The Thursday 4-30-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 1, 2009 - 8:30am

The TPM was called Dumb Americans? O'Reilly mentioned some Rasmussen poll that shows people like Obama. Then he basically called the American people dumb for voting like that in the poll. Which is funny, because when liberals said Americans were dumb to vote for Bush in 2000 and 2004, O'Reilly ripped them to pieces and was outraged that they would call the people dumb. Then he does the very same thing, and btw Billy, I thought you respected everyones opinion, so what's with calling people dumb for voting in a way you do not like. You are the dumb one, and an un-American idiot.

Billy also said Obama is against all harsh interrogations, which is right-wing spin and lies. He is only opposed to waterboarding and torture, he did not say he was opposed to all harsh interrogations. So once again O'Reilly lied about an Obama position. Then O'Reilly said Obama claims to be a moderate, when that is also a lie, Obama does not claim to be a moderate, that's just the O'Reilly opinion. Obama has never said he is a moderate, ever. O'Reilly just makes this stuff up and hope someone believes it.

Then O'Reilly had two Republican stooges on from stratfor.com, a website his own personal site links to btw, and he never mentions that fact. He had Reva Bhalla and Fred Burton on to trash and smear Obama over his terrorism policies. They trashed Obama and Biden, and they claim the Obama terrorism policies are making us less safe, which is the same right-wing garbage Cheney and O'Reilly are putting out. These idiots are just trying to make Obama look weak on terrorism to get his job approval numbers down so they can really hammer him. It's just ridiculous, and nothing but right-wing propaganda.

And for the record, nobody knows if Obama is making us less safe or not, it's impossible to know that, the only way we would know is if Obama does something that lets another terrorist attack happen on American soil. Until then, it's all propaganda, and nothing but right-wing speculation. It's just insane right-wing garbage. And O'Reilly puts these two stratfor.com morons on to agree with his propaganda. If that's not proof of bias by O'Reilly there is no proof. Only a biased Republican would say that garbage, and only a biased Republican would put these two idiots on to say it.

Then Laura Ingraham was on to spew out some more one sided biased right-wing propaganda, with no Democrat anywhere in sight to give the counterpoint or provide the balance. You can guess what she said, I don't even need to report it. Billy and Ingraham trashed Obama and everything he is doing, Ingraham even called Obama a liar, and O'Reilly said nothing. In fact, Billy even thought it was funny. Now when a liberal guest called Bush a liar O'Reilly would rip them to pieces and hammer them, but Ingraham calls Obama a liar and O'Reilly never said a word.

Ingraham even trashed Obama for not closing the border because of swine flu, when O'Reilly claims the swine flu has been over-hyped, and yet he still agreed with Ingraham, which makes them both crazy. Not to mention the massive amount of money that would cost America, in the middle of a fricking recession, so they are double crazy.

Then Newt Gingrich was put on to spew out more one sided biased right-wing propaganda, with no Democrat to counter him. Billy asked Newt if the GOP was in big trouble. And crazy Newt said of course not. When he must be the only Republican in America who thinks that. Then they trashed Obama, Specter, and Al Franken. Newt downplayed the Specter switch and said it was no big deal, wow is he insane, if a Democratic Senator switched he would call it the greatest thing ever.

O'Reilly called Franken the worst person in the world, and said a fair minded person like him is shocked Franken might be a Senator. Ok, so how can he claim to be fair minded after just calling Franken the worst person in the world, figure that out. If that's being fair minded I'm Ted Nugent. Then Newt told Billy not to worry because the GOP is gonna make a big comeback in 2010 and 2012 and win the Government back. I have one thing to say to Newt, send me some of the drugs you are on, because you are out of your freaking mind. The Democrats are going to gain more seats in 2010, and 2012, and Obama will be re-elected and go on to 8 serve years in the White House.

Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk tabloid garbage about some robot injury and the Miss California garbage again, enough already, move on idiots. Then crazy Glenn Beck was on, Billy asked him about the swine flu, and Beck did not have much to say, he even said Obama is doing ok with it. Then O'Reilly asked Beck for advice on the economy and asked him where he is investing his money. Why, who cares what Beck does with his money, he even said he is not a financial expert. The whole segment was stupid, and a waste of time. At the end, Beck even asked O'Reilly why he had him on, and O'Reilly said he just needed to fill time for that segment. So the whole thing was garbage, and Billy even admitted it.

Then the stupid no reality Reality Check segment, O'Reilly said it was the unbiased truth, yeah, and I'm Michael Jordan. I will not even report what he said because it was just stupid right-wing spin and garbage, with no checks on any of it. Two of them were about ratings, one was about Rahm Emanual and Geitner making the top 100 most beautiful people list, one was nothing more than pimping the Lis Wiehl book, and one was about a bear show on the National Geographic network, what the hell is the check on that, there is none. It's garbage, and a total waste of tv time.

Then the stupid pinheads and patriots and the cherry picked and highly edited e-mail segment. And the totally one sided (not one Democrat on the entire show) April 30th O'Reilly Factor was over.

The Bill O'Reilly Bias Factor
By: Steve - April 30, 2009 - 12:30pm

As I watched the Factor last night I was thinking what a biased piece of crap it is. O'Reilly claims to be a moderate Independent (his words) with no agenda (his own promo on FOX says that) who is fair to both sides in a no spin zone. O'Reilly also claims he has the most diverse guest list of any show on cable, that he has been fair to Obama and the Democrats, and that he personally makes sure he has an equal number of Republican and Democrat guests.

In October of 2008, O'Reilly said this in answer to an e-mail:
O'REILLY: Did Geraldine Ferraro not appear on your tv set, Bob? C'mon. I make sure, personally make sure, that throughout the week we have equal representation of conservative, liberal, Democrat, Republican. OK, I mean, if you have been watching the show I've been doing this now into our thirteenth year, and we have voices, and they're equal.
When all that is a lie, he said that garbage on Thursday 10-16-08, that week O'Reilly had 29 Republican guests & 8 Democrats. I don't know on what planet 29 to 8 is an equal number of Republican and Democratic guests (especially when the host is also a Republican, and if you count Billy it was 34 to 8) but it's sure not equal on planet earth. So even in the same week he claimed to always have an equal number of Republican and Democratic guests he was lying his ass off.

The week before that, from 10-6-08 to 10-10-08 he had 22 Republicans to 5 Democrats. And so far this week, it's 15 Republicans to 3 Democrats after only 3 shows. If that's an equal and balanced guest list I'm Jay Leno.

Bill O'Reilly is a Republican who takes the Republican position on 99% of the issues facing America today. Almost all his regulars are Republicans, about 95%, or more. Each Factor show has 4 to 6 Republican guests, with 0 to 2 Democratic guests. In an average week O'Reilly has 20 to 25 Republican guests, while at the same time he only has 4 to 8 Democratic guests per week. That is not balance, and it's not even close.

And that is only the guest list count, if you count O'Reilly each night as 1 Republican it's a 30 to 5 unbalanced show each week. Nobody would call that balance, except O'Reilly, ok maybe Hannity would too. The point is, O'Reilly's claims of balance do not match the facts.

To have an equal number of Republican and Democratic guests it actually has to be equal. That means if you have 3 Republicans on you must have 3 Democrats on. But O'Reilly does not do that, ever, not once, it just don't happen. While he claims it does, but if you watch the show you know it's a lie, and if O'Reilly will lie about something like that how can anyone believe anything he says about anything.

How can we believe a proven liar, who does not even tell the truth about the balance of his guest list. If he will lie about that, he will lie about anything. That is why I am starting the Factor guest list count tomorrow. I will count each guest, and list the numbers for each month, then archive them for everyone to see. After May you will be able to visit the archive page and see the past count.

This will prove O'Reilly is a liar, and that he does not have a balanced guest list as he claims. It will also prove he is a biased and one sided right-wing hack of a pretend journalist. Because no objective journalist would have 95% Republican guests on, while claiming to be an Independent who is fair to both sides. The unbalanced right-wing guest list alone proves that he is a partisan Republican.

The Wednesday 4-29-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 30, 2009 - 10:30am

The TPM was called Criticizing Obama. O'Reilly was on after the Obama press conference, and to start the show he did a quick analysis of a few questions asked by the media. It was pretty much a negative analysis, and O'Reilly criticized Obama on a few things. Which is what you would expect from a right-wing idiot like O'Reilly, especially when the FOX Network was the only broadcast Network that did not show the Obama press conference.
NEW YORK -- Fox became the first broadcast network to turn down a request by President Barack Obama for time, opting to show its drama "Lie to Me" on Wednesday instead of the president's prime-time news conference.
O'Reilly is a Republican who hates everything Obama plans to do, who criticizes everything he has done, he gave him a C grade for his first 100 days, when almost everyone else gave him a B+ or higher, and now FOX refuses to show the press conference. And then O'Reilly wonders why people think he is biased, and why Obama hammered FOX for their bias in the tea party coverage.

Wake up O'Reilly, you are a biased Republican, and you let your bias cloud your analysis of Obama. The president has done well, his job approval is 65%, and everyone who is not a Republican gave Obama a B+ or higher grade for his first 100 days. While all you Republicans hate him, say he is doing a terrible job, and grade him at a C or lower, Hannity gave Obama an F, Limbaugh gave him a D, and O'Reilly gave him a C, which is just ridiculous. President Obama has a 65% job approval, it's 89% with Democrats, and 60% with Independents, so how in the hell could he have an F, D, and C grade from you right-wing morons, explain that Billy.

Then O'Reilly had Dick Morris on to trash, spin, and lie about the Obama press conference and the first 100 days. I do not need to report exactly what Morris said, because it's all right-wing garbage. He pretty much trashed Obama and had nothing good to say about him. Which proves he is nothing but a biased right-wing idiot who just says what O'Reilly and his mostly Republican viewers want to hear. Morris even said the Obama job approval ratings were slipping, which is what O'Reilly and the Republicans have also said in the last 3 months, but it's a lie, and his ratings have not slipped at all.

Go to www.gallup.com and look it up, you will see they have held steady at 62% or better. In fact, Obama has averaged a 63% job approval for his first 100 days, yet O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends claim Obama is doing a terrible job and his ratings are slipping. It's all lies put out by partisan idiots who hate Obama and everything he does. And do not just believe me, go look it up for yourself and see it with your own eyes. O'Reilly told Morris that Obama gives long winded answers on purpose so it limits the time for follow up questions, which is just crazy. Earth to O'Reilly, you just hate it that Obama is smart, and he can give long detailed answers. Unlike your hero Bush who was so stupid he could barely even answer the question.

Let's talk about media bias, the Democratic president does a prime time national press conference, so what does O'Reilly do. He puts the totally biased right-wing idiot Dick Morris on to do the analysis. That alone proves that O'Reilly is a biased right-wing moron. Because every time Bush had a press conference O'Reilly would have a Republican on to do the analysis, and then the two of them would praise and defend Bush. Now that Obama is the president Billy has a Republican on to trash Obama with their partisan analysis, now that's bias. They basically had nothing good to say about the press conference. Later in the show O'Reilly even called it a charade.

Then O'Reilly put Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes on to do the Barack & a hard place segment. But this time O'Reilly had Crowley on to say what good things Obama has done, and Colmes to say what bad things Obama has done. Because Colmes said if he has to say the good things every week he will not do it anymore. Crowley found a good thing Obama did, and Colmes reported a bad thing. But then she trashed Obama and said she really does not think he does anything good. Which defeats the whole purpose of the segment, and makes it a joke. It's basically a waste of tv time, and an excuse for O'Reilly to put Colmes on so he can say he has Democrats on the show.

All during the show, right after a Democrat president press conference, and his first 100 days in office, O'Reilly had one Democrat on, and he was only on for about 1 minute to do the Barack & a hard place segment. The show was all Republicans who trashed Obama and everything he has done. Dick Morris, Monica Crowley, Bernard Goldberg, Amanda Carpenter, and Dennis Miller. Colmes was the only Democrat, and he was not even put on to talk about the press conference. Not to mention he was not on alone, he had to split his time with Crowley and O'Reilly, so he barely got to talk for one minute, maybe less.

O'Reilly also had on the right-wing Bernie Goldberg, Amanda Carpenter, the right-winger from townhall.com, and the right-wing Dennis Miller. They all trashed Obama and had nothing good to say about him.

Basically O'Reilly and his 99% right-wing guests trashed Obama and had almost nothing good to say about his press conference, or his first 100 days in office. O'Reilly called it a boring charade, he said the D.C. press were nothing more than props, and he said they did not ask tough questions. And all his right-wing guests agreed with him. It's all bias, and right-wing propaganda, about a president they do not like because he is a Democrat. When Bush did the same thing they loved it, and never once complained about anything he did. In fact, they supported Bush 100%, and defended everything he did.

Then the pinheads and patriots and the lame e-mails. O'Reilly said he got a lot of e-mails saying his C grade for Obama was way too high, that it should have been a D, or lower. He even read one of those e-mails calling him crazy for giving Obama a C, the guy wanted a D, or lower. Which also shows that most of the Factor viewers are right-wing idiots. Because Obama has a 65% job approval, and everyone but Republicans gave him a B grade or higher. Only the right-wing idiots gave Obama a C or lower, and that's you O'Reilly.

And btw, if I were counting guests for this show it would be 5 Republicans (6 if you count O'Reilly) to 1 Democrat, and that Democrat was Alan Colmes from FOX, who was only on for about 1 minute, if that, and had to split his time with O'Reilly and another Republican.

O'Reilly Wins Gold in Worlds Worst Person
By: Steve - April 29, 2009 - 12:45pm

From the Tuesday night Countdown with Keith Olbermann:

Our winner is Bill-O the clown. He showed this cartoon from the “New York Times” while saying, “take a good look at this cartoon which the ‘New York Times‘ printed yesterday. It shows the Statue of Liberty holding a whip, ready to strike. Just look at this atrocity and tell me that newspaper is a fair media outlet.

The two men responsible are Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., and editor Bill Keller. These guys are on a Jihad to define America as a gulag nation, a country that tortured helpless captives. The Times is aided and abetted by General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt and NBC‘s Jeff Zucker, who allow their commentators to push a hateful, far left agenda.”

You know what, Bill-O, I never saw that cartoon in the Times. I didn‘t see it on NBC, either, because NBC didn‘t show it. I don‘t even think we ran it until just now. You know where I saw that hateful cartoon? I saw it on Fox News. Bill, why do you hate America? Bill-O then went on to explain, with the insistence of a paranoid schizophrenic in a psych ward, that this is an unpatriotic Keller/Sulzberger/Immelt/Zucker plot to marginalize the Republican party through show trials.

It was so bad, Karl Rove had to reel him in. Karl Rove!
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ROVE: And I don‘t say they are unpatriotic, they just have a definition of what they --

O‘REILLY: Let me stop you there. They are not unpatriotic? When you‘re going to have pictures released in the next few days of criminal investigation into wrongdoing by Americans, which happened. And they‘re going to flood all over the world. Well, who‘s going to be in danger there? That‘s going to heighten the danger for every American troop overseas, every American diplomat, and every American tourist. And you‘re saying these men aren‘t unpatriotic, Mr. Rove?

ROVE: I‘m not saying—they‘re not doing this because they‘re unpatriotic. They‘re doing this because they want to achieve a goal for America that I fundamentally disagree with.

(END VIDEO CLIP)
OLBERMANN: Mr. Rove, Mr. Murdoch. When Karl Rove has to talk your commentator down, either your commentator or his supervisors or you are out of control. Bill O‘Reilly, today‘s worst person in the world!

The Tuesday 4-28-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 29, 2009 - 12:30pm

The TPM was called Grading The President. Billy gave Obama the Factor report card on his first 100 days. But he graded him on 3 different areas. O'Reilly gave him a B on domestic policy, but he said future spending is the wild card. What's odd is every night O'Reilly attacked everything Obama did on domestic policy, then gives him a B, which makes no sense. He gave him a C on foreign policy, he said Obama is not holding evil accountable, whatever that means. He gave Obama a C+ on leadership, and called Obama a weak leader. Which is funny because Obama has a 65% job approval, so clearly the only people who see him as weak are biased right-wing idiots.

And btw, I saw many other people on tv and on the internet grade Obama in his first 100 days, and they all gave him a B or higher. Only a handful of far right Republicans gave him a grade lower than a B, including O'Reilly. It shows that partisan Republicans like O'Reilly can not give an objective grade to a president when they are biased right-wingers. And they prove their bias, because they are the only people that do not think Obama is doing a great job.

Then O'Reilly had 2 Republicans from FOX on to discuss it, Carl Cameron and Major Garrett. Here is my question, where are the Democrats. How can you debate something with 3 Republicans and no Democrats. It's a violation of journalistic standards. The rules of journalism say you need to have someone from both sides to make it fair and balanced. O'Reilly ignores the rules and does a biased one sided partisan hack job on Obama. Then he claims he is fair to Obama, if that's being fair, I'm Mike Ditka. Earth to O'Reilly, you are a biased idiot, and you are not fair to Obama.

And of course neither O'Reilly, Garrett, or Cameron had one good thing to say about Obama, because it was 3 biased Republicans from FOX that do not like him. Between the 3 of them only Garrett said one thing that was true, he mentioned that the polls about right direction or wrong direction for the country, show an increase in people who think were going in the right direction. Other than that it was all negative, and nothing but right-wing propaganda with 3 Republicans who work for FOX News.

At then end of the segment O'Reilly said before we run out of time let's talk about Specter. The biggest story in America, that was the lead story on every news show all day long, and O'Reilly gave it a lousy 60 seconds with 2 Republicans. Billy said Specter switched parties, Garrett you have 30 seconds, go. Then he talked for 30 seconds, then Cameron got 30 seconds, then O'Reilly said thank you and went to commercial. What a joke, if that's objective journalism I'm Joe Biden.

Then a lame swine flu segment, Billy claims the media is hyping the story, then he reports it every night, and FOX is reporting it as much, or more than anyone. Then O'Dummy had a segment about the CIA vs. the FBI on the torture debate. And of course O'Reilly had a one sided biased segment on it with one Republican who was a former CIA officer. O'Reilly put this right-winger Michael Scheuer on, and of course he agreed with everything O'Reilly said. They both claim torture works and if you do not agree with them you are wrong and a liar.

Billy said FBI director Mueller said torture does not work, and Scheuer said Mueller is a liar. But nobody was on to give the other side, or to point out that it's not just Mueller. It's hundreds of people in the CIA, FBI, Navy, Army, Air Force, Marines, the DOJ, the DOD, and on and on. Billy just don't have those people on, because they disagree with him. It's called cherry picking the CIA people, O'Reilly only has people on from the CIA who agree with him, then he says that proves he is right. But I have seen people from the CIA on other shows who say it does not work, O'Reilly ignores them, and only has right-wingers from the CIA on that agree with him.

It's one sided bias, and a massive violation of journalistic standards. Yet O'Reilly does it anyway, and his brainwashed viewers probably believe all of it. In O'Reilly world he calls that journalism, but in the real world it's one sided right-wing propaganda. It shows that O'Reilly is a fraud, and a lying partisan spin doctor.

And if you want proof this guy Scheuer is a partisan right-wing stooge, during the segment, that was not about Obama, he trashed Obama 2 times. He said Obama is playing games with our safety, when he don't know if that is true or not, and only right-wing idiots are saying crap like that, as in Cheney and others. He also called Obama an amateur that does not know what he is doing. Which is basically the talking points on Obama right from GOP headquarters. At the end of the segment O'Reilly called him a great guest and told everyone to buy his book.

Then O'Reilly replayed old video of him and Ellis Henican talking about torture, and Frank Luntz the biased right-wing pollster was on to talk about it. He wired people up and showed them the interview, and of course Luntz said O'Reilly won the debate. Which is so ridiculous it's sad, Luntz is a right-wing fraud, and a known poll rigger, he was even caught doctoring poll results and his credibility is zero. Yet O'Reilly made him the official Factor pollster. Nothing Luntz says can be believed, ever, because he is a partisan corrupt fraud. There is no Democrat pollster, just Frank Luntz, and he is always on alone.

Then O'Reilly had the 2 Republican legal experts on from FOX for is it legal. Lis Wiehl and Megyn Kelly. They talked about some stupid legal cases, and one was about naked people who put pumpkins on their heads. It's just more one sided right-wing garbage. The 3 Republicans cherry pick 3 or 4 legal cases and then they put their right-wing spin on the cases. With no Democrats to provide the balance or the counterpoint. And none of it does any good anyway, it's not like they are going to get the ruling changed for talking about them on a lame cable news show.

