|Advertise||Contact||About This Web Site||Webmaster Information|
Astonishing online blackjack tables can be found in this extraordinary online casino website.
Play at online gambling
sites with popular games
like blackjack online
January - 2010
February - 2010
March - 2010
April - 2010
May - 2010
June - 2010
July - 2010
August - 2010
September - 2010
January - 2009
February - 2009
March - 2009
April - 2009
May - 2009
June - 2009
July - 2009
August - 2009
September - 2009
October - 2009
November - 2009
December - 2009
January - 2008
February - 2008
March - 2008
April - 2008
May - 2008
June - 2008
July - 2008
August - 2008
September - 2008
October - 2008
November - 2008
December - 2008
March - 2007
April - 2007
May - 2007
June - 2007
July - 2007
August - 2007
September - 2007
October - 2007
November - 2007
December - 2007
2001-06 Blog Archives
2006-07 Blog Archives
The Factor Guest List Count Archives
Monday - 9-27-10 -- O'Reilly - 3,014,000
Hannity - 1,963,000
Beck - 2,129,000
Tuesday - 9-28-10 -- O'Reilly - 3,154,000
Hannity - 2,306,000
Beck - 2,161,000
Wednesday - 9-29-10 -- O'Reilly - 3,370,000
Hannity - 2,349,000
Beck - 2,258,000
Thursday - 9-30-10 -- O'Reilly - 3,590,000
Hannity - 2,358,000
Beck - 2,210,000
Friday - 10-1-10 -- O'Reilly - 2,571,000
Hannity - 1,972,000
Beck - 1,979,000
Weekly Factor Average - 3,139,000
The Monday 10-4-10 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - October 5, 2010 - 10:30am
The TPM was called A Political Hit Job. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Last week the nation saw an example of how dirty politics can get. In the California gubernatorial race, liberal lawyer Gloria Allred accused Republican candidate Meg Whitman of employing an illegal alien named Nicky Diaz. Ms. Whitman denies any wrongdoing, saying she thought her employee was legit. Californians are smart enough to decide the issue for themselves, but there's no question that Ms. Diaz is being used to hurt Ms. Whitman.There is so much wrong in that statement I barely know where to start. To begin with, it's not dirty politics, because Jerry Brown had nothing to do with it. It was done by Gloria Allred, an attorney, and she is not in politics. And it only hurts Whitman because it shows her hypocrisy, she hurt herself by having an illegal working for her. O'Reilly defends Whitman, and acts like she did not know the maid was illegal, when we know she did because there is a copy of a letter with her husbands wrting on it.
Then O'Reilly had Greta Van Susteren on to discuss her interview with Gloria Allred, with nobody to balance Van Susteren. So it was a biased interview with only one side of the story. Then O'Reilly said Van Susteren skewered Gloria Allred Friday evening. Which is just laughable, and nothing but his biased opinion. I saw the interview, and Allred made a fool out of Van Susteren. All Van Susteren did was accuse Allred of playing politics to unfairly hurt Meg Whitman. While Allred had the facts, and even held up a copy of the letter, which Van Susteren ignored.
Van Susteren said this: "I thought it was disgraceful, that Gloria, as a lawyer, would throw her client under the bus, both for the illegal documentation issue and also for perjury. Then O'Reilly predicted that Gloria Allred's tactics will backfire, Billy said this: "The polls show that Jerry Brown benefitted from this, at least in the short term. But I think when the dust settles, people will start to figure out that this whole deal was pretty unseemly. Meg Whitman is a billionaire and she didn't need to hire an illegal alien."
All during the segment O'Reilly defended Whitman, and agreed with every word Van Susteren said. But they never talked about the facts. They just went on and on about how unfair it was to Whitman, and how bad Allred is for doing it. But if you look at the O'Reilly TPM he even admitted it was politics as usual, and we all know that if it was happening to a Democrat they would not even care.
The FACTS show that Whitman knew the maid was illegal in 2003, and that she was part of the family when they found out, so they let her keep working for them. The letter proves it, plus the husband denied he knew, then once the letter was put out he admitted he knew. Making him a proven liar, who can not be trusted to tell the truth. But O'Reilly and Van Susteren ignore all that to cry unfair politics, when everything that is legal, is fair in politics and they both know it. They only cry foul when it happens to a Republican, and it's ridiculous.
Then O'Reilly had the Republican Carl Paladino on to kiss his ass and let him spin his threats etc. O'Reilly did a mostly softball interview, but he did ask him about the threat, and if he regrets it. but the crazy Paladino said he had no regrets, showing that he is crazy. Because O'Reilly only put him on to say he was sorry for the threat, and the dumb ass Paladino blew it. At one point Paladino said all he wants to do is talk about the issues, but O'Reilly never called him on that lie. Because he is the guy who accused Cuomo of cheating on his wife, and said he had proof of it, but when asked for the proof, he did not produce it.
If that's talking about the issues, I'm Joe Montana. The interview was a joke, and O'Reilly should be ashamed to call himself a journalist. Then as it was ending O'Reilly said we invited Mr. Cuomo on to be balanced, haha, yeah right. I would bet that is a lie, and I would also bet he will never have Cuomo on the Factor.
Then Brit Hume was on to discuss it, and for once Hume actually acted like a real journalist. Brit Hume said that Paladino hurt himself in the prior segment. Hume said this: "When I heard he was going to be on with you. I felt he would do everything he could to get the incident behind him. Instead, he said he didn't regret it at all. He should regret it! It's just not smart politics to get into a shouting match with a reporter and tell him he's going to 'take him out.' When you do that you cross the line between tough guy and thug."
Wow, I'm shocked. Hume actually sounded like an impartial journalist, for once. But then of course O'Reilly defended Paladino, Billy said that Paladino's combativeness may be an intentional strategy, he said this: "People are fed up and I think Paladino knows he's not going to get any establishment help. Some people are going to vote for 'thugs' this time around - they've had it with the genteel stuff that's crippling this nation."