Instead of reporting real news, O'Reilly does all this crap to get ratings from his right-wing viewers, and none of it has any news value at all. Then more waste of tv time, the factor culture quiz with 2 Republicans from FOX News. Billy has Steve Doocy and Martha MacCallum on to take some stupid 5 question culture quiz. And even that is one sided bias, because no Democrats are ever allowed to take the quiz. And it's not news, it's just more garbage to get ratings and to promote Factor gear.

O'Reilly ignores the real news, Specter and the Senate Torture Report, then he does all this garbage that is not news, and has no news value at all. Then he even has the nerve to criticize other news shows for bias and tabloid crap, when the Factor has more bias and more tabloid crap than any of them, combined. Then O'Reilly says because he is #1 in the ratings, that means he is a great journalist. Ummmm, wrong jackass. It just means you do partisan garbage that gets you good ratings with right-wing idiots, and that's all it means.

Show me your journalism awards, and get back to me when you win a peabody.

More Proof O'Reilly is Just a Total Joke
By: Steve - April 28, 2009 - 8:30pm

The big news story today (that was the lead story) on every news network in America, was Arlen Specter the Republican switching to the Democratic party. It was on every cable news network all day long, it's almost all they talked about, and it was clearly the biggest news story of the day by a mile. This is a huge story, almost as big as Obama winning the election last November. It's big because once Al Franken is seated in Minnesota the Democrats will have the 60 votes they need to do whatever they want.

If Arlen Specter was a Democrat, and he was switching to Republican to give them 60 votes so they could do anything, it would be a 30 minute segment on the Factor, and maybe even the whole show. O'Reilly would be as happy as a pig in fresh mud, and he would have a whole show of guests to talk about it.

So what does O'Reilly do, how did he cover the biggest news story of the day, he spent 1 minute on it at the end of a political segment with Major Garrett and Carl Cameron. Billy pretty much totally ignored the story, that's what he did. O'Reilly did a TPM that gave Obama a grade on three measures, then he had Garrett and Cameron on to give their opinions on Obama and his first 100 days, even though the 100 days is tomorrow.

Billy, Garrett, and Cameron talked about the first 100 days for Obama, then at the very end of the segment O'Reilly mentioned Specter. And he did not even use his first name, he just said let's move on to Specter. Then he said Garrett you have 30 seconds, go. So Garrett talked about him for 30 seconds, then Cameron got to speak for his 30 seconds, and then O'Reilly said thank you, and went to commercial.

And that was that, the great objective and Independent super journalist Bill O'Reilly devoted a whole 60 seconds to the biggest news story of the day, and maybe the year. That is what O'Reilly calls journalism, I call it biased right-wing garbage. He did not even do a full segment on it, and no Democrats were on to discuss it, none. Just 60 seconds at the end of a political segment with two Republicans who work for FOX News.

What a joke, is that what O'Reilly calls objective reporting. In the real world the Spector switch was a huge story, in O'Reilly world it was nothing, and barely even got a mention. Billy did not even give him the respect of using his first name, it was just ridiculous, and if that's objective journalism, I'm Bill Gates.

Specter Switches Parties: Will Billy's Head Explode
By: Steve - April 28, 2009 - 5:30pm

O'Reilly has been crying like a baby for 99 days now about Obama and all his plans for the country. His only hope to get some of the Obama plans blocked was the Democrats did not have the 60 votes needed in the Senate. Now that hope is gone, Specter will now give the Democrats the 60 votes they need, and then Obama can do whatever the hell he wants to, even if every dumbass Republican votes no, he can just say who cares, then do what is right for America.

And the right-wing idiots like Bill O'Reilly are gonna scream bloddy murder, and cry about it for months, if not years. I say suck on it O'Reilly, you are a far right idiot who is out of touch with mainstream America. Do you know that in a recent poll only 21% of the people claim to be Republicans. That's because the Republican party is the party of the old Religious white guys, just like O'Reilly, and they are becoming the minority in this country very fast.

If the Republican party does not wise up, and do it fast, the end of their party may come soon. Specter is a classic example of the Republicans pushing a moderate out because he is not a far right nut job like Rove and Gingrich. The Republicans think the answer to getting power back is to move farther right, which shows how stupid they are, because the majority of the country is moving to the center, or the left. I have to say I love it, and it's even better because O'Reilly is gonna lose his mind watching Obama and the Democrats pass every liberal plan they have.

Arlen Specter said this:
I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary, said Specter in a statement. I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.

He added: Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.
What's really great is the Republicans caused this, they said they would run a conservative Republican against him in the 2010 primary, after he voted yes on the Obama stimulus bill, so their payback is Specter will now be a Democrat.

Specter also said this:
When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.

Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable.

On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.
The Republican party should put a sign on their door saying, old far-right anti-tax pro-life religious white guys only. Because that is what the Republican party has become, the party of old far-right white guys.

My 100 Day Review of President Obama
By: Steve - April 28, 2009 - 10:30am

I personally give Obama a B+ for what he has done so far. It would be an A if he supported the Bush investigations as he promised he would in the campaign. So he is doing very well in his first 100 days. Unless you are Bill O'Reilly or a Republican, who think he is terrible and ruining the country. Remember that O'Reilly and all his dumbass right-wing friends have trashed everything Obama has done, and it's only been 100 days, he still has 3 years and 9 months to go, and maybe 7 years and 9 months to go.

President Obama has a 65% job approval rating, which is the 4th highest in history after 100 days, behind Eisenhower, JFK, and Reagan, Obama is 4th at 65%, yet O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends say Obama is terrible. But if Obama is so bad, as they claim, how can he have the 4th highest job approval (after 100 days) in history. It shows how biased and out of touch with reality O'Reilly and his right-wing friends are.

They see something nobody else does, because they are dishonest partisan right-wing spin doctors. A full 65% of the American people like Obama and approve of the job he is doing. Now just think how high his approval would be if Bush had not left him the mess he did, it would probably be 70%, or higher. But right-wing idiots like O'Reilly do not see that, all they see is a bad president, who is too liberal, and who is ruining the country. That's because they are dishonest and biased partisan right-wing spin doctors.

Think about this, the American people love Obama and give him a 65% job approval. While at the same time O'Reilly and all the Republicans hate Obama and say he is doing a terrible job. It shows that they are insane, and it shows that they have no influence over what the American people think about Obama. It also shows that they do not report the truth, and that people like O'Reilly are trying to fraud the American people with their partisan propaganda.

I say good job Obama, and good job America. You finally elected a good man to be the president, and you see right through the partisan right-wing propaganda from O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends. Michelle Obama once said she can finally be proud to be an American again, and I will say the same thing. We got rid of Bush, who ruined the country, and now we can be proud to say we are Americans again. Now if you just keep ignoring all the lying right-wing spin doctors like O'Reilly America will be great once again.

The Monday 4-28-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 28, 2009 - 10:15am

The TPM was called Brutalizing America. O'Reilly put out some more right-wing insanity last night, he said the far-left is now putting the lives of American troops in danger. Billy went on some crazy right-wing rant about Obama putting the rest of the abu ghraib prison abuse photos out, and some NY Times cartoon. When some of the photos were already put out, Obama is just putting the rest of them out to let the American people (and the world) see the whole truth, not just the partial photos the Bush administration let out. And the cartoon story was really funny, Billy totally ignored the Obama chimp killing cartoon in the NY Post, and never said a word about it, but now he cries about a NY Times cartoon, haha, shut up hypocrite.

O'Reilly attacked Soros, GE, Immelt, the far-left, the ACLU, etc. For supporting the truth be known to the American people. Billy hates that because it makes his hero George W. Bush look bad. But you can bet the farm if Bush was a Democrat O'Reilly would be saying the same thing liberals are. He is only opposed to showing the truth because Bush is a Republican. I say, show the truth about everything, including Obama, I do not care if it's a Democrat or a Republican, the people deserve to see the truth, and the whole truth. Not the partial cherry picked truth Bush and O'Reilly want you to see, we need to see it all O'Reilly, so shut up already.

O'Reilly even said that ONLY the FBI director Mueller said torture does not work. Which is just laughable, and a lie. Hundreds of interrogation experts in the CIA, the FBI, the Military, etc. have said torture does not work to get good information. Which shows what a biased right-wing liar O'Reilly is, a simple google search on does torture work, will get you hundreds of people saying it does not, yet O'Reilly falsely claims only Mueller is saying that. Only a right-wing propagandist would even say such a thing, it's a total lie, and if anyone believes that you need a check up from the neck up.

Then Mr. (I am an objective Independent with a no spin zone who is fair to both sides) had the far right biased Republican Karl Rove on to discuss it, all alone, with no Democrat or anyone to give the counterpoint and provide the balance in the segment. If that's objective journalism, I'm Brad Pitt. O'Reilly and Rove trashed Obama and everything he is doing, or has done, Billy even called the people who he trashed in the TPM, Soros Immelt, the far-left, etc. unpatriotic. Here we go again, now they are unpatriotic for wanting the truth. When just a week ago O'Reilly said he respects dissent, and that he was fair to liberals when they had anti-war protests.

Now O'Reilly is back to calling liberals who want to see the truth about what Bush did in our name unpatriotic. It is so crazy that even Karl Rove refused to call them unpatriotic, Rove said he will NOT call them unpatriotic, but O'Reilly did, and more than once. Which shows that O'Reilly is a right-wing lunatic, and even more of a partisan idiot than Rove is, which is hard to do, good job Billy. Earth to O'Reilly, how is it unpatriotic to call for the truth to come out, explain that to me jackass. You are unpatriotic for trying to cover up the truth, so put that in your pipe and smoke it, idiot.

Then O'Reilly had Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on to talk about his crazy TPM etc. Juan agreed with O'Reilly on the cartoon, what a shocker, not. But he never once pointed out the hypocrisy from O'Reilly, for not saying a word about the NY Post Obama chimp killing cartoon. O'Reilly only reports cartoons when they are negative to a Republican, but if it's negative to a Democrat he ignores it and never says one word about it. Not only is it hypocrisy, it's bias, and a double standard. And of course Ham agreed with everything O'Reilly said, like the good little right-wing ass kissing stooge she is. In a rare case of honesty Juan actually disagreed with O'Reilly about the photos, Juan has to disagree with him once in a while so he can claim to have some integrity.

Then O'Reilly had the results of his insane and worthless website poll. He asked if you support harsh interrogations if the president orders it. And the way that was worded even I would answer yes, because it's garbage, and wrongly worded. The answers were 98% yes, and 2% no, what a shocker, haha. Not to mention it's a worthless unscientific poll taken on his personal website, so it's garbage. The poll should have said do you support TORTURE if the president orders it. My answer to that would be NO, I do not support torture from anyone, because it's illegal under US law, and International law, but I do support harsh interrogations. O'Reilly rigged the poll by wording it wrong, and by running it on his personal website.

Then O'Reilly had Jon Meacham on to discuss his pulitzer for his book American Lion, and O'Reilly ambushed him with garbage about bias at Newsweek, and the CIA memos etc. Meacham refused to talk about some of it and told O'Reilly they have no bias. Billy said in the future he might support an investigation of Bush, but right now it is too soon to do the investigations, whatever that means, and like anyone cares if he supports them or not. Then he had a segment on the swine flu with Dr. Bernadine Healy, Billy said the media is hyping the story, and for once he was exactly right. The swine flu is a story, but it's not as big as the media is making it. One guy at CNN said million and millions of people could die, when it's only 150 at most. They are hyping it for ratings, and it's just stupid, so for once I agree with O'Reilly.

Then O'Reilly had the two Republican culture warriors on to talk garbage about Hollywood celebs who speak out about politics. Maher, Lettrman, Garofalo, Franken, Behar, etc. They trashed them all, but only the liberals, they do not trash the conservative celebs who speak out about politics. Hey Billy, what happened to you respect dissent. It's total hypocrisy and a giant double standard. In O'Reilly world dissent and political speech is ok if you are a conservative, but if you are a liberal you are un-American and unpatriotic if you speak out. It's a joke, and O'Reilly is a total right-wing idiot.

Then the crazy (no-reality) Reality Check segment, it's so biased and so stupid I am not even going to report what he said. It's just O'Reilly putting his spin on 6 things that mean nothing to anyone, except him and his brainwashed right-wing viewers. They have no reality, and no check, it's all spin and opinion from O'Reilly, and it's a massive waste of tv time on a so-called news show.

Then the pinheads and patriots and the cherry picked highly edited e-mails. And another one sided biased O'Reilly Factor was over, with 99% Republican bias, and 99% Republican guests to help Billy spin out his 99% right-wing propaganda.

Gallup Torture Poll You Will Never See Reported on The Factor
By: Steve - April 27, 2009 - 6:15pm

UPDATE 4-28-09 -- As I predicted yesterday O'Reilly did not say a word about the Gallup poll showing that 51% of the people support an investigation of Bush.

Gallup just ran a new torture poll, and here are the results.

Majority support investigation of Bush administration's interrogation tactics.



In a new poll out today, Gallup found that a slim majority of Americans -- 51 percent -- support "a government investigation into harsh interrogation techniques of terrorist suspects." Forty-two percent said they were opposed to such investigations.

Big News Articles O'Reilly Has Totally Ignored
By: Steve - April 27, 2009 - 3:15pm

Billy claims torture is great and it works, yet he ignores all the reporting that says otherwise. It's called bias and cherry picking only articles that agree with you. And most of what he reported came from biased Republican sources, then he tries to pass it off as objective journalism. It's reported as fact, when he knows it's cherry picked, and only Republican news sources are reporting it. Here are some important articles O'Reilly has totally ignored.

‘We Could Have Done This the Right Way’

How Ali Soufan, an FBI agent, got Abu Zubaydah to talk without torture.

The arguments at the CIA safe house were loud and intense in the spring of 2002. Inside, a high-value terror suspect, Abu Zubaydah, was handcuffed to a gurney. He had been wounded during his capture in Pakistan and still had bullet fragments in his stomach, leg and groin. Agency operatives were aiming to crack him with rough and unorthodox interrogation tactics—including stripping him nude, turning down the temperature and bombarding him with loud music. But one impassioned young FBI agent wanted nothing to do with it. He tried to stop them.

The agent, Ali Soufan, was known as one of the bureau's top experts on Al Qaeda. He also had a reputation as a shrewd interrogator who could work fluently in both English and Arabic. Soufan yelled at one CIA contractor and told him that what he was doing was wrong, ineffective and an affront to American values. At one point, Soufan discovered a dark wooden "confinement box" that the contractor had built for Abu Zubaydah. It looked, Soufan recalls, "like a coffin." The mercurial agent erupted in anger, got on a secure phone line and called Pasquale D'Amuro, then the FBI assistant director for counterterrorism. "I swear to God," he shouted, "I'm going to arrest these guys!"

Mueller ordered Soufan and a second FBI agent home. He then directed that bureau personnel no longer participate in CIA interrogations. In the corridors of the White House, Justice Department and U.S. intelligence agencies, heated debates ensued. Three months later, on Aug. 1, 2002, Justice lawyers issued a chilling memo blessing everything the CIA contractors had proposed—including waterboarding, or simulated drowning, a ghoulish technique that was administered to Abu Zubaydah 83 times.

Full Story: www.newsweek.com/id/195089

CIA official: No proof harsh techniques stopped terror attacks on America

WASHINGTON — The CIA inspector general in 2004 found that there was no conclusive proof that waterboarding or other harsh interrogation techniques helped the Bush administration thwart any "specific imminent attacks," according to recently declassified Justice Department memos.

That undercuts assertions by former vice president Dick Cheney and other former Bush administration officials that the use of harsh interrogation tactics including waterboarding, which is widely considered torture, was justified because it headed off terrorist attacks.

Note: It also undercuts what O'Reilly said too, because he is saying the same thing Cheney has been saying.

The IG's report is among several indications that the Bush administration's use of abusive interrogation methods was less productive than some former administration officials have claimed.

Even some of those in the military who developed the techniques warned that the information they produced was "less reliable" than that gained by traditional psychological measures, and that using them would produce an "intolerable public and political backlash when discovered," according to a Senate Armed Services Committee report released on Tuesday.

Note: They refer to the Senate report O'Reilly has never said a word about, and will not talk about it, because it details the torture Bush approved and it makes his hero look bad.

Full Story: www.mcclatchydc.com/227/66895.html

Bush Officials Tried to Shift Blame for Detainee Abuse to Low-Ranking Soldiers

by Senator Carl Levin

4-21-09 -- We are releasing the declassified report of the Senate Armed Services Committee's investigation into the treatment of detainees in U.S. custody. The report was approved by the Armed Services Committee on November 20, 2008 and has, in the intervening period, been under review at the Department of Defense for declassification.

In my judgment, the report represents a condemnation of both the Bush administration's interrogation policies and of senior administration officials who attempted to shift the blame for abuse - such as that seen at Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay, and Afghanistan - to low ranking soldiers. Claims, such as that made by former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz that detainee abuses could be chalked up to the unauthorized acts of a "few bad apples," were simply false.

The truth is that, early on, it was senior civilian leaders who set the tone. On September 16, 2001, Vice President Dick Cheney suggested that the United States turn to the "dark side" in our response to 9/11. Not long after that, after White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales called parts of the Geneva Conventions "quaint," President Bush determined that provisions of the Geneva Conventions did not apply to certain detainees. Other senior officials followed the President and Vice President's lead, authorizing policies that included harsh and abusive interrogation techniques.

The record established by the Committee's investigation shows that senior officials sought out information on, were aware of training in, and authorized the use of abusive interrogation techniques. Those senior officials bear significant responsibility for creating the legal and operational framework for the abuses. As the Committee report concluded, authorizations of aggressive interrogation techniques by senior officials resulted in abuse and conveyed the message that physical pressures and degradation were appropriate treatment for detainees in U.S. military custody.

Full Story: www.huffingtonpost.com/sen-carl-levin-report.html

Notice that Bill O'Reilly (the so-called journalist with the no spin zone who claims to not have an agenda) ignores all of that, and never once reported any of it.

Meet The Dumbest Man in America
By: Steve - April 26, 2009 - 10:15am

Every once in a while I get an e-mail from a braindead right-wing O'Reilly Factor viewer, about 1 or 2 a month. I usually just copy it and post it in my forums for the forum members to laugh at. But this one was so insane, and so stupid I decided to publish it in the blog too. Here is that e-mail.

Subject: none
Date: Saturday, April 25, 2009 11:06 PM
From: john doe - [email protected]
To: [email protected]

Wow,

If there was a word to describe what an idiot you are, I would use it.

Are you so stupid that you are oblivious to the fact that O'Reilly and Fox News are absolutely annihilating all the cable news company's, especially MSNBC? Are you oblivious to the extreme far left hatred driven by MSNBC and other biased news places like The New York Times? Fox News and O'Reilly give you the NEWS. Not biased news. Not BS. Just the news, fair and balanced. It seems the entire country agrees. Check the ratings, idiot.

My gosh. You're insane. I'm sure your taking a lot of pleasure in this message. Does it make you happy that America hates you? Do you like to be hated? Do you enjoy being one of the biggest idiots on the planet?

Are you ok in the head?

I think not.

I will not reply to everythng he said, but I do want to make a couple points. He claims that O'Reilly and FOX News give us the news, just the news, with no bias and no BS, and that the entire country agrees because they are #1 in the ratings. Then he says check the ratings idiot.

So I did, and Brian Williams at NBC is #1 with 10 million viewers a day. O'Reilly does not even beat Katie Couric at CBS, who gets about 6 million viewers a night. So if we use his argument the entire country agrees with Brian Williams because he is #1 in the ratings.

Neither one of them can say the entire country agrees with them, because most of the country do not watch any of their shows. On top of all that, Obama and the Democrats crushed the Republicans in the last election, so if you were to say the entire country agrees with someone, it sure as hell would not be O'Reilly, or any Republican. In fact, most of the country hates O'Reilly and disagrees with his partisan right-wing propaganda.

He claims I am an idiot, yet he is the one who thinks the entire country agrees with O'Reilly because he has the #1 rated CABLE NEWS SHOW, THAT ONLY 1% OF AMERICANS WATCH. If the country agrees with anyone, it's Obama (who has a 64% job approval rating) and the Democrats who crushed the Republicans in the last election, and gained the majority in the House and the Senate.