All during the interview O'Reilly did nothing but defend Paladino and make excuses for him. At one point Hume even mentioned the racist e-mails Paladino sent out, and O'Reilly cut him off to say yeah yeah yeah we already know all that, then changed the subject to cover for Paladino.
Then O'Reilly had Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on to talk about a poll on Obama. It showed that Obama's popularity remains sky-high among black Americans, and he asked them if it will help Democrats in the November elections. O'Reilly made a ridiculous statement that if you take blacks and liberals out of the poll Obama has very little support with the rest of the Country, and I say duh, no shit sherlock. And of course Ham agreed with O'Reilly. Juan said this: "You're starting to see, what pollsters call a 'tightening.' The numbers are closing in states across the country, and in large part this has to do with Democrats making the case that there are some extreme Republican candidates."
Then O'Reilly had the far right Factor media bias analyst on to discuss the Rick Sanchez firing for calling Jon Stewart a Bigot, and for saying Jews control the media. Goldberg said this: "Even though what Sanchez said was really dumb, I don't think he should have been fired."
Billy argued that Sanchez, whose ratings were microscopic, had to go, O'Reilly said this: "CNN sells their credibility as a hard news organization. If you're going to have an anchorman making stupid statements, how can you have a dumb guy there?"
Which is just laughable, Sanchez is not dumb, he just said something stupid, which O'Reilly does every night. And if they fired everyone in the news business for saying stupid things, O'Reilly and everyone at Fox would be in the unemployment line.
In the last segment O'Reilly talked about the One Nation For Jobs rally by liberals on Saturday in Washington. Which O'Reilly called a flop, even though he admitted that thousands of people were there. In O'Reillyworld if a rally does not have 300,000 people it's a flop. Except the Beck rally only had 87,000 and O'Reilly called that a great event. Billy also lied during the segment that the Beck rally had hundreds of thousands of people. When the official crowd estimate done by an ariel photo service said the crowd was 87,000, with a plus or minus margin of error of 9,000. That means it could have been 78,000, or 95,000, which is not even close to hundreds of thousands.
And who was the guest to discuss the One Nation rally, Ann (total right-wing nut job) Coulter, that's who. Of all people, Ann Coulter, are you kidding me. And of course there were no Democratic guests on to discuss it, none, not one, nobody. And I normally do not report anything Coulter says, but this time I will, because it was so stupid, and so ridiculous I want everyone to see what an idiot she is.
Coulter said this: "I think they wanted to get the last 10,000 Obama supporters together, for one last hurrah. Maybe they thought they'd estimate the crowds based on the garbage left behind."
Coulter also ridiculed those on the left who accuse tea partiers of racism.
"Apparently if you don't have an exact proportion of every race in your rallies, that's evidence of racism. And I didn't see a lot of white faces Saturday, so we can conclude that this rally of the last 10,000 Obama supporters was a racist event. I call on the Democratic Party to denounce the extremist elements in their movement."
Wow is she an idiot, other than Beck she may be the biggest right-wing jerk in America. And btw, it was a positive rally about jobs and the economy, with no hate and no racism. But O'Reilly called it a flop, and said it hurt the liberal cause. Which proves that he is just a total right-wing jackass.
Then the lame pinheads and patriots, and the highly edited Factor e-mails. And btw, not one Democratic guest was on the entire show, it was all Republicans all the time. One e-mail was great, because it actually told the truth, but of course O'Reilly ignored it after reading it. Here it is:
Lim Leverett, Atlanta, GA: "O'Reilly, you are not fair. If you disagree with someone you loud talk them and cut them off."
Fox Defends Paladino Take You Out Threat
By: Steve - October 5, 2010 - 9:30am
Before I show you what two-faced (biased) right-wing stooges almost everyone at Fox News are, let me say this. It is crossing the line for anyone in politics to make threats against a journalist, even if that journalist works for Fox News. Which is what makes the defense of Paladino from the Fox stooges so shocking.
And let me also say this, as far as I can tell Brit Hume is the only person at Fox who has said the threat from Paladino against Fred Dicker was crossing the line. Remember, these are people who claim to be fair and balanced impartial journalists.
Most of the Fox stooges have praised Paladino for the altercation, calling him "refreshingly honest" and "iconoclastic," while criticizing Dicker for being "unprofessional."
For anyone who does not know what happened, because Fox almost never shows the whole tape, read this. It started when Dicker asked Paladino if he had any proof of his shocking allegation that Democratic rival Andrew Cuomo cheated on his former wife during their marriage:
"What evidence do you have for something most people would consider a smear?" Dicker asked.And btw, on the Monday O'Reilly Factor Paladino told O'Reilly he has no regrets for saying what he did, and that he does not take it back, or plan to say he is sorry.
Here is what the Fox stooges said:
-- Mike Huckabee: "I really like" Paladino, NY Post "stepped way over the line." He went on to criticize Dicker for having "injected himself into the story" and being "unprofessional" and "confrontational."
-- Bill O'Reilly: "Paladino helped himself with altercation because people are so fed up. I think Paladino doing what he did, you know, the wisdom is that he hurt himself. I think he helped himself."
-- David Asman: After Democratic strategist Christopher Hahn said that Paladino "derailed his campaign," Asman replied, "I would not be so sure of that. By the way, a guy standing up to a guy in the media -- the media, after all, is down there along with Congress in terms of low opinion."
-- Gretchen Carlson: On Fox & Friends, Gretchen Carlson said of Dicker: "I have to say, after seeing that now, that reporter was in his face. She added that she was not going to "defend what Paladino said at the end, because that did sound like a threat."
-- Sean Hannity: On his September 30 show, Hannity said that Dicker's original question to Paladino was "legitimate," then praised Paladino's reaction, saying, "I'm kind of enjoying that he's got the establishment off-balance, and they don't know how to deal with this guy because he's so outspoken."
Then Paladino went on a mission to spin his side of it on a friendly right-wing news network, Fox News. He had interviews with Megyn Kelly, Sean Hannity, Eric Shawn and Bill O'Reilly. While refusing to do any show on CNN or MSNBC. Because he knew the Fox stooges would support him, and give him a softball interview, which they did.
O'Reilly Makes A Fool Of Himself Again
By: Steve - October 5, 2010 - 9:00am
While talking about the Obama job approval numbers at a 45% average for September, O'Reilly made a total ass of himself. He said "If you don't count African-Americans and liberals, Obama has very little support in the rest of the country."
That's like saying if you don't count old white right-wing nuts, O'Reilly has very little support in the rest of the Country. And if you said that, O'Reilly would be highly insulted. Just as it's insulting to cite a poll then throw out everyone with views you do not like.
Earth to O'Reilly, you can not cherry pick a poll and only talk about what you like in it. The purpose of a poll is to measure what everyone thinks of something, not just the people you agree with, dumb ass.
O'Reilly Bias In Ignoring The Stock Market
By: Steve - October 5, 2010 - 8:30am
Ever since President Obama took office 21 months ago, whenever the stock market has a one day, two day, or even a week of down days O'Reilly will report on it. And he blames it on Obama, O'Reilly will say the market was down because Wall Street does not like his liberal policies. O'Reilly will say it's all Obama's fault, simply because the market had a temporary drop, that happens under every President.
But when the market had these same temporary drops in the 8 years under George W. Bush, not once did O'Reilly blame it on him. In fact, O'Reilly would ignore it, or in the rare case when he did talk about it he would blame it on everyone but Bush. One time O'Reilly even blamed it on the Democrats, when the Republicans had the White House, the House, and the Senate.
What really shows the right-wing bias from O'Reilly against Obama is that when the market goes up O'Reilly ignores it, and does not say a word about it, or give credit to Obama. So in O'Reillyworld, when the market drops it's Obama's fault, but when it goes up, he gets no credit for it, and O'Reilly does not even report that the market went up.
Including September of 2010. This September, traditionally the most difficult month for the stock market, is turning out to be the best September since 1939. The S&P 500 added 2.05% thanks to the 2.12 percent pop on Friday when Germany's IFO Business Climate Survey slightly improved in September setting the tone for higher open in the futures market.
Then came the durable goods report for August from Department of Commerce which showed overall demand in durable goods rose 2 percent excluding the volatile transportation sector.
It also reported a healthy 4.1 percent increase to capital goods, signaling a rebound in business spending after falling 5.3 percent in July.
And here are some other facts:
-- In the last 30 days the Dow is up 3.04%.As you can see the Dow has been up in every period except the slight 1.42% drop in the 6 month time frame. But if you watch the Factor you would think the market had dropped like a rock and it was doing terrible, and O'Reilly blamed it all on Obama.
When in fact, the market is up 12.84% over the last year, and Obama was in office the entire time. But not once has O'Reilly ever mentioned any of those numbers, or given Obama credit for it. Because he is too busy lying to you, with the false smears on Obama, as he blames him for a short term temporary drop in the market that happened one time in the last year.
It's like A-Rod hitting 350 for 4 months, then he has one bad month where he hits 250, and O'Reilly slams him as a bad hitter because of one bad month, while ignoring the other 4 good months. That is what O'Reilly does with Obama and the market, ignore the good days, but slam him for the few bad days.
And that is just one more example of the right-wing bias from O'Reilly against President Obama. Making the statement that he has been fair to Obama, laughable to the 10th power.
O'Reilly Shills For Crazy Carl Paladino
By: Steve - October 4, 2010 - 10:30am
In this video the so-called non-partisan Bill O'Reilly basically spins his ass off shilling for the Republican Carl Paladino, as if he is working for Paladino as his damage control man.
O'Reilly defended Paladino, for saying he would take a reporter out, as in kill him. Paladino told the reporter he would take him out, but to O'Reilly that was a positive because he claimed it reflects the people's anger. But that anger had nothing to do with the people, he said it because the newspaper the reporter worked for sent someone to get photos at Paladino's Daughters house. Paladino threatened to kill a reporter for sending someone to a house where his daughter lived, which has nothing to do with the anger of the people.
If that's not bias what is, because the number of times O'Reilly has defended a Democrat for threats to a reporter is ZERO. Then on top of that O'Reilly is going to have Paladino on the Monday Factor to help him spin it, and to get him publicity.
While not having the Democrat running against him, Andrew Cuomo on to spin for his campaign. Which is 100% proof that O'Reilly is a biased right-wing con man.
Another Fox Anchor Defends Paladino
By: Steve - October 4, 2010 - 9:30am
On the 10-1-10 America Nightly show on Fox, David Asman joined O'Reilly to praise Crazy Carl Paladino for what he called sticking up to the media. Asman praised the NY governor candidate who threatened a reporter, Asman called it "standing up to a guy in the media."
Okay so get this, not only are O'Reilly and Asman biased for Paladino, they are hypocrites with double standards. Because when a Republican does what they call standing up to the media, they defend him, and praise him. But when President Obama stands up to Fox and calls them out for their bias, they slam him and call him a liar.
And if a liberal running for office told a Fox reporter he would "take him out" what do you think O'Reilly and Asman would say. You can bet the farm they would slam him, and say the man is a thug who should not be elected. In fact, O'Reilly did not just defend Paladino, he said what he did would help him, and then invited him to be a guest on the Factor.
What gets me is how they can do this and then claim to be impartial fair and balanced journalists. When what they are doing is the same thing people on their campaign are doing, spinning for his screw up. And btw, Paladino later said he was sorry for the threat, and also admitted he has no evidence that Cuomo cheated on his wife.