The best part is you get to see what a Factor viewer is really like. This is a look into the head of the kind of person who watches the Factor, and if you ask me it's pretty scary. If this guy votes, it's really scary. If you believe the entire country agrees with a partisan right-wing cable news host, because he is #1 on cable news, who only has 1% of the country watching him, you need to be locked up in a padded room somewhere, and yet, he thinks I am the idiot.

It's really crazy talk right after Obama and the Democrats crushed the Republicans and took over total control of the country. I bet he still thinks George W. Bush is the president too.

The Friday 4-24-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 25, 2009 - 11:15am

The TPM was called Torture Investigation? Billy said Pelosi is driving the witch hunt. And notice that only Republicans are calling it a witch hunt. The rest of the people are calling it an investigation to get the truth. Billy said Obama is now opposed to an investigation, and he likes that. Then he said anyone who supports the investigation is so stupid they are dangerous, ideological nuts, called it a mistake, and fodder for far-left haters. Billy also said it would be anti-American and hurt the country if we go forward with the investigation of Bush over torture.

Which is all just right-wing propaganda. Earth to O'Jackass, what happened to the rule of law. Did you actually read the UN Charter Against Torture, go read it moron. The investigation will not hurt the country, and it is not anti-American, the only people it will hurt is you, and the guys in the Bush administration who approved the torture. And btw, you can cry and bitch about it all you want, but it will not do any good, they will do it no matter what you say, did you forgot your side lost in November, that nobody is gonna listen to the losers who ruined the country, and that you are just a nobody cable news host.

Here is what I find funny, Bush, and the Republicans in Congress had total control of America for almost 7 years, they ruined the financial markets, the housing markets, started two un-needed wars, bankrupted the country, used illegal torture, not once, but 266 times, that we know of, and basically destroyed everything they got involved in. Then O'Reilly, Hannity, etc. supported and defended everything these corrupt bastards did, and now we are supposed to listen to them to fix the country?

What planet are you jerkoffs living on, why should anyone listen to anything you have to say, you are the people that caused all the problems. It would be like giving a financial advisor a Billion dollars to invest for you, and he loses it all, then you go back to him and ask him for financial advice, it would be insane. Once you bankrupt the country, and ruin everything you touch, then you get voted out, you have no say in how to fix it because you are proven idiots.

Yet O'Reilly and the Republicans are saying do not do what Obama and the Democrats want, listen to us and the tea baggers. NO, they won, do you understand what that means. It's why we have elections, the people have spoken, and they rejected the right-wing agenda, that's why the people elected all the Democrats. You had your 7 years and you blew it, big time, so now you have no say in anything, so get over it. Now the Democrats get their chance and if they screw it up you can vote them out, but until then you lost and you have no voice in what happens now.

Then O'Reilly had Karl Rove on to discuss torture, politics, etc. Which is a massive joke, because he is not an objective analyst, he was in the Bush administration. If O'Reilly and Rove had any credibility at all (which they don't) Rove would never be a guest to talk about issues in the Bush administration, because he was in it, so he is biased, and he should recuse himself. Yet O'Reilly puts this biased idiot on to talk about what happened in the administration he was in, which is just ridiculous. I will not report all of what he said, but you can guess, he defended Bush and trashed Obama, what a shocker, not!

What was really ridiculous is how O'Reilly asked what did Pelosi know about the torture. While ignoring what Bush knew, it's like watching the twilight zone, not a real news show. The question is, what did Bush know, and when did he know it, Pelosi has nothing to do with it, because she was not in the Bush administration. But O'Reilly only wants to know what Pelosi knew, which is extreme bias, and pretty much insane. He even did a one sided biased segment on it with a Republican Congressman from Texas, Mac Thornberry.

They both speculated that Pelosi knew about the waterboarding. And they both implied that Pelosi was lying when she says she did not know they were waterboarding people. They did this with no proof, and no evidence, it was all speculation. This dumbass Thornberry said he knows she is lying because she was briefed, when asked if he was there, he said no, so he has no clue if she was or not, because he was not allowed in on those breifings. Yet he still claims she knew, with no evidence to back up those claims.

And O'Reilly put this speculating Republican jackass on to smear Pelosi, knowing what he would say, so O'Reilly is just as big of an idiot as Mac Thornberry. The whole segment was just a one sided biased hit job on Pelosi, it was basically a set up. O'Reilly knew what he would say from the pre-interview, then he put him on anyway, just to smear Pelosi who they both hate. It's a violation of journalistic standards, and un-ethical. Nobody was on to give her side of the story, and Pelosi has flat out denied she knew, yet Billy and his right-wing buddy call her a liar, with no proof, none. Hey O'Reilly, change the name of your show to The Speculation Factor.

Then the biggest joke of the night, so far, haha. Billy said he is running a new poll on his personal website. The question is, Do You Support Tough Interrogations When Ordered by The President?

Which is just a stupid and wrongly worded poll question that does not address the issue, it's a spin poll question. I would even answer yes to that question, so it's a fricking joke. The right question would be this, Do You Support Torture When Ordered by The President?

That would be the right question to ask, the O'Reilly poll question is ridiculous. I support tough interrogations, so I would answer yes, but I do not support torture, so if the question asked about torture I would answer no. And I bet 95% of the people answer yes, so the poll is a joke, and it will be taken on his personal website so it's a worthless and unscientific poll anyway.

Then O'Reilly attacked CNN for bias with some right-wing nut job woman from Canada, and was working for a tv station in Canada. Which was also totally ridiculous and not even worth reporting. Basically she agreed with everything Billy said, so that alone tells you where her head is at. Then Geraldo was on to talk tabloid garbage, the craiglist murder, Melissa Huckaby, and the octo-mom nonsense.

Then the insane far far right nut job Glenn Beck was on. Billy and Beck attacked GE and Jeff Immelt, Beck even said Immelt is the devil and he is destroying the world. And this guy has a tv news show? Then they attacked Diane Feinstein over some deal with her husband and the Government, but they both admitted it was speculation and they have no proof she did anything wrong. The Speculation Factor strikes again, do you guys ever talk about anything with actual facts that is actual news?

At one point O'Reilly said he is the journalist, and Beck said he is not. One of them is telling the truth, guess which one it is, haha. And what's really funny is in the last 8 years neither one of these right-wing idiots ever said a word about all the shady deals with the Government and Halliburton. Even though Cheney was their CEO before getting the VP job, and he still owned stock in Halliburton, yet they said nothing, while Halliburton got Billions and Billions of dollars in contracts from the Government. Talk about bias and hypocrisy, this is it.

Then the TV Icon garbage about Dean Martin and the roasts with Deana Martin, the pinheads and patriots and the e-mails. Notice that O'Reilly has still not said one single word about the 232 page Senate Armed Services Torture Report that came out on Tuesday, not a fricking word.

And btw, O'Reilly has never said one word about the FBI, the Navy, the Air Force, the Army, or the Marines, all refusing to use the Bush torture methods, they all refused, so Bush had to get the CIA to do it. And you should also notice that O'Reilly never has any current or former military guys on to say waterboarding is torture, even though they are all over the other news shows.

O'Reilly does that on purpose, he just ignores them and refuses to have them on his show. Because if he had any of them on his show he would not be able to say only liberals oppose torture. Even John McCain recently said waterboarding is torture, but O'Reilly will not even have him on because he said that.

O'Reilly stacks the deck with Republicans who support torture, but he does not have any on that oppose it. Then he has a Democrat or two on who oppose torture, and Billy spins it like only liberals oppose the torture, when the truth is many Republicans also oppose it, O'Reilly just will not let them on the show.

The Thursday 4-23-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 24, 2009 - 3:45pm

Before I start the review, please note that to this day Bill O'Reilly has not said one word about the 232 page Senate Armed Services torture report on the Bush administration. It has been the biggest news story in America since it was released on Tuesday, it was on all day and all night Tuesday and Wednesday, on CNN, MSNBC, and somewhat on FOX. Yet the entire report has been 100% ignored by Bill O'Reilly, even though two Republican Senators also signed off on it, John McCain and Lindsay Graham.

O'Reilly calls himself a journalist, then he ignores the report that details all the torture, and the biggest story in America, if that's journalism, I'm Donald Trump.

The TPM was called Will General Electric get paid for supporting President Obama? Billy went on some insane right-wing rant about GE getting paid to support Obama. What he fails to report is that GE had those Government contracts under Bush too, so shut up already, you are just making a fool out of yourself. He even claimed there was a revolt at the GE stockholders meeting, when it was just his boy Jesse and a few right-wingers who listen to Billy's propaganda about GE, which was hardly a revolt.

Billy said Immelt and Zucker are guilty of a major breach of journalistic ethics, when the only major breach of journalistic ethics is you buying a few shares of stock for your stooge Jesse, so he could get into the stockholders meeting, then record it against the rules. Billy even compared it to watergate, which is just laughable. O'Reilly said GE stock is down 70% so Immelt should be fired, yet News Corp stock is down 56% and O'Reilly does not call for anyone to be fired there. Not to mention many US companies have lost 50 to 70 percent of their stock value because of the financial crisis and the recession. Yet O'Reilly only talks about GE, and he only calls for Immelt to be fired.

It's nothing more than revenge for Keith Olbermann exposing the truth about O'Reilly, and it's dishonest reporting from O'Reilly.Then O'Reilly had the far right Laura Ingraham on to discuss it, and I will not waste your time with the garbage she put out. She basically agreed with everything O'Reilly said, like the good little lying Republican spin doctor she is. Just think about this, these segments with Ingraham are one sided biased right-wing spin. It's O'Reilly and Ingraham spinning out right-wing talking points and lies, with nobody to counter what they say, ever. As Billy would say, this is a major breach of journalistic ethics, yet he does it every night.

Then O'Reilly cited a Rasmussen poll asking if Bush should be investigated, it says 28 percent say yes, 58 percent say no. What O'Reilly did not report is that Rasmussen is a biased Republican, and a couple other things that were in the same poll. He did not report this.

Among all voters, 42% say terrorism suspects were tortured by the United States, but 37% disagree. The number who believe America used torture is unchanged from October 2007.

Most Democrats (54%) and a plurality of unaffiliated voters (46%) believe the United States did torture terrorism suspects. Fifty-five percent (55%) of GOP voters do not believe torture was used.

And there is also a Gallup poll that says something different. The last time Gallup polled this issue was on February 12, when they found that 62 percent of the public supported some sort of investigation into the "possible use of torture in terror interrogation." Thirty-eight percent favored a criminal investigation, 24 percent favored an investigation by an independent panel, and 34 percent said they favored neither. Billy never said a word about that poll, and only cited the Rasmussen poll put out by a biased Republican.

Billy said this about the Rasmussen poll:
O'REILLY: Now that reaffirms my faith in the wisdom of the folks. Still the loons carry on.
While he ignores the Gallup poll where 62% of those same folks disagree with O'Reilly, when the Gallup poll came out he totally ignored it and never said a word about it. So somehow the folks have wisdom now in the Rasmussen poll, because it agrees with him, but when it's a Gallup poll they don't have wisdom? Please explain that one O'Reilly. And btw, the current Obama job approval is 65%, yet O'Reilly never says a word about it.

The Gallup poll says 6 in 10 say there should be either a criminal investigation or an independent probe. This includes 62% who favor some type of investigation into the possible use of torture when interrogating terrorism suspects, 63% who do so with respect to the possible use of telephone wiretaps without obtaining a warrant, and 71% who support investigating possible attempts to use the Justice Department for political purposes.

Then O'Reilly pulled a biased garbage trick, he had two Republicans on who lost loved ones on 9-11 to talk about torture etc. This is a joke, the real story is the Senate torture report, he ignores that and had two biased right-wingers on to talk about torture. And while he mentioned the Jersey girls, who disagree with the two family members Billy had on, he did not have any of them on the show. It was a biased one sided garbage right-wing propaganda segment. I refuse to report what they said because it was bogus one sided biased right-wing garbage.

Then O'Reilly had Leslie Stahl from 60 minutes on to discuss the Obama/Chavez hand shake etc. Stahl pretty much disagreed with all the O'Reilly spin, and told people to watch 60 minutes Sunday for the truth. O'Reilly tried to justify the torture because Bush kept us safe for the last 7 years, and she was not buying it. Then Billy had two tabloid segments about Mel Gibsons divorce and Donald Trump was on to talk about the Miss USA scandal.

And btw, Trump said she did not lose because she is opposed to gay marriage, which kills the O'Reilly spin that she lost because of it, and Trump also said he trusts Obama and hopes he will be a good president. Trump also said he would hire Obama in a minute. Trump even said he would use Perez Hilton as a judge again, and he did not think he did anything wrong.

Then the no reality Reality Check segment. Billy said this:
O'REILLY: Under CEO Jeff Immelt, the stock has declined an astounding 70 percent, and the man still has his job.
But as I pointed out earlier, News Corp stock has declined 56% during the same time, and Billy does not call for the News Corp CEO Rupert Murdoch to be fired, or even mention it. The rest of the reality checks were just stupid, something about General Karpinski, Billy said she was a liar, with no proof, and asked her to provide him with the evidence and he will report it, haha, yeah right. More garbage about his ratings, and more on Barney Frank.

Then pinheads and patriots and the e-mails, and another biased right-wing joke of a news show was over. In fact, it's an insult to even call it a news show, so I'll call it a show, a propaganda show. This so-called news show should be re-named to The Propaganda Factor, because all you get is one sided bias and right-wing propaganda.

Bill O'Reilly Ignores The Actual Torture Laws
By: Steve - April 24, 2009 - 10:55am

Republicans like O'Reilly have a mantra they have used for years, it says we must obey the rule of law. Billy even said if we do not obey the rule of law you have chaos, and that is the end of society. But suddenly when his hero George W. Bush approves torture the rule of law goes out the window, and now we must forget about the rule of law and move on with no investigation and no prosecutions.

Which is really funny, coming from a guy who wanted the feds to investigate Democrats who use their children in political ads, he called it child abuse, and brainwashing, and he wanted the feds to investigate it. He also supported the Bill Clinton impeachment for lying under oath, when the lie was only about cheating on his wife with Monica Lewinsky, and had nothing to do with his job, or torture, or breaking torture laws and violating UN torture laws or International torture laws.

It's right-wing bias, hypocrisy, and a double standard. I went and looked up the torture laws, please read them, because you will never see or hear this on the Factor. These are the actual torture laws, the laws the United States of America agreed to, and this has not, and never will be reported on the Factor. Because then O'Reilly would have to show you the truth, and he can not let that happen, it would un-spin all his lies and spin about torture.

O'Reilly claims that waterboarding is not torture, and that Bush did nothing wrong. This argument is fantasyland garbage, it ignores the law, and the UN Charter against torture. The USA is a member of the UN, and we have agreed to these laws.

The UN Convention against torture says this:

Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which provide that no one may be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Having regard also to the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, adopted by the General Assembly on 9 December 1975 (resolution 3452 (XXX).

Have agreed as follows:

Article 1
1. For the purposes of this Convention, torture means any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity.
Article 2
1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.
2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
3. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.
Article 3
1. No State Party shall expel, return or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.
Article 4
1. Each State Party shall ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law. The same shall apply to an attempt to commit torture and to an act by any person which constitutes complicity or participation in torture.
2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.
And that is not all, there are 33 articles that cover torture, you can read them all here.

www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html

Notice that O'Reilly never says a word about any of them, he just ignores those laws, the laws we agreed to. They say torture is illegal and a crime, even during a time of war, no exceptions. O'Reilly ignores all that and never says a word about any of it. So he can cover for his hero George W. Bush.

Earth to Bill O'Reilly, waterboarding is torture, and the UN Convention against torture says there are no exceptions, period. Why don't you report this and show your brainwashed viewers the truth, and the facts. What part of Article 2 section 1 and 2 do you not understand, let's review it one more time.

Article 2
1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.
2. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat or war, internal political instability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
These are the facts, right from the UN Convention against torture. The very same Convention the USA signed on to and agreed to. Yet you ignore them all to spin and lie for the Bush administration. You should not only report the truth, you should make a correction, and you should be ashamed to call yourself a journalist. You are a fraud, a liar, and a totally dishonest right-wing spin doctor.

O'Reilly Wins Silver in The Worlds Worst Person Award
By: Steve - April 24, 2009 - 8:50am

From the wednesday Countdown with Keith Olbermann:

Our runner up, Bill-O the clown; his vendetta against NBC and GE has now gotten so desperate that he is talking to people from the Fox out of Business Channel about an article in the “Wall Street Journal” and pretending nobody will notice that they all work for Rupert Murdoch. The “Wall Street Journal” headlined GE‘s debacle this way, quote, “GE‘s net tumbles 35 percent on finance woes.”

O'REILLY: Here is how the uber liberal “New York Times” headlined GE‘s trouble, quote, “GE‘s first quarter net tops analysts‘ estimates.” Quite a difference from the journal, wouldn‘t you say?

Yes, yes, I would. And clearly it has nothing to do with the fact that your boss also owns the “Wall Street Journal.” What is the journal going to say about broadcasting and cable stories today, Billy? That Fox will shortly report network ad sales down by 20 percent, station ad sales down by 45 percent, Fox News ad sales down, for the first time ever, by four percent, to go with company stock down 56 percent in one year.

O'REILLY: “President Obama recently appointed GE Chairman Jeffrey Immelt to be one of his economic advisers, even though the man has run GE into the ground. That appointment was payback for allowing NBC News to openly support Obama for president.”

Hey, bully boy, you care to try to prove that? Or was that just something god whispered to you?

O'REILLY: “So now we have powerful corporations not only intruding on electoral politics, but also attacking Americans like, the Tea party protesters. That is the situation all Americans should condemn.”

Seriously? You and the other Fox talking points readers mocked every anti-war protester, every critic of the last administration, every defender on the Constitution, and your boss sent instructions to President Bush in the White House. You have the nerve to actually criticize actual critical coverage of poorly intended News Corps sponsored cluster Fox?

Bill, you know nothing about news. Your company doesn‘t have the journalistic chops of Scholastic Magazine.

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Nixon Mao Zedong Meeting
By: Steve - April 24, 2009 - 8:30am

On April 22nd, O'Reilly falsely claimed that President Richard Nixon never met with Chinese leader Mao Zedong.

While discussing Obama's handshake with Hugo Chavez, Alan Colmes said: "What do you, ignore somebody standing right next to you? Do we -- because he touched him, put his hand on his shoulder, shook his hand? Do these people have a problem with Mao and Nixon?"

O'Reilly cut him off and said, "It was Chinese Prime Minister Zhou Enlai and Nixon. Mao was not involved." Colmes then said, Did you have a problem with looking into Russian President Vladimir Putin's eyes and seeing his soul? Did you have a problem with any of the other... O'Reilly interjected again:
O'REILLY: OK, all of those are valid points, as long as you realize it was Zhou Enlai, not Mao Zedong." Colmes replied: "Zhou Enlai, OK.
WRONG DUMBASS! While Nixon did met with Zhou, he also met with Mao on February 21, 1972. There are photos of it, showing Nixon shaking hands with Mao Zedong, just do a google image search on it and you will see it for yourself, and there is also video of it, Keith Olbermann showed the video last night, it clearly shows Nixon meeting with Mao and shaking his hand, the exact same thing Obama did with Chavez.

So once again O'Reilly is caught in a right-wing lie, a lie that can be proven in 2 minutes with a simple google search. Yet he claims he has a crack staff of 15 people that research everything and never make a mistake. We know that's a lie, the question is, will O'Reilly report a correction tonight, haha, don't bet on it.

O'Reilly Caught Spinning The Blair NID Memos
By: Steve - April 24, 2009 - 8:00am

Newsday columnist Ellis Henican was on the Factor wednesday night to talk about President Obama's decision to leave the door open for prosecutions of Bush administration officials for using torture. Henican hammered O'Reilly with the facts, and he did so well O'Reilly was reduced to putting his spin on the cherry picked comments he pulled from the Blair letter.