O'Reilly slammed Democrats for unfair personal attacks on Meg Whitman, even when it was not a personal attack, just the truth. And yet when Paladino uses a personal attack on Cuomo by saying he cheated on his wife, with no evidence, then later admits he has no evidence, O'Reilly is silent as a mouse.
Folks, this is hard evidence of bias from O'Reilly. Open your eyes, just look at what O'Reilly does every night. It's nothing but attacks on Obama with 95% partisan right-wing guests, and covering for crazy Republicans like Palin, O'Donnell, Paladino, Angle, etc.
Obama Job Approval Since September Of 2009
By: Steve - October 3, 2010 - 9:30am
About every 2 days O'Reilly will do a TPM or a segment, or both, on the Obama job approval numbers. In each case O'Reilly claims the Obama job approval numbers are going down, down, down, or dropping like a rock, crashing, etc.
If that was true, his approval would be down to 30 percent by now. But's it's not, the Gallup daily tracking poll has President Obama at 46 percent approval, as of 10-3-10.
O'Reilly makes these false claims to make you think the people are getting more and more disappointed in what Obama does. When in fact, the Obama job approval numbers have virtually stayed the same over the last year, from September of 2009, to October of 2010. Here is the screen capture of the chart from Gallup.com:
As you can see, the Obama job approval numbers slowly dropped to about 50 percent approval in August of 2009. This happens with every President, especially when you start at 70 percent approval. From January of 2009 to August 2009, his ratings slowly dropped 20 points, to 50 percent approval.
But since then his numbers have remained mostly the same, dropping to 42 percent one time, but the rest of the time it has stayed between 45 and 50 percent. That is a 5 point swing, over a year, it will go up a point or two, and down a point or two.
So there has not been a big drop over the last year, as O'Reilly claims. No crashing poll numbers, no dropping like a rock, just a mild flucuation of 3 to 5 points, which is normal for any President.
What this shows is that O'Reilly is a biased liar, that he tries to fool people into thinking everyone is hating Obama more and more the longer he is in office. It's all lies, from O'Reilly. And what's really shocking is that he claims he is a non-partisan Independent, who has been fair to Obama.
When the facts show he is a partisan right-wing hack, who has not been fair to Obama, and who has used almost every show he does to smear and lie about Obama. Once in a while he will say something to defend Obama, maybe 1 percent of the time. Then he uses that as evidence to claim he has been fair to Obama.
Which is just ridiculous, and classic O'Reilly. It would be like me slamming Stupid Sarah Palin every day for a month, then I say something good about her one day, then I say I have been fair to Stupid Sarah. That would also be ridiculous, just as what O'Reilly claims.
Fox Media Watchdog Show Ignored GOP Donations
By: Steve - October 3, 2010 - 8:30am
Riddle me this: When is a media watchdog show not a media watchdog show?
Answer: When it's a Fox News media watchdog show.
On the Saturday 10-2-10 Fox News (so-called) media analysis show, Fox News Watch, host Jon Scott and the show's panelists lined up to slam President Obama's criticism of their network as pushing a "destructive" political viewpoint. But they never did talk about the recent news that News Corp. gave $1 million to an organization (Chamber of Commerce) spending tens of millions of dollars to defeat Democratic congressional candidates.
Obama told Rolling Stone magazine that Fox News is part of the tradition of using the press "very intentionally to promote their viewpoints" because Fox "has a very clear, undeniable point of view" that "is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth" of the country.
And as I have pointed out a million times, Fox has a long history of promoting the Republican agenda, and of opposing economic positions which economists say would stimulate growth.
And the Fox News Watch stooges were not happy. Because they really hate it when the President tells the truth about them.
And there was no mention, none, that News Corp. had donated $1 million to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is also planning to spend $75 million on the 2010 election, and has already devoted nearly $7 million to the benefit of GOP Senate candidates alone.
A Nexis search reveals that the Fox News Watch show has also never mentioned the August News Corp. $1 million donation to the Republican Governors Association, the GOP organization that helps coordinate Republican gubernatorial campaigns and pays for independent ads in support of their candidates.
According to Bloomberg News, News Corp. was "the Republicans' biggest corporate donor" this year. Politico's Ben Smith has reported that according to a source "close to News Corp.," the company believed the donations were "supposed to be secret."
And Fox News Watch is doing everything it can to keep it a secret. Not to mention, Bill O'Reilly has not reported on either million dollar donation. Even though he does a weekly media watchdog segment with the right-wing Bernie Goldberg, they have both ignored the donations, and not said one word about it.
Which is probably why there is no Democratic media watchdog on the Factor, so they can cover for Fox and the Republicans, by only reporting what they claim is liberal bias in the media, while ignoring all the conservative bias on the Factor, Fox, etc.
O'Reilly Ignores New Poll While Promoting Paladino
By: Steve - October 2, 2010 - 10:30am
Here we go again, O'Reilly is so biased for Republican candidates it is ridiculous. First he lied for Meg Whitman, and then he lied for Carl Paladino. To begin with, last week O'Reilly cherry picked a poll about the NY governor's race with Republican Carl Paladino and Democrat Andrew Cuomo. The Quinnipiac poll had Paladino only 6 points down and O'Reilly called it stunning that he was so close.
While ignoring a Siena Research poll, that had Cuomo leading by 34 points, 57 percent to 24 percent. So Friday morning a new poll comes out that has Cuomo ahead by 16 points. Cuomo is leading Paladino by 56 percent to 40 percent in a Marist Institute poll conducted Sept. 27-29. But O'Reilly never said a word about either poll, the only poll he reported is the one that had Paladino 6 points down.
And here is what makes it ever worse, if that's possible. On the Friday night Factor show O'Reilly had a segment on the race with Geraldo. Not only did O'Reilly ignore the new poll, he promoted Paladino, said his threat to take out a journalist would help him, and he plans to have him on the Factor Monday night.
So in O'Reillyworld if a Republican tells a journalist he will "take him out" as in kill him, That's a positive to O'Reilly. Now imagine if a Democratic candidate said that to say a Fox News reporter, me thinks O'Reilly would have a slightly different view of that. Just look at what O'Reilly said:
O'REILLY: Carl Paladino, the Republican candidate for Governor of New York, nearly came to blows with a political reporter this week.Wow, can you be any more of a right-wing ass kisser. If Cuomo did that to a Fox reporter, O'Reilly would call for him to quit the race, and tell people to not vote for him. But when the Republican does it, O'Reilly loves it, says it helped him, and invites him on the Factor to kiss his ass some more.
Then on top of that, not once does O'Reilly mention the new poll that now has Paladino 16 points down. And that Factor visit is only being done to give Paladino free air time, on the #1 rated cable news show to help him gain votes. But you notice that Cuomo is not given the same free air time.
This is ridiculous, and the FEC should be cracking down on this partisan election bias. O'Reilly claims he is just doing an interview, when we all know it's a free infomercial for Paladino, to make him look good on a friendly show that will not cost him a dime.
On the O'Reilly website it even says this: "Nastiness ratchets up in New York gov race"
Yeah and it's all from Paladino, the man is a jerk, he has said he will use a baseball bat to clean up New York, he made threats to a New York reporter, he put out false rumors that Cuomo cheated on his wife, and he forwarded racist e-mails about President Obama and his wife.
So what does O'Reilly do, reward him with a Factor interview, promote him, ignore most of what Paladino has done, fail to report most of the polls on the race, and basically send out the message to vote for Paladino.
My question is this, after the Meg Whitman ass kissing, and the Carl Paladino ass kissing, how the hell can O'Reilly claim to be a non-partisan Independent journalist. It's like he is working for their campaigns, instead of being an impartial journalist.
Paladino is a far right nut, who should be in anger management classes, not the Governor of New York. And instead of reporting that, O'Reilly promotes the guy and helps him by giving him a free campaign add on his show.
The Friday 10-1-10 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - October 2, 2010 - 9:30am
The TPM was called More Propaganda From Rep. Maxine Waters. O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Yesterday Rupert Murdoch, CEO of Fox News parent company, traveled to Capitol Hill to urge passage of a fair immigration law. Congresswoman Maxine Waters, a far-left zealot, turned the immigration testimony into an anti-Fox News diatribe, complaining about 'hosts talking about anchor babies.'And that is just laughable, if anyone owes anyone an apology it's O'Reilly, Fox News, and virtually all the Republicans. Because they are anti-immigration, and that's a fact, so Ms. Waters is right, and she does not owe anyone an apology. The right wants to change the Constitution to ban babies born here to illegals from becoming American citizens. And virtually everyone at Fox supports it. To claim O'Reilly and Fox are not anti-immigrant is a joke.
Then O'Reilly had Democratic Congressman Luis Gutierrez on to discuss it. Gutierrez said this: "When I come on, there's usually an anti-immigrant Congressman."
O'Reilly challenged Gutierrez to set the record straight, Billy said this: "This is the premier broadcast on Fox News and we have been flat-out fair in this debate, we put on just as many liberal voices as conservative voices. But Ms. Waters characterizes Fox News as anti-immigrant."
Wow is that insane, because O'Reilly has not been fair in the immigration debate. For one thing he calls them illegal aliens, which is not fair at all. He has also lied about the crime rate among illegals, and he has used right-wing propaganda to spin the debate, when they just come here for work. And to say he has as many liberal voices as conservatives in the debate is beyond a lie. O'Reilly has a 7 to 1 ratio of Republicans to liberals on his show, and it's really 7 to 0, because almost none of his guests are actual liberals, most of the Democratic guests who get on are moderate Democrats, and half of them work for Fox News.
Then O'Reilly had another smear segment on Obama for doing exactly what Bush and every other President does, campaign for their people before an election, O'Reilly called it desperation. O'Reilly had Dana Perino and Leslie Marshall on to discuss it. And of course the right-wing stooge Perino agreed with O'Reilly. But Marshall said it's fine for President Obama to do it. She said this: "I don't think it's desperation. What I think I heard from the President is energizing the base and stimulating them to get out and vote."
Then O'Reilly talked about the 10-2-10 Washington One Nation jobs rally by liberals, and of course he hates it, and tried to smear them. "Our march," said the NAACP's Hilary Shelton, "is focused on the real values that emanated from the original march by Martin Luther King Jr. in 1963. This is a coalition of people working on jobs, justice and education. We want to create a million more public sector jobs."
So it's a group of liberal Americans who are marching on Washington to speak out on jobs, justice, and education. Great idea right, not in O'Reillyworld. O'Reilly implied the communist party was involved, Billy asked Clarissa Martinez to comment on the participation of the Communist Party, but she sidestepped the issue. She said this: "We have the power, to build an economy that works for everyone. Most Americans are concerned about the state of our economy right now and believe we need jobs that allow us to provide for our families and a good education system."
It's a jobs and education rally by honest hard working liberal Americans, but O'Reilly turned it into a communist party rally. What a fricking joke he is, and that statement just proves what a right-wing idiot O'Reilly is. He claims to never use right-wing talking points, but that is exactly what he did, claim the communist party is involved to make them look like bad Americans.
Then O'Reilly had a segment on the NY Governors race with Paladino and Cuomo, and I have another blog on that. And Glenn Beck was on to talk about President Obama, who has criticized unnamed "talk show hosts" who call him names and question his citizenship. Beck and O'Reilly played dumb as said who me, we do not do that. O'Reilly said this: Billy theorized that President Obama may have the wrong idea about some radio and TV hosts: "He might put you and me in the category of hosts who are mean and despicable. But he doesn't really see us enough to know what we're doing, that we're just trying to get the bottom of President Obama."