It's clear that O'Reilly was using the GOP Talking Points on the letter written by National Intelligence Director Dennis Blair, in the letter he talks about high value information obtained through torture. Butif you actually read the entire letter you see a whole different story. O'Reilly used the edited-down version O'Reilly that the Republicans have been spinning, Blair makes it clear that he would have opposed the use of torture and clearly disapproves of it now, here is a quote from the actual letter:
Those methods, read on a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009, appear graphic and disturbing. As the President has made clear, and as both CIA Director Panetta and I have stated, we will not use those techniques in the future. I like to think I would not have approved those methods in the past, but I do not fault those who made the decisions at that time, and I will absolutely defend those who carried out the interrogations within the orders they were given.
And the next day Admiral Blair was quoted again, he made this statement:
The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means. The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security.
O'Reilly ignored all that, and never said a word about the other things Blair said in the letter, and in a later statement. Billy did what he usually does, he cherry picked a partial quote and used it to fit his argument, while ignoring everything in the same letter and from the same person, that disagreed with him. When someone else in the media does that he calls them dishonest smear merchants, but when he does it I guess it's ok.

Henican had a copy of the Blair letter and the later statement he made, and he started reading from the letter, he was reading Blair's words, then O'Reilly cut him off and told Henican that's not exactly what he said. When Henican was reading the Blair statement word for word. From that point on, O'Reilly lost it and went into over-drive with GOP talking points and right-wing spin.
O'Reilly: This was done to protect your life, you live in New York City. You -- this was done to protect your life, and it worked! That's No. 1.

Henican: We don't know whether it worked.

O'Reilly: Yeah, we know it worked, you're still alive! And the attack on Los Angeles was aborted.

O'Reilly: Wait, wait, wait. We can establish facts. And the facts are, this worked.

Henican: Well, you say that.

O'Reilly: They did it to protect us.

Henican: You assert that. Well, let me assert a couple of things.

O'Reilly: That's the overwhelming evidence.

Henican: Well, that's what you're focused on. Let me focus on some other facts. One is that these kinds of things cause huge problems for us afterward.

O'Reilly: Oh, now we're in Theory World. Here we go!

Henican: You cannot face torture -- I know you like avoid that word, you prefer the euphemisms, but let's call it what it is...

O'Reilly: No, it isn't! That's your opinion!

Henican: And you think waterboarding is lovely.

O'Reilly: I think it's harsh interrogation.

Henican: When they do it do our guys it's not so lovely, is it? Let the Justice Department decide if a crime has been committed here...

O'Reilly: Oh, Holder? You want Holder in charge of that?

Henican: Let the facts be gathered here. And let the facts be -- Why are you scared of the facts? Why won't you let the facts be gathered here, and take us where they lead?

O'Reilly: You know who Eric Holder is?

Henican: He's the Attorney General of the United States. And the professionals in that office are going to make this decision, and not Eric Holder.

O'Reilly: OK, you listen to me. You listen to me. Eric Holder was second in command to Janet Reno. Eric Holder and Janet Reno put the wall up between the FBI and the CIA, which led to the 9/11 attack! If anybody should be prosecuted, it's him!

Holder is not qualified to do this. And, and, here's the deal: If Obama does this, it is the end of the Obama Presidency. No, it's the end! It's the end! And if he gets hit, if we get hit after he does this, it's over!
Now that is some big time right-wing spin, O'Reilly denies it was torture even when the facts show it was, the wall spin is at least 6 or 7 years old, and all that was debunked years ago. O'Reilly keeps talking about facts, but he can't get any of them straight. The "wall" had nothing to do with a barrier between the CIA and the FBI, and Janet Reno did not put any wall up anywhere, ever.

The wall was known as the Gorelick Wall, which was based on a memo written by then-Deputy AG Jamie Gorelick. And as the 1995 guidelines clearly stated, the wall only applied to intelligence sharing between the FBI and the Criminal Division of the Justice Department, it had nothing to do with info sharing to the CIA. Janet reno and Eric Holder had nothing to do with the wall, and the wall had nothing to do with 9-11, that's a right-wing myth that is a 100% lie. They put that garbage out to blame Clinton for the 9-11 attacks, when they happened 8 months after Bush took over.

Not to mention, when George W. Bush became president in January of 2001 Bush and his Attorney General John Ashcroft approved of the wall, and authorized the wall to be kept in place. They thought the wall was a good idea so they did not get rid of it. O'Reilly does not report any of that, he just spins out GOP talking points and hopes someone buys his right-wing BS.

Ashcroft and Bush both approved the wall, they could have removed it, but they did not, yet O'Reilly blames it all on the Democrats, when Bush and Ashcroft both agreed the wall was a good policy. And the wall had nothing to do with 9-11, it was only for legal cases here in the USA on domestic prosecutions, it had nothing to do with intelligence on foreign terrorists, the CIA, or terrorism.

Hey O'Reilly: People on FOX Are Calling it Torture
By: Steve - April 23, 2009 - 1:20pm

So here is my question, how come you do not have any of them on your show to discuss it, what say you coward.

Since President Obama released the Bush administration's OLC torture memos, several Fox News pundits have launched unrelenting, full-throated defenses of torture. Bill O'Reilly dismissed waterboarding yesterday, saying, "Torture, my ass." Also yesterday, Sean Hannity volunteered to be waterboarded for charity (those who have tried it have found it to be rather unpleasant):
GRODIN: We can waterboard you?

HANNITY: Sure.

GRODIN: Are you busy on Sunday?

HANNITY: I'll do it for charity. ... I'll let you do it. I'll do it for the troops' families.
Surprisingly, Fox is not all pro-torture. In fact, there are a handful of pundits who are speaking out against torture at the right-wing network. In multiple segments over the past few days, Shep Smith has been ripping the idea of government-sanctioned torture.
"We are America. We don't torture. And the moment that is not the case, I want off the train!" he declared Wednesday afternoon.
Yesterday, in Fox's Strategy Room, which was only aired on the web, Smith's anger culminated in an explosion:
SMITH: WE ARE AMERICA! I DON'T GIVE A RAT'S ASS IF IT HELPS. WE ARE AMERICA! WE DO NOT FUCKING TORTURE! WE DON'T DO IT!
Fox News's Trace Gallagher responded, "I'm not saying whether torture is right or wrong. I'm not going there." And Smith isn't alone. Judge Andrew Napolitano said in the Strategy Room that the memos "are so fraught with disregarding volumes of law." This week, he wrote a scathing critique of the Bush administration's legal reasoning.
"This is not rocket science and it is not art. Everyone knows torture when they see it," he wrote, decrying the "illegal horror," "moral antipathy," and the memos' "attack at core American values."
Furthermore, Fox contributor and former New York Times reporter Judy Miller said yesterday that "enhanced interrogation techniques" are "Orwellian. It's Orwellian for torture." It remains to be seen which faction will come out on top in this Fox News civil war.

Note: Judge Napolitano is the Senior legal analyst at FOX News and Bill O'Reilly has not had him on the Factor to talk about the CIA memos or the Senate torture report, not one time, ever. Because he knows the judge is saying waterboarding is torture, and he is saying the Bush legal papers that justified it are garbage.

So Billy will not put him on the Factor because his viewers would then hear the truth, and hear it from a Republican. Which shows that O'Reilly is a biased right-wing spin doctor, a coward, and a fraud. He claims to look out for the folks, and now he is trying to hide the truth from the folks, to cover for his hero George W. Bush. And think about this, only a few Republicans are saying waterboarding is not torture, and nobody else.

Here is O'Reilly and Henican from last night, O’Reilly talked to Ellis Henican, who criticized O’Reilly’s tolerance of torture. “You disappoint me, you disappoint me,” Henican said, pointing his finger at O’Reilly. “I would have dumped that guy in the water 1000 times to save your life,” the Fox News host countered. The heated debate concluded with this exchange:
HENICAN: You’re coming out for torture now?

O'REILLY: Torture, my [bleeped].

HENICAN: Torture? Torture?

O'REILLY: Bleep that word. All right, Ellis, calm down. We'll waterboard Ellis in a moment.
The bleeped word was ass. And it's pretty sad to see O'Reilly make jokes about waterboarding Democrats. If a Democrat jokes about waterboarding a Republican O'Reilly flips out and calls them un-American, but somehow it's ok for him to do it to Democrats. But what's really sad is how O'Reilly and all his Republican friends are trying to re-name waterboarding "coerced interrogations" when everyone knows that is just code for torture.

They refuse to call it torture, or admit it was torture. That's their talking points and they are sticking to it, no matter how stupid it makes them look, and no matter how much evidence comes out that proves Bush approved the use of torture. It's actually sad to see smart people make these ridiculous arguments, it's all partisan garbage, from O'Reilly and his Republican friends.

They are trying to protect the legacy of George W. Bush and his administration. They do not want them to go down in history as the torture administration, well guess what Billy, it's too late pal. They will go down in history in shame as the torture administration. And it's gonna get worse, because we do not even have all the facts yet, so hold on sparky, it's gonna get worse, and be a very rough ride for Bush, and his brainwashed supporters like you.

FACT: Bush and Cheney are war criminals, they should be prosecuted, found guilty, and put in jail for 10 to 15 years, so how is that for no spin Billy, put that in your pipe and smoke it, dumbass.

The Wednesday 4-22-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 23, 2009 - 10:00am

The TPM was called Show Some Leadership. Billy said Obama should show some leadership and shut down the investigation of torture in the Bush administration. He said he has been fair to Obama (which is a total lie) so he is asking Obama to not go forward with the torture investigation of the Bush administration. Billy is basically saying leave them alone because they protected us after the 9-11-01 terrorist attacks. He called it a big dishonest charade, and claims it will damage America.

And every fricking word of that is total right-wing propaganda.

1) Obama is showing leadership by saying he will let the investigation go forward. That is leadership, and only Republican idiots are opposed to it.

2) O'Reilly has not been fair to Obama, he spins, lies, and smears him unfairly almost every night.

3) Even though Bush protected us for 7 years after 9-11, it does not mean he can break torture laws, nobody is above the law, and let's not forget the attacks happened under Bush's watch, a full 8 months after he took over.

4) It is not a witch hunt, or a dishonest charade, because we know it happened, and we have evidence they not only knew of the torture, they approved it. A witch hunt is when you think something happened but you have no evidence, in this case we know it happened, we know it was torture, and we know laws were broken.

O'Reilly is the dishonest one here, he is ignoring the rule of law to justify torture because a Republican president he supports approved it. If a Democrat president did this, O'Reilly would call for him to be waterboarded, then put in prison for 20 years.

Then O'Reilly had the Bush speech writer, Marc Thiessen on to discuss the CIA memos. When the big news story of the day was the Senate torture Report, it was on all day long on every news show, except the Factor. O'Reilly never said a word about the Senate Report released Tuesday, he only talked about some 2005 justice department memo, and the CIA memos Obama released. O'Reilly and Thiessen claim torture works, so it's ok to use it. Which is insane logic, especially when it's illegal, and a war crime. Robbing banks works too, but that does not mean it's ok. It's an insane and stupid argument that only 2 right-wingers defending Bush would make.

Not to mention they have no proof it worked, and if it did, they have no proof that they could not have got the same information without waterboarding them. A former CIA official said today that if they had evidence the torture got us good information someone would have leaked it out by now. And so far nobody has done that, so they have no proof, just speculation from O'Reilly and his right-wing friends.

Then O'Reilly had Ellis Henican on to discuss the CIA memos. O'Reilly tried to limit what Henican said by asking him to answer his specific questions, like an attorney asking for yes or no answers only. Henican did not fall for it, and he talked about the waterboarding, said it was torture, and that O'Reilly is hiding from the truth. Which really pissed O'Reilly off, then he cut Henican off and got screaming mad and started yelling at him. Henican nailed O'Reilly good so he flipped out, and barely let him talk after that.

Compare that to the Thiessen interview, O'Reilly let Thiessen spin his right-wing ass off and never cut him off one time or got mad and screamed at him. When Henican said it's torture, O'Reilly screamed "that's your opinion." Wrong Billy, it's not an opinion, it's a fact, waterboarding is torture, even John McCain said it is. Plus everyone else in the world except a few right-wing idiots like you. Billy said if Obama does this it's the end of the Obama administration. How, only he knows, because I have no idea.

O'Reilly said he would have done exactly what Bush did, and that he would have dunked KSM 1000 times. Henican said it was torture, and O'Reilly said "torture my ass." And they bleeped the ass word from O'Reilly. O'Reilly was crazy mad, he defended and supported everything Bush did, torture and all. And still never said one word about the 230 page Senate torture report that was released Tuesday. He ignored the entire story, even though it was the lead story on every news show in America today.

Then O'Reilly had Dick Morris on to discuss it. Billy said Obama has had a rocky road so far, when his approval is 64% today, and has averaged 63% for his first 3 months. And that job approval is higher than any president in his first 3 months over the last 20 years or so. In O'Reilly world that's a rocky road, in the rest of the world it's doing a good job. Morris pretty much agreed with O'Reilly and put his right-wing spin on it all. They did disagree on one thing, O'Reilly said if Obama goes forward it will damage him beyond repair. Morris disagreed, but that's the only thing they disagreed on.

Morris also downplayed waterboarding as nothing, ok Dick, so why is it illegal and a war crime, and why have people went to jail for doing it. Morris also said the Obama foreign policy is anti-American. Which just shows what a right-wing idiot Morris is, because the polls show Obama has a 59% approval and a 19% disapproval on his foreign policy. Anyone who buys that right-wing garbage from Morris is stupid, and a fool. He just says what Republicans want to hear so he can keep going on the Factor to promote his website and his books.

Then O'Reilly did an Earth Day segment with a right-wing nut and some anti-fat people activist. O'Reilly claims to support global warming, but he made a joke out of the whole segment and just mocked it. Which just proves that he is also a liar when he says he believes in global warming. Instead of having a real debate on it, he made a joke of it talking about fat people being the cause of global warming. His biggest comedy line was, what are you gonna do grab the twinkie out of fat kids hands.

Then the moron Dennis Miller was on to give his two cents on all the recent issues. Billy talked about the possible torture investigation, he called it a phony, unnecessary, show trial. Miller agreed (as if anyone cares) and said if Obama goes forward he loses his support. Now that's funny, does he actually think Obama would care if he loses him or not, get a grip man. You are a right-wing idiot with a radio show, and Obama probably does not even know who you are. Miller said Leahy is a nobody and a punk, huh?

He is a U.S. Senator, you are a has been hack of a right-wing comedian, with a radio show only right-wing losers listen to, and you call him a punk and a nobody, look in the mirror sparky. Then the stupid "Barack & a Hard Place" segment with Alan Colmes and Monica Crowley. Colmes is a fool, his best thing Obama did this week was meeting Chavez, which is just stupid. The best thing he did this week was release the CIA memos, you dork. Crowley said Obama releasing the CIA memos was the worth thing he did, and that it was the worst thing any president ever did.

It was all garbage, from Colmes and Crowley. And btw, how can you do a segment on Wednesday that is supposed to report the best and worst things Obama did that week, when the week is not even over yet, it's fricking wednesday moron. The week ends on Friday, so this segment should be done on Friday you dumbass. What if Obama cures cancer on a Thursday or a Friday, then what do you do, idiots.

Then pinheads and patriots and the e-mails. What's stunning is that O'Reilly never said one word about the biggest news story of the day, the Senate torture report. It was on every news show in the country all day long, I laid in bed with back pain and watched them all, and every single show reported it, except the Factor.

O'Reilly was the only person in tv news that ignored the Senate report. Because it details the torture done by the Bush administration. He had to ignore it because if he did report it he would have to admit the truth. So he just ignored the entire report like it never came out, and did his usual right-wing spin show.

Note to Bill O'Reilly: Waterboarding is Torture
By: Steve - April 22, 2009 - 9:30pm

It is not just an opinion Billy, waterboarding is torture. Read this information about waterboarding from a 2007 Washington Post article called "Waterboarding Used to Be a Crime." The article was written by By Evan Wallach. He was a JAG in the Nevada National Guard, and he used to lecture the soldiers of the 72nd Military Police Company every year about their legal obligations when they guarded prisoners.

He left the unit in 1995, and he said he likes to think that some of his teaching had carried over when the 72nd refused to participate in misconduct at Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. Here are some quotes from his article.

Sometimes, the questions we face about detainees and interrogation get more specific. One such set of questions relates to "waterboarding."

That term is used to describe several interrogation techniques. The victim may be immersed in water, have water forced into the nose and mouth, or have water poured onto material placed over the face so that the liquid is inhaled or swallowed. The media usually characterize the practice as "simulated drowning." That's incorrect. To be effective, waterboarding is usually real drowning that simulates death.

That is, the victim experiences the sensations of drowning: struggle, panic, breath-holding, swallowing, vomiting, taking water into the lungs and, eventually, the same feeling of not being able to breathe that one experiences after being punched in the gut. The main difference is that the drowning process is halted. According to those who have studied waterboarding's effects, it can cause severe psychological trauma, such as panic attacks, for years.

The United States knows quite a bit about waterboarding. The U.S. government -- whether acting alone before domestic courts, commissions and courts-martial or as part of the world community -- has not only condemned the use of water torture but has severely punished those who applied it.

After World War II, we convicted several Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American and Allied prisoners of war. At the trial of his captors, then-Lt. Chase J. Nielsen, one of the 1942 Army Air Forces officers who flew in the Doolittle Raid and was captured by the Japanese, testified:
"I was given several types of torture. . . . I was given what they call the water cure." He was asked what he felt when the Japanese soldiers poured the water. "Well, I felt more or less like I was drowning," he replied, "just gasping between life and death."
Nielsen's experience was not unique. Nor was the prosecution of his captors. After Japan surrendered, the United States organized and participated in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, generally called the Tokyo War Crimes Trials. Leading members of Japan's military and government elite were charged with torturing Allied military personnel and civilians. The principal proof upon which their torture convictions were based was conduct that we would now call waterboarding.

Here's the testimony of two Americans imprisoned by the Japanese:
They would lash me to a stretcher then prop me up against a table with my head down. They would then pour about two gallons of water from a pitcher into my nose and mouth until I lost consciousness.

And from the second prisoner: They laid me out on a stretcher and strapped me on. The stretcher was then stood on end with my head almost touching the floor and my feet in the air. . . . They then began pouring water over my face and at times it was almost impossible for me to breathe without sucking in water.
As a result of such accounts, a number of Japanese prison-camp officers and guards were convicted of torture that clearly violated the laws of war.

The were convicted, and sentenced to 15 years hard labor.

In 1983, federal prosecutors charged a Texas sheriff and three of his deputies with violating prisoners civil rights by forcing confessions. The officers conspired to "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions.

This included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning."

The four defendants were convicted, and the sheriff was sentenced to 10 years in prison.

We know that U.S. military tribunals and U.S. judges have examined certain types of water-based interrogation and found that they constituted torture. That's a lesson worth learning. The study of law is, after all, largely the study of history. The law of war is no different. This history should be of value to those who seek to understand what the law is, as well as what it ought to be.

Senate Report Details Bush Torture Policy
By: Steve - April 22, 2009 - 3:30pm

Yesterday the Senate Armed Services Committee made public an unclassified version of its November 2008 report, "Inquiry into the Treatment of Detainees in U.S. Custody."

The report reveals that top Bush administration officials were so eager to start harsh interrogations on detainees that they often ignored warnings from military advisers, skipped a thorough legal review process, and failed to fully investigate the origins of the dangerous techniques.

Here are some details, will O'Reilly report any of this, I doubt it.

Top Officials Were Unaware Of The Gruesome Origins Of The Interrogation Program.

The Bush administration's interrogation program was based on the U.S. military program known as Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE), which is used to train U.S. troops if they are ever tortured by an enemy that doesn't adhere to the Geneva Conventions. However, none of the top CIA, Cabinet, or congressional officials who approved of the Bush administration's recommendations knew that SERE was designed around "torture methods used by Communists in the Korean War."

These officials were unaware that veteran SERE trainers said the methods were ineffective for getting useful information and the former military psychologist who recommended that the CIA adopt SERE "had never conducted a real interrogation."

One CIA official called the process "a perfect storm of ignorance and enthusiasm."

Military Officials Warned That Harsh Interrogation Was Illegal And Ineffective. In November 2002, the Deputy Commander of the Defense Department's Criminal Investigative Task Force at Gitmo raised concerns that SERE techniques were "developed to better prepare U.S. military personnel to resist interrogations and not as a means of obtaining reliable information."

The Air Force cited "serious concerns regarding the legality of many of the proposed techniques." The Army, Navy, and Marine Corps raised similar issues, citing "maltreatment" that would "arguably violate federal law."

And remember this folks, Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice, denied any of this was happening. They also denied they approved it, now we know they were lying, which is what Democrats have said for years, and O'Reilly said they just hate Bush and want to make him look bad. Now we know we were right, yet O'Reilly ignores all that and still defends what they did. It was all lies, Rumsfeld said it was just a few bad apples at the bottom, when we now know everyone knew, from the private in Iraq to president Bush, they not only knew, they approved it.

Abusive Tactics Were Used To Search For A Non-Existent Al-Qaeda/Iraq Link.

In 2006, former U.S. Army psychiatrist Maj. Charles Burney told investigators that interrogators at Gitmo were under "pressure" to produce evidence of ties between Iraq and al Qaeda, even though they were ultimately unsuccesful. "The more frustrated people got in not being able to establish that link...there was more and more pressure to resort to measures that might produce more immediate results."

Top Bush Officials Bypassed Military Concerns. Less than a month after the military voiced their concerns, then-Defense Department general counsel William Haynes sent Defense Secretary Rumsfeld a memo recommending that he approve 15 torture techniques requested for use at Gitmo. Haynes indicated that he had discussed the issue with Doug Feith, Paul Wolfowitz, and Gen. Richard Myers, all of whom agreed with him.

The only legal opinion Haynes cited in the memo was one that senior military advisers had called "legally insufficient" and "woefully inadequate." Five days later, Rumsfeld signed off on the request.

Officials Began Preparing Harsh Interrogation Techniques Before They Were Granted Legal Approval. Military and intelligence officials were "exploring ways to break Taliban and al-Qaeda detainees in early 2002, eight months before Justice Department lawyers approved the use of waterboarding and nine other harsh methods," and weeks before the CIA captured its first high-ranking terrorism suspect.

In fact, in July 2002 -- a month before the Justice Department approved its list of interrogation techniques -- instructors at a training seminar told intelligence officials that the harsh measures were already deemed acceptable.

In one of its conclusions, the Armed Services Committee writes, "The abuses of detainees at Abu Ghraib in late 2003 was not simply the result of a few soldiers acting on their own. ... Rumsfeld's December 2, 2002 authorization of aggressive interrogation techniques and subsequent interrogation policies and plans approved by senior military and civilian officials conveyed the message that physical pressures and degradation were appropriate treatment for detainees in U.S. custody."

You should also read the blog posting by Philip Zelikow at shadow.foreignpolicy.com, he is a Republican who worked for Condi Rice while she was the head of NSA. He wrote a memo of dissent, and the Bush administration destroyed the memo and all copies and covered it up. He could not talk about it because it was classified, but now he can because Obama declassified the CIA memos.

Here are a couple quotes from his blog posting:
I first gained access to the OLC memos and learned details about CIA's program for high-value detainees shortly after the set of opinions were issued in May 2005.

I did so as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's policy representative to the NSC Deputies Committee on these and other intelligence/terrorism issues. In the State Department, Secretary Rice and her Legal Adviser, John Bellinger, were then the only other individuals briefed on these details.

In compliance with the security agreements I have signed, I have never discussed or disclosed any substantive details about the program until the classified information has been released.

Weakest of all is the May 30 opinion, just because it had to get over the lowest standard -- "cruel, inhuman, or degrading" in Article 16 of the Convention Against Torture. That standard was also being codified in the bill Senator John McCain was fighting to pass. It is also found in Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, a standard that the Supreme Court ruled in 2006 does apply to these prisoners.

Violation of Common Article 3 is a war crime under federal law (18 U.S.C. section 2441), a felony punishable by up to life imprisonment. (The OLC opinions do not discuss this law because in 2005 the administration also denied the applicability of Common Article 3.)

At the time, in 2005, I circulated an opposing view of the legal reasoning. My bureaucratic position, as counselor to the secretary of state, didn't entitle me to offer a legal opinion. But I felt obliged to put an alternative view in front of my colleagues at other agencies, warning them that other lawyers (and judges) might find the OLC views unsustainable.

My colleagues were entitled to ignore my views. They did more than that: The White House attempted to collect and destroy all copies of my memo. I expect that one or two are still at least in the State Department's archives.
Full Story Here:

shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/torture_memos_thoughts_from_a_dissenter

Everyone should watch the O'Reilly factor tonight and take note of how O'Reilly spins the Senate report, if he mentions it at all. I will take notes and report tomorrow if and how he reported it. What O'Reilly should do tonight is report the truth, admit he was wrong, admit Bush lied, and admit they lied to cover up torture. Now does anyone believe that will happen, I sure dont.

I predict O'Reilly will take the Bush/Cheney side, ignore and or spin this report, continue to fraud the American people, and most likely do it with 3 or 4 Republican guests and 0 to maybe 1 Democrat, and if he does have a Democrat guest, that Democrat will probably be a fake Democrat who works for FOX News.


The Tuesday 4-21-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 22, 2009 - 10:40am

The TPM was called Cheney vs. Obama. O'Reilly said finally the Bush administration is fighting back. O'Reilly supports and defends Cheney. When Cheney is the guy who started all this garbage, he is the one who went after Obama saying he was not keeping us safe. Which is wrong to do, and when Clinton, Gore, or Carter spoke out against Bush while he was the president O'Reilly hammered them and said it was wrong. O'Reilly even asked what took Cheney so long to speak out, now Imagine what Billy would say if Joe Biden was doing this to a Republican president 3 months after he left office.

O'Reilly would rip him to pieces, call him a left-wing loon and tell him to stop it. Most of the Republicans even think Cheney is wrong, and hope he would just shut up. Not to mention Dick Cheney left office with a 17% job approval, so why should anyone listen to anything he says. And notice that George W. Bush is not saying anything about Obama, it's only Cheney. O'Reilly once again shows his right-wing bias by supporting and defending Cheney, because if Cheney was a Democrat doing this to a Republican O'Reilly would tear him apart.

Then O'Reilly had a segment on torture and the CIA memos. Peter Zeihan from stratfor.com and David Rittgers from the Cato Institute were on to discuss it. Zeihan agreed with O'Reilly that we should torture people to get the information we need, if the president orders it. And once again O'Reilly tried to deny waterboarding is torture, when even John McCain said it is, and said it as recently as Monday. Earth to O'Reilly, no matter what you call it, it's still torture, because you do not get to define what torture is, because you are just a right-wing cable news host.

Why don't you have McCain on the show and ask him, you biased fraud. David Rittgers who was in the military and was also in the business of interrogations disagreed with O'Reilly. O'Reilly got mad at Rittgers because he disagreed with him. Billy gave him a doomsday scenario and asked him if he would then use torture, and he said maybe, maybe not, he can not say. Then O'Reilly got really mad because he would not answer his fantasy question, and even denied it was a fantasy question. Rittgers held his ground and refused to agree with O'Reilly. The stratfor.com guy even agreed with Rittgers on a couple things and that made O'Reilly even more mad.

Then O'Reilly had a totally biased one sided right-wing smear job segment on president Obama. Billy put the crazy right-wing idiot Col. David Hunt on to report on some lie filled internet rumor started at the right-wing website worldnetdaily. Billy and Hunt used their website rumor to smear Obama, they now claim Obama waited too long to order the use of force to save Captain Phillips after the Pirates captured him. Which is just ridiculous, and nothing but right-wing spin that is trying to make Obama look bad when it all worked great, and Obama did the right thing.

It's garbage, and nothing more than an internet rumor, from a biased right-wing website with no named sources for the story. They just make it up, put it on their website, then e-mail it out and the right-wing idiots all report it, like O'Reilly did. When in the past O'Reilly has said it's wrong to use un-named sources to smear the president, but that was when Bush was the president, now it's suddenly ok with O'Reilly to do it when a Democrat is president.

Not to mention O'Reilly also said he does not trust anything on the internet, especially when they do not name a source, then he reports this internet rumor in violation of his own standards, and journalistic standards. On top of all that, he violates another rule of journalism by doing a biased one sided segment with no Democrat or anyone from the Obama administration to give the other side of the story.

The fact that O'Reilly devoted an entire segment to reporting this right-wing garbage is proof that he is an active member of the right-wing smear machine, a smear machine that is trying to make Obama look bad at every turn so it will get his job approval numbers down. They can not stand it that his approval numbers are so high when they hate him and oppose everything he does. Only Republicans are spreading that rumor, and O'Reilly helped them by doing a whole segment on it with no facts and no evidence that any of it is true.

Then Billy cried some more about Miss California losing the Miss USA contest. Earth to O'Reilly, nobody cares but you and a few right-wing losers, get over it, and move on. O'Reilly even admitted for a 2nd time that nobody knows for sure if she lost because she said she is opposed to gay marriage, and yet he did another segment on it for the 2nd night in a row. O'Reilly even had the gay man Wayne Besen on to discuss it, and he made O'Reilly mad because he did not agree with him.

Besen said she deserved to lose for having such a stupid position on the issue, then O'Reilly blew his top and went nuts. Billy said it was un-American for her to lose just because her opinion is that gay marriage is wrong. O'Reilly said it was un-American to punish someone for their opinion. Which is so funny, because O'Reilly does that every night. Every damn show O'Reilly punishes liberals for their opinions, he calls them loons and bad Americans for their opinions, I guess he just forgot, yeah right. O'Reilly is just a two faced jackass.

Then is it legal with Wiehl and Kelly, two Republicans who work for FOX. They talked about the craigslist killer, for a long time, too long. Then they talked about some tabloid garbage about 2 fifth graders who looked at porn and showed it to the class. Why, for ratings I guess. Because there is no way the kids will be prosecuted, and the legal stooges even said they will not be charged with anything. Then they talked about an ACLU case where some other students (who were a lot older) were blocked from looking at a non-porn gay information website.

Kelly actually agreed with the ACLU, while O'Reilly and Wiehl did not. O'Reilly and Wiehl said he does not want them looking at gay websites even if it is not porn. Which is insane, and Kelly got mad and told them both they are wrong. O'Reilly called her crazy, and said she was social engineering. Earth to O'Reilly, everyone has a right to look at any website, as long as it's not porn. It's called the 1st amendment of the Constitution. And O'Reilly said he is pro-Gay and has nothing against gay people.

When he is opposed to anyone even looking at gay information websites, if that is pro-Gay I'm Dick Cheney. Kelly said how would you like it if they blocked them from looking at pro-Marriage websites, and O'Reilly said that would be wrong. Which is massive hypocrisy, and a double standard, not to mention a violation of their free speech rights, which is why the ACLU got involved. And once again it shows that O'Reilly is a right-wing nut who would choose right-wing ideology over a persons rights to visit any website they want to.

Then O'Reilly had a culture quiz about John Wayne with two more Republicans from FOX, Steve Doocy and Gretchen Carlson. Then the pinheads and patriots and the lame e-mails. And another 99% right-wing biased O'Reilly Factor was over, thank God.

O'Reilly Ignores McCain Statement on Torture
By: Steve - April 21, 2009 - 11:30am

The bias from O'Reilly is almost as bad in what he ignores as in what he reports on. A perfect example is what John McCain said yesterday about torture. O'Reilly claims only liberals are against waterboarding, I guess he does not watch the news on his own network. Yesterday on Fox News, John McCain responded to the startling information that detainee Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was waterboarded 183 times. "It's unacceptable," McCain said, adding:
One is too much. Waterboarding is torture, period. I can ensure you that once enough physical pain is inflicted on someone, they will tell that interrogator whatever they think they want to hear. And most importantly, it serves as a great propaganda tool for those who recruit people to fight against us.

McCain later reiterated his point, "The image of the United States of America throughout the world is a recruiting tool for Islamic extremists."
What John McCain said yesterday is the exact same thing liberals have been saying about waterboarding for years. And McCain is not just any old Republican, he was the Republican nominee for president in 2009. But O'Reilly claims only liberals consider waterboarding torture, and when liberals say it's a recruiting tool for Islamic extremists, O'Reilly calls it left-wing garbage.

O'Reilly ignored what McCain said and never reported a word of it, because it would destroy his spin that only liberals believe waterboarding is torture. So Billy has to ignore what McCain said to keep his right-wing propaganda going. Which is just more proof O'Reilly is a lying right-wing idiot. And if you have to waterboard someone 183 times to get them to talk it's clearly not a very good method to use.

Imagine the outrage from O'Reilly if Spain waterboarded an American 183 times, he would scream bloody murder, yet when Bush did it he not only supported it, he defended it, and still does to this day.

The Monday 4-20-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 21, 2009 - 11:10am

The TPM was called Insulting Obama. Billy talked about all the foreign leaders who have recently insulted Obama. He said some people will see Obama as weak. What O'Reilly fails to mention is who those "some" people are. They are right-wing idiots who want to smear Obama any way possible, to get his job approval ratings down. When O'Reilly says "some" people say, it's code for Republicans, who hate Obama. Nobody is calling Obama weak, except O'Reilly, Rove, Gingrich, Hannity, etc.

They are desperate, and grasping for straws. Obama is at 62% job approval, the people like him and trust him, so O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends are trying every trick in the book to make him look bad, and get his approval numbers down. But they are just stupid, it's not working, and it just makes them look like partisan fools. They spew out all these lies and it does nothing, Obama was at 62% approval a month ago, and he is still at 62% approval today. Earth to O'Reilly, you are a right-wing idiot, and your plan to trash Obama so his approval numbers drop has been a massive failure.

Then O'Reilly had Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on to discuss it. Ham agreed with everything O'Reilly said, as she always does, because she is a right-wing idiot who hates Obama, and even admitted she does not like anything he does. Which shows what a partisan fool she is, because 62% of Americans like what Obama is doing. For once Williams actually defended Obama and said what he is doing was smart. Williams said Obama was playing nice with the foreign leaders to see if it will work out better than what Bush did. Williams also said O'Reilly is not rational about it, then Billy went nuts and got mad.

O'Reilly started yelling at Juan and told him what Obama is doing is not working. Juan said how do you know, it's too soon to tell. Then O'Dummy admitted it was too soon to know, and that Juan was right about that. Then he went back to Ham because he knew she would agree with him. And they both agreed that Obama was weak and what he was doing was not working. Which is what you expect from two right-wing idiots that both hate Obama, and disagree with everything he does.

Then O'Reilly had two right-wingers from FOX, Stuart Varney and Tobin Smith on to trash MSNBC and Janeane Garofalo. Okay now get this, she said the tea party protesters were racist, and she is right. Many many protest signs were racist, I saw a lot of them. So Billy and his two right-wing friends said she was guilty of hate speech. Ummmmm, how, on what planet, in what world? If you say there was racism at a protest, and you are right, that is not hate speech, and it's not even close. I do disagree with her a little, they were not only about racism, they were also about hate for Obama.

The tea party protests had the hate, and the racism, but it was mostly just hate for Obama from right-wing idiots. Yet O'Reilly and his right-wing friends said she was the hater, when the haters and the racists were at the tea party protests. To deny that is to deny reality. And I am not saying they were all racists, I am saying there was racism, and a lot of hate for Obama. I am also saying O'Reilly is denying reality and spinning it to make Garofolo out to be a hater, when he is the hater, and all his right-wing friends are too.

They hate Obama, and that is a fact, yet O'Reilly ignores all that to twist it into Garofolo is guilty of the hate speech. When all she did was point out the truth, there was a lot of racism, O'Reilly just denies it and ignores it. And all during this segment not one Democrat was put on the air to give the other side of the issue. Which as O'Reilly would say, is a clear violation of journalistic standards. Yet he did it anyway, and he does it all the time, pretty much every night. You are supposed to give both sides, and give them equal time, but O'Reilly never does, it was 3 Republicans and 0 Democrats.

Then O'Reilly had another Republican from FOX on, Jim Angle. They talked about the CIA memos Obama released. Billy pulled the "some" people were outraged crap again, which means a few Republican idiots were outraged, but nobody else. They claim it was wrong, except Obama promised he would expose the truth about the Bush torture if he got elected, so he was just keeping a campaign promise. What he never said a word about is the 183 times KSM was waterboarded. The memos destroy the right-wing lies about it, including what O'Reilly said.

Billy and all his right-wing friends said he was only waterboarded 1 time, and he talked after 35 seconds. And that they got a load of information from him that saved thousands of Americans lives. Now we find out it was 183 times before he finally talked. If waterboarding works so great why did it take 183 times, what say you Billy? And after the 183 times the info he gave them was pretty much worthless, and it did not save 1 American life. So now we know it was all just a bunch of right-wing BS to defend the waterboarding Bush authorized.

Then O'Reilly had some ridiculous segment about women sexual predators and had an expert on to discuss it. He actually asked her if it was an epidemic, and she said no, that they just report it more. Which destroyed his spin on it instantly. The whole segment was a waste of time. There is no epidemic of women sexual predators, it's just reported more. Then a story about Miss USA, and how she might have lost because she opposed gay marriage, and a judge was gay who after it was over called her dumb. But she got 2nd place, so that's pretty good. It was tabloid garbage, and not news.

It was all speculation, with no proof she lost because of it. Billy had the two culture warriors on, Hoover and Carlson. Billy even admitted it was all specualtion, yet he wasted a whole segment on it anyway, just because it involved gay marriage, and Republicans are idiots about it. They also talked about the stupid Burger King commercial, and nobody cares, except 60 year old right-wing idiots who still think it's 1950.

Then the Reality Check garbage. Check one was an attack on Jon Stewart, for simply telling the truth about O'Reilly, and pointing out his hypocrisy. Check two was an attack on Stephen Colbert, and neither attack made any sense. Earth to O'Idiot, they are comedians who have a comedy show on the comedy channel. Not to mention Stewart and Colbert were both telling the truth.

Check three was an attack on Sam Donaldson for telling the truth about torture. The check is that he was wrong, but that's only in O'Reilly's head, because Sam was 100% right. Check four was a clip of Rahm Emanual on a talk show talking about the CIA memos. No Check. And check five was a shameless book promotion, and no check at all.

Then the pinheads and patriots and the lame e-mails. In answer to one e-mail Billy said the tea party protests were honest dissent. Which is a 100% lie and total right-wing spin. They were a sham, run by Republican think tanks, and nothing but hate for Obama and racism against Obama. It was basically a bunch of right-wing idiots crying about Obama winning, they were filled with hate and racism, and planned by Republican groups.

Billy even pimped his new doormat, it says Patriots welcome, and he said get them now before they sell out. And I thought to myself you have to be stupid to buy any of that Factor Gear. Instead of selling that garbage he should just donate money to charity.

Great Example of FOX News Bias
By: Steve - April 20, 2009 - 12:10pm

O'Reilly, Cavuto, etc. all claim they are journalists who report the news in a fair and balanced way and they are not partisan. They do interviews on their shows, but do you know there is a pre-interview, and that before any guest is put on the show they talk to them to see what they plan to say. If they do not say what they want them to, sometimes they are not put on. I have known about this for years, but I am not sure most people know this.

Now we have clear evidence this happens, on the Howard Kurtz Reliable Sources show yesterday, Republican Michael Smerconish revealed the mind of a Fox News producer when he was approached to go on the air with Neil Cavuto in 2008. News is supposed to be news. Having two different points of views, no matter how slanted one of those sides might be, is the FOX idea of presenting balance. All it really does is set up antagonistic debate as entertainment for ratings, which they then try to justify by claiming that it is valid news.

When you see an interview on one of these so-called objective news shows, you think it's just two people who were invited on and they happen to disagree. You would be wrong, it's a set up, and the whole thing is planned ahead of time. If you are not willing to say what they want you to say, they do not use you, and they find someone who will say what they want them to say. This is not objective news, it's bias and a fraud on the American people.

Here is a partial transcript from that Howard Kurtz show yesterday:
KURTZ: Let's talk about cable news and the way the booking process works. This was just fascinating to me. You have e-mails in your book from a producer who works for Neil Cavuto and his Fox News program. And let me put it up on the screen and share this with our viewers.

The first e-mail, this was last April, just about a year ago.

"Wanted to see if you're available today at 4:05 for Neil's show. The topic is on Obama and his cockiness. We're looking for someone who will say, yes, he's cocky and his cockiness will hurt him."

And I love your rather brief response. You wrote back, "Thanks for the clarity. I am not your man."

Then you get a second e-mail from this same Fox producer. And it says, "What about a debate off the top on the show on whether or not Hillary is trustworthy? We have someone who says she is and we're looking for someone who says she isn't."

Now, how common is that in cable news, that you only get to appear if you're willing to take a predetermined, precooked, prepackaged position?

SMERCONISH: Well, I think it's very common. It's exactly what I was just describing. I mean, it's this mentality that says that only good television is television which pits one individual against another and there's a fight that ensues. I just don't believe that.