Wow is that a load of garbage, he even mentioned the fact that Beck called Obama a racist. But they ignored the million other times Beck and everyone at Fox has called Obama names, like marxist, communist, etc. It happens every day, a hundred times a day on Fox, and O'Reilly knows it. He just refuses to admit it, because he is a right-wing stooge who lies when he gets caught doing something wrong.
And finally the two Republicans Arthel Neville and Greg Gutfeld were on for dumbest things of the week. Which is not worth reporting, because this segment is the dumbest thing of the week, and it has nothing to do with reporting the news. This is more of that equal liberal voices garbage O'Reilly claims, 2 Republicans and 0 Democrats. Same thing with the Culture Warriors, the legal team, the Factor news quiz, Dennis Miller, etc. The facts show that 95% of the Factor guests are Republicans, and yet O'Reilly still lies about it.
Then the lame pinheads and patriots, and the highly edited Factor e-mails.
O'Reilly Caught Lying For Republican Meg Whitman
By: Steve - October 1, 2010 - 9:30am
On the Thursday O'Reilly Factor Bill O'Reilly had a talking points memo and segment on the Meg Whitman illegal housekeeper story. And it may be one of the most dishonest things I have ever seen O'Reilly do. To begin with O'Reilly called it a dirty tricks political smear job by her Democratic opponent Jerry Brown.
O'Reilly defended Meg Whitman and said nobody knows if she knew the housekeeper was an illegal. When that is a flat out lie, and we know she knew because the housekeepers attorney has a copy of a letter from the SSA with her husbands hand written note on it.
On the O'Reilly website, on the segment summary page it said this before the show even aired.
"We take a look at some dirty tricks going on in a few races."
Notice it says he is going to take a look at some dirty tricks in a few races. That was also a lie, because he only looked at one race, the race between Jerry Brown and Meg Whitman for Governor of California. So his own website was lying about the TPM and the segment on it.
O'Reilly claimed it was dirty tricks for Jerry Brown to run an ad about the illegal housekeeper, ok how, where is the dirty tricks, when the ad was true. And btw, O'Reilly did not even mention the letter from the IRS, or that Whitman's husband had written a note on it, proving he got it. Not to mention after the copy of the letter was made public he suddenly remembered that he got the letter. And O'Reilly did not report any of that.
O'Reilly also failed to mention that Whitman has spoke out against employers who hire illegal immigrants, she even said that if you own a business it is your duty to make sure you do not have any illegals working for you. That the employer must be held accountable if they are caught with an illegal working for them. Then she is caught, and she blames it all on Jerry Brown, with no proof he had anything to do with it.
And yet, O'Reilly defended Whitman and called it a dirty trick by Brown, for simply running a campaign ad that told the truth. When he has no evidence, none, that Jerry Brown had anything to do with it. And the Brown campaign has said they did not know the housekeeper, and have never spoken to her. O'Reilly tells liberals they can not make charges without proof, then he does it himself.
The central issue is whether Whitman knew about a letter that the Social Security Administration sent her in 2003 that raised discrepancies about the housekeeper's documents - a possible tip-off that she could be illegal. The letter is the foundation for claims by former maid Nicky Diaz Santillan that Whitman and her husband knew for years she was in the U.S. illegally, but kept her on the job regardless.
For two days, Whitman forcefully denied receiving any such letter and said she fired the housekeeper last year immediately after learning she was illegal. But Whitman's husband changed course Thursday after a letter surfaced with his handwriting, forcing him to say he may have been aware of the correspondence back in 2003.
Revelations about the illegal housekeeper have also thrown Whitman's carefully managed campaign completely off track and opened the door for Democrats to accuse her of hypocrisy.
The former eBay chief executive has called for tougher sanctions against employers who hire illegal workers, and the fact that she employed an illegal immigrant maid from Mexico for nine years could undermine her credibility. She has also spent millions courting Latino voters, who could play a key role in determining the outcome of the race.
The housekeeper and lawyer Gloria Allred later produced a copy of the letter that shows Whitman's husband, Dr. Griffith Harsh III, partially filled it out and told the housekeeper to "check on this."
The April 22, 2003 letter addressed to the Whitman's home in Atherton included a handwritten note - which Diaz said was that of Whitman's husband, Dr. Griffith Harsh - saying "Nicky, please check this. Thanks."
Earlier that day, Whitman appeared in an hour-long press conference with Dr. Harsh standing at her side and repeatedly denied that either one of them had ever been contacted by the Social Security Administration about a "mismatched Social Security number for Diaz.
And btw. Whitman and her campaign have alleged that Diaz and Allred are fronts for Democratic groups and the campaign of Democratic gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown. But Allred denied the allegation and said she had not been in touch with Brown for years.
And Bill O'Reilly did not report any of this information, as he was saying nobody knows if Whitman knew the housekeeper was illegal. Then O'Reilly had Laura Ingraham on to agree with him, and they both lied about Whitman not know she had an illegal working for her for 9 years.
Basically O'Reilly tried to help the Republican Whitman with a cover up, by ignoring all the facts, and spinning out her explanation, as if he was working for her. And if you had any doubts O'Reilly was a biased right-wing hack of a fraud journalist, those doubts were removed in this segment.
In the 10 years I have been monitoring O'Reilly, this was one of the most biased right-wing spin job segments I have ever seen O'Reilly do. He pretty much tried to cover the whole thing up, by using the talking points from Whitman and her campaign spokesman. It was like he was working for her campaign as the damage control man.
The Thursday 9-30-10 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - October 1, 2010 - 9:00am
The TPM was called Dirty Tricks in Politics. O'Reilly reported on some dirty tricks being used in a few political races. And of course O'Reilly did not talk about any dirty tricks by Republicans, even though they use them far more than Democrats do. O'Reilly said he does not endorse political candidates, haha, yeah he just smears all the Democrats, and tells people not to vote for the Democrat.
O'Reilly cried about the illegal housekeeper Meg Whitman had, and called it a dirty trick by the Democrat. But that is ridiculous, and O'Reilly defended her. Even though there is a letter from the IRS that notified her the housekeeper was illegal. And who believes she worked for her for 9 years and she did not know she was illegal. What a joke, it's not a dirty trick to point out the truth.
Then O'Reilly had Laura Ingraham on to discuss it. And she just joined in with O'Reilly calling it dirty tricks, sleazy, and a drive by attack. While ignoring the fact that the facts show Meg Whitman knew the woman was illegal. They defened her because they are Republicans, and Whitman is a Republican too. Ingraham also slammed the housekeeper's attorney, Gloria Allred, and said she gives attorneys a bad name.
And btw, if this had happened to a liberal, O'Reilly and Ingraham would say it was just politics, they only complain when it happens to a Republican. Now here is a good one, neither O'Reilly or Ingraham reported that Whitman said just 2 days ago that employers should be held accountable who have illegals working for them. Then she is caught with an illegal working for her, for 9 years in her own house, and she denies it with no accountability.
Then Megyn Kelly was on for the Kelly File segment. Kelly also talked about the Whitman case, Kelly said because the maid was paid $23.00 an hour it was ok, and O'Reilly called it a bogus lawsuit, even though no lawsuit has been filed. O'Reilly said nobody knows if Whitman knew she was illegal, when that is a lie, we do know she knew, because they have a copy of a letter from 2003 that the IRS sent her telling Whitman the maid was illegal, her husband even admitted he saw the letter. O'Reilly is such a right-wing stooge it's pathetic. They also talked about David Beckham suing InTouch magazine. My comment to that is who fricking cares, and how is this hard news we need to know. It's ridiculous tabloid garbage and I refuse to report on it.
Then the Culture Warriors Margaret Hoover and Gretchen Carlson were on. they talked about a student who jumped from a Bridge after being caught having sex with a male student on a camera placed by his roommate. Funny how O'Reilly reports this, but ignores the O'Keefe story. Then they cried about kids using dirty words, they claims kids use dirty words more these days, are you kidding me, what a joke.
Then O'Reilly had the parents of a 17-year-old who was shot to death by an illegal alien on to talk about Stephen Colbert's Congressional testimony. And my God you have to be kidding me. I even agree it was wrong for Congress to have Colbert testify, but this was ridiculous. To put the parents of a kid who was killed by an illegal, just to use it to smear the Democrats and Colbert. O'Reilly is a low-life for using these kind of tactics. Especially when the story is a week old, and everyone has moved on.
Then it was part 2 of the highly edited Bill Maher interview, where almost all the good stuff Maher said was edited out and only on the website version. If O'Reilly was a real journalist he would not edit these interviews, and let the people see the whole thing, un-edited. O'Reilly cried about Bill Maher saying people are stupid, and he also said the people who believe in religion are morons.
Maher said 60% of the American people are stupid and uninformed, and to be honest, Maher is probably right. Maher said christians are hypocrites, because they only want to believe in the happy half of the bible. O'Reilly said he does not see it that way. Maher pointed out how they cite portions of the bible that are good, while just ignoring the parts they do not want to talk about. O'Reilly also said he does not know if evolution is real, so he is a wanna be creationist. He says God may have created everything, which is fantasy, and exactly what Maher told him.
And finally is the last segment was the ridiculous total waste of tv time Factor News Quiz, with Steve Doocy and Martha MacCallum. Then the lame pinheads and patriots, and the highly edited Factor e-mails. As usual O'Reilly ignored a bunch of big news stories, like the O'Keefe story, and the news about all the O'Donnell lies, etc.
More Proof O'Reilly Lied About Health Care Costs
By: Steve - October 1, 2010 - 8:30am
Remember this, back in early August O'Reilly blamed his own $2,100 health care premium rate hike on the Obama health care plan. O'Reilly decided that Obama was to blame for the rate increases, claiming that "American health insurance companies are building in the anticipated costs of Obama-care.
I reported here that he was lying, and now I have the proof. The Chicago Tribune, and other websites like healthkey.com, are reporting the real reason premiums are going up.
Health care costs rise 6 percent to 8 percent annually, primarily because advances in medical technology and the increasing use of medical services by an aging population. (Michael Tercha/Tribune)
So health care costs go up 6 to 8 percent every year, with or without Obama-care. O'Reilly blamed the entire increase on Obama, when in fact the cost of health care goes up 6 to 8 percent every year.
In 2011, the combined average of premium and out-of-pocket costs for health care coverage for an employee is projected to climb to $4,386, according to an annual study by Hewitt Associates. That's a 12.4 percent increase, or $486, over this year.
Overall health care costs continue to rise 6 percent to 8 percent annually, primarily because advances in medical technology and the increasing use of medical services by an aging population.
And in the wake of the recession, employment trends also are affecting health care costs: Companies are hiring fewer younger people, so premiums paid by this segment of the working population who typically use fewer health services are not absorbing the costs of older employees who do.
"An older population tends to have chronic conditions like diabetes," Vlajkovic said. "And when your hiring rates have slowed, you are not bringing in a younger work force."
Premiums are being affected by the implementation of the new federal health care law, but the impact is expected to be minimal.
"Health care reform has added to the cost burden, but that is only an additional percent or two," Vlajkovic said.
Industry analysts have said the health law could temper cost increases for everybody once the more than 30 million uninsured have coverage because it will spread risk over a larger population. Although several major new consumer benefits started last week, this broadened coverage will not go into effect until 2014.
"Reform creates opportunities for meaningful change in how health care is delivered in the U.S., but most of these positive effects won't be felt for a few years," said Ken Sperling, Hewitt's health care practice leader.
Next year, workers are expected to contribute about $184 a month, 12 percent more than they do now. Their out-of-pocket costs will jump, too, rising 12.5 percent, to $181 a month in expenses, which include covering deductibles as well as co-payments and co-insurance for prescriptions and visits to the doctor.