I mean, what's wrong with a host taking a contrarian point of view in a respectful way? I think the viewers get all that they need. But you're right, in that circumstance -- and I raised it just as one clear example -- my invitation was predicated on my willingness to say that Barack Obama was cocky or that Hillary was untrustworthy. And I was unwilling in that circumstance to say either.
Smerconish was not on the Cavuto show that day, because he was not willing to say Obama was cocky and Hillary was untrustworthy. So what they did was call around until they found some right-winger who would say it, and then he was put on. This is bias, and unethical. And don't think Cavuto is the only guy doing that garbage, you can bet they all do it.

Then they claim they have no agenda, that they are fair and balanced, and that the rest of the media has the bias. When it's right there staring you in the face, it's bias, and pure right-wing garbage. Hey O'Reilly, how come you and the great Bernie Goldberg never report on this bias, what say you?

More Proof O'Reilly Lied About The Tea Party Protests
By: Steve - April 19, 2009 - 11:30am

Billy said the tea party protests were grassroots events run by the folks, and he denied any right-wing groups had anything to do with it. O'Reilly even had Newt Gingrich on the Factor and they both said they were grassroots events run by the folks. But I found proof they were lying, and it's a source they would both say is 100% honest, www.foxnews.com.

Here is what Billy and Newt said on the Thursday O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: So Mr. Speaker, it looks like there's going to be - there is civil war in this country in the media. There is now civil war. It broke out yesterday. No more pretense. It's them against us, I guess. Is that how you see it?

NEWT GINGRICH: Oh, look, I think there's no question but that the elite media is stunningly left wing. They hated the tea parties because they're on the side of the monarchy. They're on the side of big taxes. They're on the side of big government.

I was in New York, as you know. We had 12,500 people. It was a terrific crowd. It was mostly a young crowd. I would say the average age was probably 26 or 28 organized by a very young business guy, Callan Guida, who went out on his own and set up a website.

And I think it's just very hard for "The New York Times" types to believe that normal tax paying hard working Americans actually don't like having big government and big bureaucracy.

O'REILLY: Well, they don't believe that.

GINGRICH: .and having their children put in debt.

O'REILLY: Yeah, none of the establishment media believes that. They believe that the tea parties were, number one, organized by right wing kooks. And number two were an anti-Obama play. That was obvious in all the reportage from the mainstream media yesterday.
Notice that Newt does not say a word about his group being a partner in the tea party protests. O'Reilly even says the media is lying when they report the tea party protests were run by right-wing kooks, while his own network admits they were, and Newt said nothing. Not to mention they were anti-Obama, and all the signs were insulting to Obama. So the media reported the truth, the liars were Gingrich and O'Reilly.

Here is a quote from a Wednesday April 15, 2009 article on foxnews.com:
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich will address a tea party in a New York City park Wednesday night. His advocacy group, americansolutions.com, has partnered with tea party organizers to get word to the group's members.
Here is the url of the article:

www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/15/anti-tax-tea-party-protests

Note to O'Reilly, your own network just busted you for lying. As you can see they admit the Gingrich group is a partner in the tea party protests. You even had him on your show and you never disclosed any of that. And on top of not disclosing those facts, you denied that any right-wing groups were involved in the protests.

You had Newt on your show, the day after the protests, and you never even asked him if he (or his group) was involved in the protests. And you call that journalism?

Your own network is admitting American Solutions was a partner in the tea party protests, which shows that you are a right-wing liar, and your own network is my source, what say you Billy?

The Friday 4-17-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 18, 2009 - 9:30pm

The TPM was called Torture Nation? The question mark is because right-wing idiots like O'Reilly are still not sure we used torture, because the loons in the Bush administration denied waterboarding was torture. Even though the entire rest of the world says it is, and we even prosecuted foreign people for torture many years ago for using waterboarding on Americans. Billy claims there is a debate on whether waterboarding is torture or not, when that's a lie, there is no debate, and waterboarding is torture.

Bush had his attorney's write a ridiculous legal memo saying waterboarding was not torture, and only right-wing idiots like O'Reilly bought that garbage. All the legal experts say it was one of the worst legal opinions ever written, and they are totally ridiculous. And yet O'Reilly still claims we did not torture anyone, when they have even admitted it. Now he says we only waterboarded 3 people, yeah that we know of, and 2 years ago O'Reilly said we never waterboarded anyone. He said it was just liberal lies to make Bush look like a torture guy, and that we never tortured anyone.

Hey Billy, I thought we never used waterboarding on anyone, now you admit to 3, that we know of, so what say you jerk. Billy also cried about Obama releasing the CIA torture memos, as he promised he would in his campaign. O'Reilly said the media violated journalistic standards in reporting the story, haha, now that's funny. Pot meet Kettle, O'Reily violates every journalistic standard in the book, and does it every night, then he has the nerve to criticize other people in the media for something, that's a good one. Billy going after the media for violating journalistic standards is like Paris Hilton going after other girls for having lots of sex.

Then O'Reilly had another totally one sided right-wing biased segment with Karl Rove, and no Democrat to give the counterpoint or to provide the balance. Rove said the CIA documents should have never been released, and trashed Obama, as he usually does. Rove worked for Bush, so of course he is going to defend him. And he is clearly not an objective source to give an analysis on the story. So O'Reilly proved his right-wing bias by even having Rove on to discuss the CIA document story.

During the segment O'Reilly was caught spinning like a top. He said liberals consider speaking in a loud voice torture, which is just ridiculous, and only a right-wing liar would say that. Liberals do not consider that torture, so O'Reilly is just a flat out 100% liar. Torture is defined in the Geneva Conventions and in the International treaties we have signed on to, and we go by those. Speaking in a loud voice is not listed as torture you right-wing jerkoff. Torture is physical, like waterboarding, and things that cause pain to the body. So stop lying about what liberals consider torture.

Not to mention, I support some torture if it is ordered by the President, and it must be done to save thousands of American lives, like in a doomsday scenario. But it must be ordered by the President, it must only be done as a last resort, and we must admit to it and not try to cover it up like Bush did. If you use torture on some terrorist scumbag just admit it, then explain why you had to do it. Be honest about it and people will support you. And I am a liberal, so O'Reilly is clearly lying when he says liberals consider speaking in a loud voice torture, because we don't.

Instead of having a Democrat on Rove was held over for a 2nd segment after the commercials, that's how biased O'Reilly is. Then O'Reilly had Greta Van Sustern on to spin the tea party protests and hammer the media some more for their reporting, or non-reporting on the bogus protests. Number of Democrat guests so far, ummmmm, zero. During the Greta segment O'Reilly said the liberal media was arrogant and dismissive of the tea party protests, that he is fair and balanced, and never arrogant or dismissive of liberals when they protest.

My God is that a massive lie, if lying was a crime O'Reilly would get life for that statement. He is totally arrogant and dismissive of liberals when they protest. He calls them loons, pinheads, far-left nuts, America haters, un-American, anti-American, Bad Americans, and on and on. He dismisses them as a small percentage of far-left extremists, I guess he just forgot he does all that, yeah right, and I'm Donald Trump. Billy should get an award for lying, because he does it more than anyone in the media.

Then O'Reilly had Geraldo on to talk tabloid garbage, then a segment with 2 guests talking about Sarah Palin. Billy called Palin a star and asked if she could be the Republican nominee for President. To say that and ask that proves you are a right-wing fool. Palin is a loser, a far-right nutjob, and a stupid pro-life extremist. The only votes she will get is from a few far-right idiots. And I predict she will never win the Republican nomination, ever. She was a gimmick, McCain just picked her because she was a far-right Republican woman, and now she is done.

A.B. Stoddard told O'Reilly Palin will not be the next big thing in the Republican party, for many reasons. And Rebecca Hagelin said she might be, but she agreed with some of what Stodard said. Hagelin is a far-right nut who loves Palin, she praised her, and supports her. Which shows how far-right and how stupid she is. Palin was the laughing stock of America, she is a fool and a dummy. Her interviews with Couric proved it, she is stupid, and nobody except a few right-wing idiots will ever vote for her dumb ass. O'Reilly called her a rock star and said he loves her, which proves what a right-wing idiot he is, everyone else saw her as a dumb ass Republican idiot who should stay in Alaska and shut the hell up.

Then the TV Icon garbage about the Seinfeld show, the pinheads and patriots and the lame e-mail segment. And another totally one sided/biased O'Reilly Factor was over. Not one Democrat was on the entire show, none. It was all right-wing spin, all the time, from O'Reilly and the guests. O'Reilly had one Independent guest, A.B. Stoddard, but she only got to speak for maybe a minute. The rest of the show was non-stop right-wing propaganda with all Republican guests. In O'Reilly world that's called a fair and balanced no spin zone.

The Thursday 4-16-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 17, 2009 - 9:15pm

The TPM was called Reporting on The Tea Parties. Billy reported on the tea parties and how they are non-partisan grassroots events put together by the folks. When that's a lie and he knows it. Then he attacked the media for their coverage, or non-coverage of the protests. The usual right-wing lies and spin to defend the bogus protests and his biased network. Billy admitted it was a major story on FOX, and that they promoted it heavily.
O'REILLY: Now there is no question that FOX News recognized the tea parties as a major story and promoted our coverage of the protests heavily this week. Also, FOX News analysts were at some of the events. That strategy was very smart.
Hey Billy, you just screwed up, because FOX has denied they promoted it, oops, I guess you missed the memo, lol. And btw, the fact that FOX saw it as a major story and promoted it heavily is 100% proof they were partisan anti-Obama protests. Because if they were not anti-Obama protests FOX would have pretty much ignored it. And to prove FOX was objective in their coverage Billy reported that they were #1 in the ratings, ummmm, huh? You are always #1 in the ratings, every night, so how in the hell does that prove you had objective coverage of the protests. It does not make sense, me thinks Billy forgot to take his meds again.

Then O'Reilly had Newt Gingrich on to talk politics, and it was just as ridiculous, one sided, and biased as ever. Newt agreed with all the spin O'Reilly had already put out, trashed the media, Obama, and everything liberal. Billy denied it was an anti-Obama deal, and Newt said it was an anti Big Government deal. Except that denies reality, because all the signs were anti-Obama and almost everyone at them were Republicans. So Billy and Newt just lied their right-wing asses off just like they do every time he is on.

Then O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: I think there's almost a civil war in the country. I look at the presidential election numbers. 69 million Americans, a bit more than that, voted for Barack Obama. 62 million Americans voted against Barack Obama.
WRONG dumb ass! O'Reilly claims to be a journalist and he can not even get the election numbers right, and of course he gave McCain more votes than he got. Obama got 365 electoral votes, and 69,456,897 total votes. McCain got 173 electoral votes, and 59,934,814 total votes. Earth to O'Dummy, 59.9 million is not 62 million, it's 59 million, which is 2.1 million less that 62 million. And they did not vote against Obama, they voted for McCain. Even a 5 year old knows that, are you sure you graduated from Harvard?

Then O'Reilly had the right-wing idiot who works for FOX, Col. Peters was on to lie and spin about the DHS report, read my other blog posting for the info on that, it was all spin and lies. Then O'Reilly had the totally insane right-wing loon Glenn Beck on to talk crazy revolution garbage. When they were not talking about how great their ratings are they were spinning the tea party protests and lying about Obama. The usual one sided biased right-wing propaganda you get when 2 Republicans interview each other.

Billy said he is glad Beck is there now because it takes some heat off him. Which is basically admitting he is a right-winger and Beck is taking some heat for him. I guess Billy is too stupid to know he just admitted to being a Republican just like Beck is. Beck even compared O'Reilly to Limbaugh and told the NY Times to remember they are still talking. It went right over O'Reilly's head, because when Letterman made the same comparison O'Reilly said he is nothing like Limbaugh, but when Beck did it he said nothing. And the only difference between O'Reilly and Limbaugh is one has a radio show, and the other has a tv show, other than that there is no difference.

Then Billy had Ron Pollock on to talk health care, O'Reilly pretty much misrepresented everything the guy is calling for and put words in his mouth, and Pollock said O'Reilly was wrong about almost all of what he said. Billy claims Pollock wants free health care for everyone, when that is not what he wants. He said it should only be free for people who can not afford it. Basically O'Reilly had no clue what Pollock is calling for, and he did a terrible job of interviewing him. At the end of the segment O'Reilly said this.
O'REILLY: All right. Look, it's a complicated matter, and I want to continue the discussion with you. We have to run now. But I do need to get a focus on what your group actually wants. So if you could just fax us something, let me read it, and we'll revisit it. Mr. Pollock, we appreciate it very much.
Now there is some great journalism, you have the guy on, misrepresent everything he said, then ask him to fax you the info on what they want. Great job of journalism there sparky, not. Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about Spain deciding not to go after the Bush six, but that was the AG saying that, and Spain may still take it to the courts. O'Reilly took credit for getting Spain to call it off, now that's funny. They also talked about the CIA memos, United Airlines and fat people buying 2 seats, and the cheerleader coach getting fired for being in Playboy. And of course no Democrat to provide the balance for any of it.

Then the stupid reality check segment that is just a bunch of right-wing garbage, it's half tabloid and half Billy's spin on things, with almost no reality checks on any of it. Then pinheads and patriots and the stupid e-mails. O'Reilly screwed up, and here is what he said.
O'REILLY: Finally tonight, the mail. Just an update on the Wounded Warrior Project we mentioned. Thousands of you have bought copies of Bill O'Reilly's big best seller. I'm Bill O'Reilly. I don't know why I had to mention my own name, but I just did. All right. I know -- this is why I did. On BillOReilly.com -- see, that's what I meant to say -- it's "A Bold Fresh Piece of Humanity."
What happened right there is O'Reilly read that off the teleprompter and he screwed up by reading his own name, that's how stupid he is. He was supposed to say thousands of you have bought copies of my big best seller on billoreilly.com. Instead the moron said thousands of you have bought copies of Bill O'Reilly's big best seller. Then he tried to cover up his mistake by making a joke out of it.

Can someone check to see if Billy actually went to Harvard, because I have my doubts, and if he did go, I bet he cheated to get that Degree.

O'Reilly Spins And Lies About DHS Report
By: Steve - April 17, 2009 - 5:15pm

O'Reilly finally talked about the homeland security report last night, warning about the increase in right-wing extremism, and of couse he misrepresented the report, and put an insane right-wing spin on it.

Here are the talking points from Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly.
* Beck says the report singled out veterans and targeted them for investigation of possible far-right extremism.

* Col. Ralph Peters says this report is the product of military-hating "Hollywood" people in the new Obama administration.

* O'Reilly says the report was "unnecessary," cooked up by a bevy of "far left" liberals in their new DHS offices.

* O'Reilly tells Beck that these liberals myopia leads them to ignore Al Qaeda while pinning the terrorism label on ordinary conservatives.
All of it, is 100% wrong. And nothing but right-wing spin from O'Reilly and Beck. First, this bulletin was just one of several assessing various terrorism threats to our national security, because these bulletins were intended for local law-enforcement officials, they focused on domestic threats. Overseas-based threats are completely different, and would not be part of this assessment, but that doesn't mean the threat is being ignored, and for that matter, Homeland Security's ongoing focus on Al Qaeda has not dropped at all since Napolitano took over.

O'Reilly and Peters are both right-wing spin doctors, the DHS report was ordered by the Bush administration, well before Obama took office, and the investigation was conducted by Bush administration. Billy said the report was cooked up by a bunch of far-left liberals, when it was done while Bush was the president, by Bush administration employees, it was just released recently. Which shows just how biased and stupid O'Reilly and Peters are.

Finally, is the claim that the report "singles out" all returning veterans as potential recruits for right-wing extremists. In reality, the report only singles out returning veterans who become active in violent hate groups. So O'Reilly and Beck got that wrong too. They do not warn of all veterans, they only warn of veterans who return from war and join a violent right-wing hate group.

Here is a quote from the report:
Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS is concerned that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to boost their violent capabilities.
That is 100% accurate, and it is the view of the DHS and the FBI. A July 2008 assessment of the situation by the FBI (titled White Supremacist Recruitment of Military Personnel Since 9/11) found that the numbers of identifiable neo-Nazis within the ranks was quite small, only a little over 200. What they know is that they have seen 200 veterans recently join a right-wing extremist group, they know this for a fact because the FBI is watching them on the internet and in person, with spies in these groups. That is how they got Matt Hale here in East Peoria btw, they had a spy in his white power group.
The FBI said in the memo that its conclusion about a surge in such activities was based on confidential sources, undercover operations, reporting from other law-enforcement agencies and publicly available information. The memo said the main goal of the operation was to get a better handle on "the scope of this emerging threat."
When investigators begin dealing with potential criminal or terrorist activity by right-wing extremists, the presence and involvement of people with military backgrounds -- particularly with skill at armaments -- is a huge red flag. Because these kinds of people transform these groups from peaceful protesters to potentially lethal extremist cells.

This points to a significant dimension of the problem: The recruitment of young men into the military who already harbor white-supremacist beliefs. O'Reilly and his boy Glenn Beck ignore all this, to spin out their right-wing propaganda.

It's been long reported that hate groups and other extremists, including neo-Nazis, have been making actual inroads into the ranks of the military in recent years. A July 2006 report by the SPLC found this infiltration occurring at an alarming rate. Neo-Nazis "stretch across all branches of service, they are linking up across the branches once they're inside, and they are hard-core," Department of Defense gang detective Scott Barfield told the SPLC. "We've got Aryan Nations graffiti in Baghdad," he added. "That's a problem."
"Recruiters are knowingly allowing neo-Nazis and white supremacists to join the armed forces," said Barfield, "and commanders don’t remove them, even after we positively identify them as extremists or gang members."
And the economic conditions are also worrying, particularly given the rising tide of right-wing hate-group activity in America:
Last year, 926 hate groups were active in America, up from 880 in 2007.
Bill O'Reilly ignored and misrepresented all that, he had most, if not all the facts wrong, and he did a very bad job of reporting on the DHS warning. What O'Reilly did was spin the hell out of the report with nothing but his right-wing spin on it, while ignoring what the report actually said, and he did it in what he calls a no spin zone, when it was all spin.

And one last thing, that proves beyond a doubt O'Reilly and Col. Peters are totally biased right-wing idiots. The DHS report warning of a possible rise in right-wing extremism did not mention the word conservative anywhere in the entire report. It was a report on right-wing extremist groups, like neo-Nazi, Skinhead, Aryan Nation, white supremacist groups, and websites like stormfront.org.

The DHS report was never meant to go public, it was a secret report sent out to all the local law enforcement police departments. Someone at one of those local police departments leaked it out and put it on the internet. So the public was never supposed to see it, and nobody was even supposed to know about it but them. That alone destroys all the right-wing propaganda O'Reilly and Peters put out about it.

And remember this, O'Reilly ignored this about the guy who killed the 3 cops in Pittsburgh. The guy who killed the 3 cops in pittsburgh was a member of stormfront.org, he was a right-wing extremist who was a member of a white supremacist group. He had uploaded a video clip from the Glenn Beck show to their forums that showed Beck talking about a revolution and a new civil war, and that Obama is going to take your guns away, and it showed Beck telling his viewers to do something to take their country back.

O'Reilly ignored all that when he reported on the warnings from the report. And when he denied Beck had anything to do with the cop killings. O'Reilly did not tell you he was a white power guy who posted at stormfront.org, that he worshipped Beck and watched his show every night, or that he posted a video clip from the Glenn Beck show in their forums about 2 weeks before he killed the cops. Billy left out all the facts, then he denied Beck or any Republican on tv or radio had anything to do with it. That is called denial, and right-wing spin.

More Anti-Obama Tea Party Protest Signs Ignored by O'Reilly
By: Steve - April 16, 2009 - 3:10pm

Remember this folks, O'Reilly said these tea party protests were non-partisan, and he even did a segment with his internet cop Amanda Carpenter asking her if she could find anything offensive to Obama, and she said no, on the entire internet. When I just found all this stuff today in 5 minutes. It not only shows the tea party protests were partisan, it shows that O'Reilly and Carpenter are biased right-wing LIARS.

Here is more proof, and this is just scratching the surface, I could post 20 more photos of signs just like this, I only posted 7 of the worst, but there are hundreds more, and O'Reilly ignored it all, and even had a right-wing liar on to say none of this stuff was out there, anywhere.