Workers will get a first glimpse of health care costs during the coming weeks of open-enrollment season, the annual corporate ritual that allows employees to select or change their benefit plans for the following year.
Hewitt's projections are calculated using data from 350 major employers and more than 14 million health plan participants spending more than $50 billion annually on health care, and they are averaged out per worker. Employees with family coverage tend to pay more, and workers with single coverage tend to pay less.
Funny how O'Reilly never reported any of that information. Yeah because it includes the facts, not the right-wing spin O'Reilly used to smear Obama. What it shows is that O'Reilly lied when he blamed the increases on the Obama health care bill.
All Of Fox News Ignored The O'Keefe Story
By: Steve - October 1, 2010 - 8:00am
Wednesday, the news broke that conservative James O'Keefe tried to pull an odd and ill-advised prank on CNN reporter Abbie Boudreau. O'Keefe set up a boat with overtly sexual props, and planned to lure Boudreau on to the boat and videotape her being "seduced" by O'Keefe.
The story even led to condemnations by a few conservatives, but not anyone on Fox News. A search of Fox's primetime shows and Wednesday morning's Fox & Friends showed no mentions of the O'Keefe scandal.
And it's not as if Fox has no idea who O'Keefe is, they obsessed for months and months over his bogus ACORN videos. Hannity called O'Keefe a "pioneer in journalism," O'Reilly said he should receive a congressional medal, and Beck called him "courageous." Fox & Friends even hosted O'Keefe in a pimp costume on their After the Show Show.
I suppose a story depicting O'Keefe less as a "courageous" "pioneer" of conservative journalism, and more of an immature creepy kid doesn't quite fit into Fox's narrative.
So what did Fox & Friends cover instead of this breaking news story. They continued with their freak out over Stephen Colbert's congressional testimony from six days ago, apparently taking co-host Gretchen Carlson's promise to make him the lead story of the show for the days following his testimony very, very seriously.
O'Reilly Ignoring 2 More Big News Stories
By: Steve - September 30, 2010 - 9:30am
The biggest story O'Reilly ignored is the James O'Keefe seduction prank he tried to pull on a CNN reporter. And this is a big story, it is the 4th most searched story on Google, it is listed at #4 on the Google hot trends page.
In fact, the hotness rating on the story is: On Fire
But of course O'Reilly did not say a word about it, even though it's one of the top 5 stories in America.
The 2nd story O'Reilly ignored is about his good friend (The Witch) Christine O'Donnell. She was caught lying about her education. The Washington Post reported Tuesday that the Delaware Republican Senate candidate misleadingly claims she attended the University of Oxford. On top of that, further reports surfaced revealing that O'Donnell's claims that she attended Claremont Graduate University are incorrect.
O'Donnell's LinkedIn page claims she studied "Post Modernism in the New Millennium" at the University of Oxford and Constitutional Government at Claremont Graduate University, a school in Southern California.
However, a spokesperson for O'Donnell told the Washington Post's Greg Sargent that O'Donnell listed the University of Oxford as a school she attended after taking a course on the Oxford campus, run by the Phoenix Institute. Chris Fletcher, who oversaw the Phoenix Institute's 2001 Oxford Summer Program, which O'Donnell participated in, told Sargent that O'Donnell's claim to have attended Oxford is "misleading."
"We never represented it as a course run by Oxford University," Fletcher said. "It wasn't sponsored by Oxford University. We rented the space."
Additionally, Claremont Graduate University says it has no student records for an individual named Christine O'Donnell.
In fact, O'Donnell received a fellowship in 2002 from the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank also in Claremont, Calif. but not affiliated with the university.
The Tea Party-backed candidate's academic record has been the subject of scrutiny since the primaries. She claimed for years that she was a graduate of Fairleigh Dickinson Unversity, but she in fact only received her degree on Sept. 1 of 2010, years after attending the school. Republicans in the primary ran attack ads questioning why O'Donnell took so long to get her degree, claiming she owed outstanding bills to the school.
Additionally, O'Donnell suggested in a lawsuit that she was pursuing a Master's degree at Princeton University, but she later acknowledged she has not taken any graduate courses at Princeton.
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
O'Reilly #5 On Top 25 Right-Wing Journalist List
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 Factor Year In Review 2009
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
Factor Pollster Caught Writing GOP Policy Memo
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
What a Fair & Balanced O'Reilly Factor Would Look Like
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
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
Buzzflash Names O'Reilly Media Putz of The Week
The 10 Page Hand Written Lucifer Letter I Got in 2003
Why FOX News Loves Juan Williams: The Strings And The Puppet
Cable News Ratings
Read The Letter O'Reilly Had His Attorney Send me
O'Reilly Caught Lying About The NY Times JFK Terror Plot
O'Reilly's Party Enrollment Form Showing Him a Registered Republican
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
FOX News Bias
Crooks & Liars
Moose & Squirrel
Politics & Society
Fox News Boycott
I Hate Hannity
Glenn Beck Is An Idiot
|Proof The O'Reilly Factor is Biased Against Barack Obama|
|Proof O'Reilly Lied About The Balance on His Show|
|O'Reilly Sucks Investigation: Dishonesty, Deception, And Bias By Bill O'Reilly|
|(( Right-Wing Hate Speech Ignored by Bill O'Reilly ))|
|O'Reilly Phone Sex Scandal Information|
After hearing of the lawsuit O'Reilly said it was all lies, that it was a shakedown for money, that he would fight it to the bitter end with no settlement, and that he would let the courts decide the matter. That was all before O'Reilly found out she had recorded his phone calls. Then Mr. I will fight her lies to the bitter end with no settlement, paid her $10 million dollars to settle the lawsuit, get the tapes, and shut her up. The out-of-court settlement came on the eve of a courtroom fight over audiotapes, reports CBS News Correspondent Kelly Cobiella.
Copyright 2001 - 2009