Does anyone have any doubt anymore that O'Reilly is 100% in the tank for the Republican party, I mean after reading my blog today how can there be any doubt left. O'Reilly has proven once again to be nothing but a biased one sided partisan right-wing hack. He is not a journalist, he is a right-wing stooge, and this is conclusive proof.

Ask yourself this, if the tea party protests were not partisan how come O'Reilly did his entire show about it with all Republican guests. How come he lied to you and said there were no offensive signs or anything about Obama. How come he failed to report any of this, and how come he denied the 3 Republican think tanks were running the whole thing. I did not make this stuff up, it's 100% true, and you can look at it.

More Facts on The Partisan Tea Party Protests
By: Steve - April 16, 2009 - 12:10pm

Suck on this O'Reilly, you right-wing fraud. Here is a detailed report from ThinkProgress on these biased and bogus right-wing tea party protests. Report this O'Reilly, it's the truth, and you ignored it all.

Tea Baggers Against Obama

While Americans across the country prepare to pay their taxes today, many right-wing activists plan to spend the day dressed in colonial tri-corner hats as they wave tea bags in the air. Conservatives are calling for these "tea party" protests, allegedly modeled on the Boston Tea Party, to oppose President Obama and to denounce taxes. Though the "tea" in tea party supposedly stands for "Taxed Enough Already," no American household or business will face higher taxes this tax day.

In fact, the economic stimulus package signed into law by Obama enacted one of the largest tax cuts ever for middle-class families, making good on Obama's campaign promise to cut taxes for 95 percent of Americans. The first benefits from these cuts arrived in paychecks earlier this month.

What's more, a recent Gallup poll found that Americans' views of income taxes are among the most positive since 1956. In his budget proposal, Obama has recommended raising the top income tax brackets back to rates under the Clinton administration and closing corporate loopholes, two issues he campaigned on, in order to strengthen America's economy by funding health care, clean energy, and education reform. Well-heeled corporate lobbyists are helping engineer today's "tea party" protests as an act of opposition to the Obama agenda.

SPONTANEOUS UPRISING?:

Although spokesmen of the tea parties have made significant efforts to portray the protests as organic uprisings of like-minded citizens, corporate lobbyists have engineered much of the planning and execution of the events. The corporate front group FreedomWorks, run by lobbyist and former House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX), had its staff organize the very first tea party on Feb. 27 in Tampa, FL, following CNBC's Rick Santelli's call for a Boston Tea Party-like upheaval to protest Obama's housing plan.

Soon after, FreedomWorks began planning nationwide tea party protests and had their operatives help coordinate logistics, call conservative activists, and provide activists with everything from organizing tips to sign ideas. Americans for Prosperity, a front group run by corporate lobbyist Tim Phillips (a former partner to Ralph Reed), assisted with the effort, drawing upon its extensive field staff to plan events, write press releases, and distribute talking points for people on the ground.

Newt Gingrich's American Solutions for Winning the Future -- which is funded by polluters and helped orchestrated the "Drill Here, Drill Now" campaign last summer -- has also signed on to support the protests.

FOX NEWS MEGAPHONE:

Both Fox News and Fox Business have run back-to-back promotions explicitly encouraging viewers to attend the tea parties. The Fox broadcasts are in turn being used by the tea party organizers to promote their protests.

Promising "fair and balanced" coverage, Fox News hosts such as Glenn Beck, Neil Cavuto, and Sean Hannity are all planning to broadcast live from the events. The segments for the tea parties are replete with enthusiastic endorsements, like the recent announcement of one Fox pundit that it's "time to party like it's 1773!" In their drive to promote the protests, Fox is fueling paranoia by making unsubstantiated, conspiratorial claims that the Obama administration may send "spies" to the tea parties.

Another claim Fox asserts to justify its nonstop promotional coverage is that the network provided similar coverage for the Million Man March in 1995. However, Fox News did not even go on the air until 1996.

A POLITICAL STRATEGY:

Congressional Republicans have fully embraced the tea parties as a channel for opposing Obama. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) is speaking at a tea party in Bakersfield; Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) will be speaking at an Americans for Prosperity tea party in Madison. Over 35 other Republican lawmakers have been invited to speak at other tea party rallies.

Republican governors who opposed the economic stimulus package -- such as Rick Perry of Texas and Mark Sanford of South Carolina -- plan to address tea party protests in their own states. Even after being rebuked by organizers of the tea parties, Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele has moved the RNC to officially support the protests. If the GOP's effort to brand and own the protests weren't already apparent, Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) introduced legislation formally honoring April 15th as "National Tea Party Day."

"It's going to be more directed at Obama," observed Daily Beast reporter Ana Marie Cox on the Republican Party's obsession with the tea parties. "This is very much, I think, part of the midterm strategy."

THE UNIFYING MESSAGE -- OPPOSE OBAMA:

Despite steady, high approval ratings for President Obama, the proponents of the tea parties seem intent on demonizing him as the cause of the country's problems. The ostensible anti-tax platform of the tea parties in fact has not resonated with all the participants. The events have drawn various elements of the fringe right-wing movement, with gun rights militias, secessionists, radical anti-immigrant organizations, and neo-Nazi groups currently working to contribute to the organizing effort, bringing with them their own pet issues.

Past tea parties have featured gatherings of people inspired to protest Obama over conspiracies related to the President's birth certificate. One of the most prominent Obama birth certificate conspiracy theorists, Alan Keyes, is the keynote speaker of the Washington, D.C. tea party today.

The Real Truth About The April 15 Tea Party Protests
By: Steve - April 16, 2009 - 9:30am

O'Reilly said the tea party protests were a grassroots event started by the folks, that it was non-partisan, and FOX only reported it, that they did not promote it. That is all lies, and here is the proof.

Gretchen Carlson repeatedly stated that Fox News will be "covering" the tea party protests, while Steve Doocy claimed "Fox isn't sponsoring" them. However, Fox News has labeled the protests "FNC Tax Day Tea Parties" and has aggressively encouraged participation in them. Additionally, The Fox Nation "hosted a virtual tea party."

Last week, we had the "FNC Tax Day Tea Parties" -- at least, this is the way the events were portrayed on the Fox News Channel. The day featured FNC personalities on the road as part of the process: Neil Cavuto in Sacramento, CA, Glenn Beck in San Antonio, TX, Sean Hannity in Atlanta, and Greta Van Susteren in Washington, DC. Here is a screen capture taken from FOX News where they actually call it the FNC Tax Day Tea Parties.



You may have heard the phrase from serious journalists that "they never want to be part of the story." A good journalist knows this. But then again, we are talking about the Fox News Channel.

Covering events is part of what journalists do. Promoting events, including but not limited to putting your initials before the event, is not what journalists do.

ThinkProgress reported last week that corporate lobbyists are helping to orchestrate the anti-Obama tea party protests. These lobbying-run front groups, along with promotion help from Fox News, are organizing the tea parties by calling right-wing activists and asking them to organize. They are also coordinating conference calls among activists, writing press releases, providing sign ideas, building websites supporting the protests, and distributing talking points so that the protesters can stay on message.

The leader of FreedomWorks, Dick Armey, who is ranked as one of DC’s top “hired guns,” is a corporate lobbyist with a history of directing FreedomWorks to support the goals of his lobbying clients.

Chicago tea party organized with the help of the right-wing Heartland Institute
Yesterday on Hardball, fill-in host Mike Barnacle had Chicago tea party organizer John O’Hara on to discuss the tea party protests. O’Hara repeatedly claimed that the protests were nothing more than a “grassroots” movement. It wasn’t until Barnacle pressed O’Hara on how he got involved with the protests that he explained how he worked for the right-wing think tank, the Heartland Institute.
Like his fellow astroturfers at Americans for Prosperity, American Solutions, and FreedomWorks, O’Hara is misrepresenting the extent to which his employer, the Heartland Institute, has been involved in helping organize today’s protests. Earlier this week, O’Hara himself issued a press release bragging about how Heartland was “the first organization on board for the first tea parties” and has been “integrally involved in the April 15th Tax Day Tea Party here in Chicago.” Heartland also promoted the protests on their homepage.

As ThinkProgress has documented, Fox News has aggressively promoted the conservative, anti-Obama tea parties. A Media Matters analysis found that Fox dedicated 23 separate segments to the tea parties between April 6 and April 13, it aired at least 73 in-show and commercial promotions for the parties as well. Of all the Fox programs, Neil Cavuto’s “Your World” dedicated the most time to the tea parties.

Tea party organizers and participants have repeatedly insisted that their nationwide protests today are completely non-partisan and not meant to be anti-Obama. But no anti-Republican or anti-Bush signs could be found at the protests. Instead, not only were there signs/clothing protesting Obama’s policies, some had violent or racist rhetoric. One participant even asked Joe the Plumber about waterboarding Obama.

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi explained that the tea party protests are not by any means an organic grassroots movement. They are a deliberate astroturf campaign organized by two well-funded right-wing think tanks intent on obstructing the Obama agenda.
PELOSI: What they want is a continuation of the failed economic policies of President George Bush which got us in the situation we are in now. What we want is a new direction. … This tea party initiative is funded by the high end — we call call it astroturf, it’s not really a grassroots movement. It’s astroturf by some of the wealthiest people in America to keep the focus on tax cuts for the rich instead of for the middle class.
As ThinkProgress has documented, the principal organizers of the local tea party events are the well-funded right-wing think tanks Americans for Prosperity and Freedom Works. Both of which provided logistical support and public relations assistance, including “sign ideas, sample press releases, and a map of events around the country.” Americans for Prosperity even had a Facebook message offering financial rewards for publicizing the tea party protests.

Fox Host Denies Tea Parties Are A Right-Wing Conspiracy, as Fox Chyron Touts AmericanSolutions.Com

As part of the network’s day-long promotion of the anti-Obama tea parties, Fox News Gretchen Carlson interviewed three tea party organizers on Fox and Friends this morning. In an attempt to push back against criticism that corporate lobbyists were helping to orchestrate the so-called grassroots movement, Carlson asked Kellen Guida, the organizer of the New York City tea party, to answer the claim that the protests are “a right-wing conspiracy. “All you can do is laugh to that,” replied Guida.

But Carlson and Guida’s defense was undermined by the on-screen chyron that flashed while Carlson asked her question, which directed viewers interested in the Bergen County, NJ tea party to the website of Newt Gingrich’s corporate-funded think tank, American Solutions for Winning the Future:



Gingrich’s organization is distributing a “Toolkit” full of tea party talking points and has been an official “partner” in the tea party effort since at least March. Gingrich himself will be speaking at the New York City tea party, of which Guida is a co-organizer.

ThinkProgress went to the Washington protest and looked around, although one man insisted to me that the tea parties were not “political” or “partisan,” we didn’t see any anti-Bush/Republican gear. But we did find plenty of anti-Obama gear.



Rachel Maddow showed signs on her show that said Obama is the new Hitler, signs that called him a traitor, signs that said a Kenyan has hijacked America, signs that said racist things, they had Obama with giant lips and big ears and racist comments, they also found a sign that said show me your birth certificate, which still questions if Obama is an American. They called Obama a fascist, a marxist, and many other insulting and racial comments.

Not one sign was found that was negative to Bush or any Republicans. And Bill O'Reilly calls all that a non-partisan grassroots event run by the folks, and denies FOX promoted it. When all their anchors did live shows from tea party protests, except O'Reilly.

It shows what a biased right-wing liar O'Reily, Ingraham, Carpenter, Miller, and everyone on FOX are. They lied about all of this, it was all lies. And I could show you pages and pages of this stuff, this is maybe 10% of the evidence I found. Yet O'Reilly ignored it all and claimed it was all non-partisan protests run by the folks. Which shows that he is a biased right-wing fool, and this blog posting proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

The Wednesday 4-15-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 16, 2009 - 9:20am

The TPM was called Big Government Revolt. Billy talked about the biased one sided right-wing tea party garbage. Except he said it was not a partisan event, the protests are valid, and FOX News only reported on them, they did not promote them. Which is nothing but total right-wing propaganda and lies. To begin with Obama has cut taxes for 95% of the people, his tax cut increase for the top 5% has not happened, and may never happen. The current federal tax rate is still the same as Bush had, it has not been changed.

So these idiots are protesting about getting a tax cut, and protesting a tax increase that only goes to the top 5%, a tax increase that has not even happened. O'Reilly also said it was a grassroots non-partisan movement started by the folks, not the wealthy and the lobbyists. And that is another bold faced lie. It's an astroturf campaign, started, funded, and promoted by the wealthy, FOX News, Republicans like Dick Armey and Newt Gingrich, and numerous right-wing groups and foundations, like www.americansolutions.com etc.

All the protest signs were an insult to Obama, some were offensive Hitler signs, some called him MaoBama, some said off with his head, some called him a traitor, some said he is a kenyan not an American, and on and on. But not one sign said a word about Bush or any Republicans, not one. Yet O'Reilly calls this biased garbage a non-partisan grassroots tax and spend protest by the folks. In reality it was an organized partisan protest planned and promoted by wealthy Republicans and right-wing groups. It was done to protest the possible future tax increases Obama might put on the top 5% who make over $250,000 a year.

I will do another blog posting on this later and prove that O'Reilly is a lying right-wing fraud with his reporting on the tea party protests. Then O'Reilly had Laura Ingraham and Neil Cavuto on to discuss it, they each had their own segment and no Democrat was allowed to be on with them to give the other side of the story. This was done on purpose by O'Reilly, because he knew if he had a Democrat on to discuss it they would spill the beans on his lies and right-wing propaganda about the protests.

During the Cavuto segment O'Reilly told him that he respects dissent, and the people at the protest should be respected. Except when Bush was president it was a whole different story. O'Reilly called anyone who spoke out against Bush, liberal loons, Bush haters, America haters, un-American, Bad Americans, traitors, said they were guilty of sedition, and on and on. Now that we have a Democrat president suddenly dissent is ok with O'Reilly, but when Bush was president it was not. O'Reilly even said you must support the president and respect him or he will call you an enemy of the state.

Now he claims to respect dissent, which is a total lie. O'Reilly is a biased two faced right-wing idiots with double standards and no integrity or credibility. Then O'Reilly did a segment on Obama not releasing the secret CIA documents about torture, he had the Democrat Dr. Marc Lamont Hill on to discuss it. And of course O'Reilly agreed with Obama, and hill disagreed. Dr. Hill even said it was shameful for Obama to keep those documents secret, and I agree with Dr. Hill. Billy is only opposed because it would be more evidence the Bush admin. used torture and it would make Bush look bad.

O'Reilly even told Dr. Hill there are no crimes, just his opinion there are crimes. Which is fairy tale land right-wing propaganda. They admit they used torture on at least 4 people, they do not even deny it. Earth to Billy, that is 4 crimes right there, it's a crime to torture someone. Not to mention, Bush illegally used wiretaps without warrants so he violated the federal FISA laws, and that would be a crime too moron. And btw, Dr. Hill was not allowed to say one word about the tea party protests, not a word. He was only allowed to talk about the secret CIA documents Obama is not releasing.

Then O'Reilly had another segment on the tea party protests with the biased Republican Amanda Carpenter, she is the Factor Internet Cop. There is no Democrat Factor Internet Cop, so as usual it was a one sided lie filled biased right-wing propaganda segment with no Democrat to give the counterpoint or provide the balance. Carpenter lied and said it was a grassroots movement by the folks, and O'Reilly said that is true, when it's a total lie. They attacked DailyKos and the media, with the usual spin and right-wing distraction garbage.

Then Dennis Miller was on to talk about the tea party protests. Billy admitted the tea party protests were big on FOX and right-wing talk radio. Even after he said they were non-partisan and FOX did not promote them. Miller loved the tea party protests, trashed Obama and the media, and agreed with O'Reilly, Ingraham, Cavuto, and Carpenter. They also talked about the pirates, the big Miller line was about the Somali pirates, he said "Somali want a cracker" and O'Reilly loved it, when it was just lame and not even funny.

Then O'Reilly had a new segment called "Barack And a Hard Place" with Alan Colmes and Monica Crowley. They give the best thing Obama did that week, and the worst thing. Crowley had some stupid complain that Obama did not get a deal with North Korea, when nobody could, not even Bush, so her complaint was ridiculous, and even O'Reilly disagreed with her and said nobody can get a deal with the nut who runs Korea. Colmes said the best thing Obama did was open up travel to Cuba, Crowley and O'Reilly agreed it was a good thing to do. But they both said they will never go to Cuba.

ONLY REPUBLICANS were on to talk about the tea party protests, not one Democrat on the entire show was on to talk about the tea party protests. So it was total one sided right-wing bias and propaganda. O'Reilly could not let a Democrat talk about the protests because they would have told the truth about them.

The Tuesday 4-14-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 15, 2009 - 8:30am

The TPM was called Radicals Run Wild. Billy cried some more about Spain investigating the Bush six. He said it was an outrage and Obama must stand up to them and speak out against it. Hey O'Moron, what happened to accountability and the rule of law. The U.S. signed international agreements that said we will not torture people. Then the Bush administration violated those agreements and tortured people. Based on the bogus legal arguments the Bush six made up.

So now Spain wants to prosecute them for using torture on Spanish citizens, and I support what Spain is doing, because they have the law on their side, and they are just doing what we would do if a foreign country used torture on our citizens. O'Reilly is only opposed to it because they might prosecute people in the Bush administration. If Spain had used torture on American citizens, O'Dummy would have the exact opposite opinion, and he would support us going after them. It's bias, hypocrisy, and a double standard, from O'Reilly.

Then O'Reilly had a FOX News stooge on to discuss it, Michael Moffett. No Democrat or anyone to provide the balance or give the counterpoint. It was just a one sided biased segment with two right-wingers. Billy was mad and called it a dog and pony show, he also said it was madness, when the only madness is from O'Reilly. Earth to O'Jerky, if you agree not to torture people, then you torture people, you will be help accountable, so get over it, and shut the hell up with your crying about it. No matter how hard you try you can not protect the Bush administration forever, and Spain could care less what you think.

Then O'Reilly had another one sided biased segment on it with Steven Groves from the Heritage Foundation. No Democrat or anyone to give the counterpoint or provide any balance. Just 2 right-wing cry babies bitching about the big bad Spain. Billy said he will boycott Spain and it will really hurt them just like his boycott of France did. Bang! That bang sound was me falling off my chair laughing, the O'Reilly boycott of France was worthless, during the boycott imports from France actually went up, so O'Reilly was lying. Most of the factor viewers did not even buy anything from France, so the whole thing was a fraud.

Scott Horton reports that, in Spain, prosecutors have decided to press forward with a criminal investigation targeting former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and five top associates (John Yoo, Jay Bybee, David Addington, Doug Feith and William Haynes) over their role in the torture of five Spanish citizens held at Guantanamo.
Spain not only has the right under the Geneva Conventions and the Convention Against Torture to prosecute foreign officials for torturing its citizens, but it -- like the U.S. -- has the affirmative obligation to do so.
The Bush administration itself insisted just last year that the U.S. has the right to criminally prosecute foreign officials for ordering acts of torture even in the absence of an accusation that any of the victims were American. Yet O'Reilly claims the whole thing is just ridiculous, when he is the ridiculous one here.

O'Reilly is even running a boycott Spain poll on his lame website, the website that only gets 50,000 hits a day. Yeah I bet Spain is shaking in their boots, haha, not! Earth to O'Loser, Spain could care less what you do, you are a nobody cable news host who gets 3 million viewers a night, and they probably do not even buy anything from Spain. You are a fool, and your boycott is just stupid.

Then O'Reilly had Ken Vogel on from Politico to report on their new poll that shows 66% of the American people trust Obama. O'Reilly mentioned that only 27% trust Pelosi, but he failed to mention that not one Republican on the list made it over 50%, so no Republicans are trusted by the American people. Billy was mad that McCain did not mention Palin on Leno, even though her disapproval is well over 50% and nobody wants her to run except a few right-wing idiots like O'Reilly.

O'Reilly also ignored the Cheney poll, it says that 72% of Americans disagree with Cheney that Obama has made America less safe, while 26% agree with him. And that 26% just happens to be the same percentage of people who are registered Republicans. So nobody agrees with Cheney except a few Republican idiots. Yet O'Reilly never said a word about that poll.

Then O'Reilly did a segment on the U.N. Childrens Rights law with the Republican Congressman Pete Hoekstra. There are 193 countries signed on, but not America, and Obama supports it. So of course Hoekstra is opposed to it, and so is O'Reilly. It was just another one sided biased segment with 2 right-wing morons, no balance, and all one sided opinions. Then some garbage segment about what Bernie Madoff does in prison all day, ummmm, who cares, and how is this news.

Then "is it legal" with Lis Wiehl and Megyn Kelly. Both Republicans who work for FOX, so it was another one sided biased segment. They trashed John Edwards again, and speculated that he might be charged for using election money to pay his mistress. When a guy who worked for Edwards admitted he paid her with his own money and John Edwards did not even know it, then the guy died. O'Reilly then trashed justice Ginsberg because she is a liberal. He was mad that she makes ruling that favor liberals, but he did not get mad at right-wing judges who make ruling that favor conservatives.

Somehow in O'Reilly world it's only wrong for liberal judges to make liberal rulings, but it's ok for conservative judges to make conservative rulings. It's total bias, hypocrisy, and a double standard. Yet O'Reilly thinks he is a fair and balanced Independent with a no spin zone, yeah and I'm Elvis too. O'Reilly said it was wrong for judges to make rulings based on their political ideology.

And I agree, but then he said the right-wing judges do not do that and said they are good judges. Which is not only a lie, it's fantasyland. Every ruling comes down 5 to 4, the 5 conservatives vote one way, and the 4 liberals vote the other way. Once in a blue moon Stevens will vote with the liberals, but not very often. So anyone who says the conservative judges do not vote on their ideology is an idiot, and a liar. Scalia and the other 4 conservatives mostly vote conservative, and that is a fact, no matter what O'Reilly says, just look it up.

Then the stupid Culture Quiz with 2 more Republicans from FOX, Doocy and MacCallum. The pinheads and patriots and the lame e-mails. And for the record, as predicted here, O'Reilly totally ignored the Homeland Security report that warns of an increase in right-wing extremism that could lead to violence. Even though it was a major headline at foxnews.com, every news show on CNN and MSNBC reported it, and it was a major story all day yesterday, O'Reilly still ignored it and never said one word about the report.

And another one sided right-wing biased O'Reilly Factor was over. Not one Democrat was on the entire show, and it was an hour of non-stop right-wing propaganda. O'Reilly calls that a no spin zone, while everyone else calls it one sided right-wing bias and propaganda.

Homeland Security Report Warns of Right-Wing Extremism
By: Steve - April 14, 2009 - 12:30pm

Last week O'Reilly said it was ridiculous that Republicans in Congress, and Republicans who have tv and radio shows who tell people Obama is going to ban guns, to take up arms and start the revolution to take your country back. Billy did an entire segment on it and said it was all nonsense, and denied that Beck and Hannity, or anyone at FOX News were causing anyone on the right to do anything.

And then today we find this headline, at guess where?

www.foxnews.com, here is the headline at foxnews.com from today, Tuesday April 14th.

Homeland Security Warns of Rise in Right-Wing Extremism

An intelligence assessment released to law enforcement last week claims news of recession, the election of an African American president, rumors of new gun restrictions and the inability of veterans to reintegrate create fertile ground for radicalizing and recruiting right-wing extremists.

The Department of Homeland Security is warning law enforcement agencies that recent news is helping "right-wing extremist groups" recruit new members and could lead to violence, and warns about the possible recruitment and radicalization of returning veterans.

DHS' Office of Intelligence and Analysis issued an intelligence assessment last week that said it has no specific information that domestic right-wing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but right-wing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on fears about the recession and the election of the first African American president. The office called them "unique drivers for right-wing radicalization and recruitment."
"Right-wing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning," the assessment reads.
The report also suggests that returning veterans are attractive recruits for right-wing groups looking for "combat skills and experience" so as to boost their "violent capabilities." It adds that new restrictions on gun ownership and the difficulty of veterans to reintegrate into their communities "could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks."
"Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans likely would attract new members into the ranks of right-wing extremist groups ... The high volume of purchases and stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by right-wing extremists in anticipation of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary concern to law enforcement," the report says.
The consequences of a prolonged economic downturn-including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability to obtain credit-could create a fertile recruiting environment for right-wing extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past," reads a key finding in the assessment.
"This is the job of DHS, to assess what is happening in this country, with regard to homegrown terrorism, and determine whether it's an actual threat or not, and that's what these assessments do. This is nothing unusual. These assessments are done all the time. This is about awareness," the official told FOX News on Monday.
DHS has no specific information that domestic right-wing terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but right-wing extremists may be gaining new recruitments by playing on their fears about several emerging issues, Kuban said.

And remember this, I found this at foxnews.com, and the question is, will O'Reilly report this article. Sure he will, when hell freezes over, he will never say a word about it, because it shoots down his spin on the issue.

The Monday 4-13-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 13, 2009 - 9:20pm

The TPM was called Rescue at Sea. Billy talked about the Navy Seals killing 3 pirates and saving Captain Phillips. He said Obama did the right thing by ordering them to use deadly force. I also think Obama did well, and I support his decision to do what he did, as most liberals do. So O'Reilly had to admit Obama did the right thing, even though you could tell he had a hard time giving Obama credit, he wanted to give all the credit to the Navy, but he had to give some to Obama.

But of course O'Reilly had to trash someone, so he hammered the U.N. for not doing anything. Because the right hates the U.N. so he knew his crazy viewers would love that. I say good job to Obama, and good job to the Seals who shot the pirates. Then O'Reilly had a former Seal Clint Bruce and Scott Stewart from stratfor.com on to discuss it. They wasted 4 minutes of tv time giving us details of the rescue, when it's been on the news all day long and we already know all the details. In fact, MSNBC did a computer animation showing what happened, so they were the best place to find out how it happened, not FOX.

Then O'Reilly had Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on to discuss it even more. Billy said Obama got a win when he ordered force, Williams and Ham both pretty much agreed. Then O'Reilly asked them if Obama is tough enough, which was a stupid question, and he would have never asked that if Bush was the president. Just asking it implies you doubt he is, so O'Reilly could not resist getting a dig in on Obama somehow. They never said a word about the stupid right-wing bloggers calling Obama a pantywaist when they thought he would not order the use of force. They had to eat their words because he did order it, and O'Reilly said nothing.

Then the biased fraud of a right-wing pollster Frank Luntz was on to report on his bogus focus group that watched the Obama speech in Europe. Luntz said the GOP hated it and the Dems loved it, wow, thanks Mr. obvious. The segment was a total waste of time, it was worthless, and it did not tell us anything we do not already know. The GOP hates Obama, we get it, where is the news in that. It was just done so O'Reilly could use Luntz to make Obama look bad in a way that does not get his hands dirty. That's what O'Reilly does, he uses biased right-wingers to smear Obama and do his dirty work for him.

Then Steve Greenberg was on to talk about the possible pay for play scandal with Jesse Jackson Jr. A Chicago paper reported Jackson may be in trouble, but nobody knows yet. Billy jumped the gun on this story, because it involves a Democrat, and the son of Jesse Jackson. Some Indian group may have offered to raise $5 million to get that Senate seat, but we do not know if Jesse Jr. was involved, or if he will be charged. So it's speculation right now, yet O'Reilly reported it anyway. Billy even admitted Jesse Jr. might not even know it happened, and may not be involved, yet he did the speculation story anyway, simply because he is a Democrat, and the son of Jesse Jackson.

Then the Culture Warrior garbage that nobody cares about, and will not change the culture at all, especially when less than 1% of the population even see the segment. The two Republicans, Margaret Hoover and Monica Crowley were on to talk about the Pope rejecting Caroline Kennedy for Ambassador because she is pro-choice. Nobody cares but O'Reilly, because he hates the Kennedy's, and it's only a story on right-wing talk shows.

They also talked about a proposed teen text law in Vermont, something about teens texting sexy pics and messages. Billy flipped out, when the law has not even passed yet, and the teens are already doing it, law or not. Get back to me when the law passes, or better yet, just move on and get a life. Then they talked about the new tattoo Barbie, my God who cares, report some news. O'Reilly flipped out, when no-body cares, and it's not news, even the two right-wing Culture Warriors did not care. Earth to O'Reilly, it's 2009, not 1950, and leave it to beaver in not on anymore, you are not Ward Cleaver, and it's not 1950. Come and join us in 2009, moron.

Then the stupid Reality Check waste of tv time. Billy attacked the media for being liberal, he hammered Andrea Mitchell, the NY Times, and the St. Petersburg Times in Florida. Basically he cherry picked one thing they did and then claimed it shows they have a liberal bias. When I could show you 10 things they did that show they have a conservative bias, he just ignores that to misrepresent what they do. The bias is from O'Reilly, and FOX News, but he can not seem to find any of that.

Then James Dobson told his church the Republicans have lost the culture war, and for once I agree with Dobson. But of course O'Reilly disagreed and said it's not over yet and to keep up the fight. Billy said the conservatives are the majority, ummmm, they are? If that's true, how did Obama crush McSame 365 to 170, explain that fool. While you are at it, explain how you can say conservatives are the majority when it's not true. Then a stupid 911 call, with no check.

And finally the pinheads and patriots and the lame e-mails. Billy had one so-called Democrat on the whole show, if you call Juan Williams a Democrat, which I do not. So it was the usual 99% right-wing bias with pretty much all Republicans guests.

O'Reilly Spinning in The All Spin Zone
By: Steve - April 12, 2009 - 9:50am

Bill O'Reilly now claims that he is only attacked because he is #1 in the ratings. He claims that people hate him only because he is #1 in the ratings. Basically he says they are all jealous of him so they attack him and try to smear him by lying about him.

But there is one big problem with all that, it's all lies, and nothing but a giant fairy tale. It's just more spin from O'Reilly, which he is very good at, spin is his game. He says all that garbage to try and justify all the attacks on him. He is the liar, and the spinner, and the biased one sided partisan fraud.

What he does is say all that garbage to dismiss the people who expose his spin, his lies, his bias, his hypocrisy, and his double standards as smear merchants who only attack him because he is #1 in the ratings.

To believe that you have to ignore reality, and ignore the fact that websites like www.oreilly-sucks.com, thinkprogress, and media matters, simply quote O'Reilly's own words then show the bias, spin, lies, hypocrisy, and double standards in what he says. I watch the Factor every night, I take notes about what he says, usually 3 to 4 pages for each show, and I also review the transcripts and quote him word for word. That is not a smear, or an attack, it's quoting his own words. Then I show you the right-wing bias, the spin, the hypocrisy, and the double standards.

I started this website in August of 2001, during that time O'Reilly was NOT #1 in the ratings, and Larry King beat him almost every night, O'Reilly averaged about 900,000 viewers a night back then. About a year later O'Reilly started beating Larry King, and would even brag about it. I did not care about the ratings then, and I do not care now. I was writing about O'Reilly before he went to #1, so his argument that everyone attacks him because he is #1 is just pure nonsense.

His argument that he is attacked because of the ratings is also nonsense. First, I do not consider what I do an attack, it's simply exposing him for his bias, spin, lies, hypocrisy, and double standards. That is not an attack, it's being a media watchdog who exposes bias, which O'Reilly praises when the MRC or Bernie Goldberg do it to what they claim is a liberal biased journalist.

But somehow in O'Reilly world when it's done to him it's a smear and an attack. Which is just another example of his double standards. When Billy goes after a liberal that he claims is biased, that's honest journalism and looking out for the folks. But when someone goes after him for his bias, spin, hypocrisy, and double standards, that's dishonest journalism, a smear, and an attack on him.

Frankly it's ridiculous, and anyone who believes that garbage should not vote because they are too stupid. Bill O'Reilly is a Republican, and everyone knows it. All his enemies are Democrats, he hates Obama, Dodd, Frank, Pelosi, Reid, Olbermann, Krugman, NBC, MSNBC, thinkprogress, DailyKos, Soros, Brock, the ACLU, anyone who is pro-choice, and on and on. Now name one Republican enemy O'Reilly has, ummmmmmm, ahhh, maybe ummmm no, ahhhh, there are none.

O'Reilly hates every Democrat and every liberal in America. He even does segments reporting on all the money liberals give to Democratic politicians, causes, and groups. Then he implies there is something wrong with that, when it's all 100% legal, and how things work in a Democracy. The kicker is that he never reports on all the money conservatives give to Republicans, and he never implies there is something wrong with that. Somehow in O'Reilly world it's only wrong when liberals do it.

I expose the bias, the spin, the hypocrisy, and the double standards from Bill O'Reilly because he denies being a Republican. Because he claims to be an Independent who is fair to both sides in the no spin zone. He even opens each show saying caution you are entering the no spin zone. Then he spends the entire hour putting out right-wing spin with 99% to 100% Republican guests. And it has nothing to do with his ratings, I do not care if he is #1 or #10, it makes no difference to me.

In fact, I do not believe any news show should be rated. I do not think news shows should have public ratings, for any of them. News shows are supposed to be in the business of informing the people with news they need to know to make an educated vote. Not to do tabloid garbage and spin for ratings, so for that reason they should not even have ratings. I do not care about ratings for any news show, and I only report on them when O'Reilly gets caught lying about ratings.

Notice that I do not have a website called hannity-sucks.com, or beck-sucks.com, or limbaugh-sucks.com, etc. I only have www.oreilly-sucks.com, because he denies being a Republican, where Hannity, Beck, and Limbaugh do not. They are honest about their ideology, and they are not trying to fool the American people with the no spin zone I am an Independent con game as O'Reilly does. So I do not report on what they say, even though they spin and lie just as much as O'Reilly, if not more.

I only report on O'Reilly, because he is a dishonest spinning biased lying hypocrite with double standards, and a 99% one sided right-wing show. And he does that while claiming to have no agenda, to be a moderate Independent, to have a no spin zone, and to be fair to both sides, when he is as far right as Rove or Limbaugh, and just as biased as Beck or Hannity, he just refuses to admit it.

That is why I report on O'Reilly, it has nothing to do with his ratings, it's about his dishonesty, his bias, his spin, his hypocrisy, and his double standards. And if he dropped to #10 in the ratings tomorrow I would still report on him.

Until he admits to being a Republican, drops the no spin zone garbage, and admits he is a biased partisan, I will continue to expose O'Reilly as the fraud he is, or until my medical problems prevent me from doing it.

The Thursday 4-9-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 11, 2009 - 9:40am

The TPM was called Can The Republicans Find a Leader? Billy started out by lying about the Obama approval numbers with Independents, see my other blog posting about that. Then he said where do all those people who disapprove of Obama go, even though it's a lie from O'Reilly. O'Reilly said they can not go to McCain because he was beaten badly, and they can not go to Powell because (according to O'Reilly) he is now a liberal. I bet Mr. Powell would disagree, because he said he is a Republican, a real one.

O'Reilly based that fact on the statement Powell made about closing Gitmo, so in O'Reilly world if you support closing Gitmo you are not a Republican, because Bill O'Reilly decided that was the measure of being a Republican. Then O'Reilly spins out some fairy tale that Powell was opposed to ground forces abroad so that is why Bin Laden got away in Afghanistan. Wow, that is some fairy tale, that totally ignores the facts.

Bush let Bin Laden go, because he did not order U.S. troops to guard the back door between Afghanistan and Pakistan, because he did not want to deal with the high number of U.S. troops that would have probably been killed. In fact, the Powell Doctrine says if you plan to use force, use overwhelming force, which Bush and Rumsfeld did not do. Powell actually wanted more troops, but he was over-ruled by Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. So O'Reilly is basically lying about General Powell, and his position on ground troops, and he is doing it to cover for his hero Bush.

Then O'Reilly put the crazy far right Laura Ingraham on, and I do not need to go into details, she basically agreed with O'Reilly and smeared General Powell, even though it was all pretty much lies. O'Reilly said Powell is done, whatever that means. They are mad at him because as a Republican he is supposed to agree with them on everything, so they trash him and call him a liberal. During this speculationfest they admitted the Republicans have no leader, spewed out some right-wing talking points, and O'Reilly said for the millionth time that he is not a Republican.

Then O'Reilly had Andrew Meldrum on to talk about the pirate attack, Billy's answer is to have two blackwater guys on each ship and just take out their dingy, bang it's gone, case closed. They spent 5 minutes talking about it, and Billy wonders why they do not just do what he says. After all, he has the #1 rated cable news show, so why don't everyone listen to him. I have the answer, because you are a right-wing freak, and nobody cares what you think, except the 3 million brainwashed viewers you get.

Then Megyn Kelly was on to discuss the warrantless wiretapping by the Bush administration. Of course they misrepresented the whole thing, liberals support the program, they just want it done legally, with warrants. They claim the liberals were all opposed to it, when that is a lie, we support it, as long as it is done legally through the FISA court, the way the law says they should. If it's done legally liberals support it, case closed morons. Billy even agreed there should be a check and balance on the program, and so do I, so we agree, except he keeps lying that liberals oppose the program, when they do not, I know, because I am one.

Then the hot for words bimbo, the one Billy has on to get a cheap thrill. It's tabloid garbage and not worth reporting. Then the crazy Glenn Beck was put on to spew out more right-wing insanity. Billy and Beck claim that because they get good ratings everyone is mad at them and that's why they smear and attack them. Which is so ridiculous it's laughable. Media watchdogs report on them because they lie and spin the American people with right-wing propaganda. And that's it, their ratings have nothing to do with it, nobody even cares about their ratings except them.

I report on O'Reilly because he denies being a Republican, if he did not deny it this website would not even be here. I do not report on Hannity, or Limbaugh, or any other Republicans. Because they admit to being Republicans and they are not trying to fool the American people with their right-wing no spin zone con game pretending to be an objective Independent. Billy and Beck sat around for 4 minutes and talked about how great they are, and how great their ratings are, but nobody cares except them.

Then the no reality and no reality check Reality Check segment. I will spare you the boring details and sum it up. Billy gave his opinion on 6 stupid non-news stories with no reality and no reality check. In fact, I do not think O'Reilly even knows what a reality check is, because 90% of his so-called reality checks have no check, just O'Reilly reporting something. A reality check is when you report how someone put a spin on a news story, then you give the reality, as in reality check.

How is reporting that a broadcaster in Turkey named Gokon Taskin went on the air in black face and talked about president Obama a reality check. Where is the spin, and what was the reality check, there was none, and who cares anyway.
"Check" one, while President Obama was visiting Turkey a broadcast broadcaster named Gokon Taskin went on the air in black face. The guy actually praised the president, but why he did it this way is a mystery. His company said that he was protesting the Bush administration.

As John Lovitz once said, "Yes, that's it. That's the ticket. That's what he was doing." "Check" guesses the guy is a moron and wanted attention. That's a good guess.
You get the picture, the reality check is garbage, and there are no reality checks. Then Billy did the pinheads and patriots, more garbage, and the lame hand picked highly edited e-mails. And another one sided biased right-wing O'Reilly Factor was over. Not one Democrat was on the entire show, so it was 100% right-wing propaganda, when it's called the no spin zone with the self proclaimed Independent and objective Bill O'Reilly.

Ask yourself this, what real Independent has 99% Republican guests, and sometimes 100% Republican guests, with 1% to 0% Democratic guests. Answer, none, because O'Reilly is just a lying right-wing hack who claims he is not a Republican. Then he has the nerve to complain how all the other journalists are dishonest, when he will not even admit to being a Republican, and then lies about being an objective Independent with a no spin zone. So he is more dishonest than any other journalist in America.

There was no Friday Factor review because O'Reilly had the Republican John Kasich fill in for him, and I do not review shows that have a fill in host.

Signed Obama Books Sell For a Whopping $2,000
By: Steve - April 10, 2009 - 9:50pm

From Mark Nickolas - Managing Editor, PoliticalBase.com

Have you ever wondered what the marketplace is asking for a signed, hardcover copy of books by our leading political figures? Well, last night I browsed the collectible versions of a number of such books over at Amazon.com and the results are interesting and occasionally unexpected.

Turns out that no one can come close to President Obama. The average listing for a signed copy of The Audacity of Hope is a staggering $2,000, more than double Ronald Reagan's My Life, which itself remains all alone in second place, and by a considerable margin.

Here are the going rate of signed books by some of the more prominent political figures:

President Obama (avg. $2,000)

Ronald Reagan (avg. $900)
Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton (avg. $300-$500)
Al Gore (avg. $150-$250)

Colin Powell (avg. $75-100)

Bill O'Reilly, Newt Gingrich (avg. $25)

In the bargain basement category, signed copies of Bill O'Reilly's The O'Reilly Factor, or Newt Gingrich's Lessons Learned The Hard Way are just $25. That's also the list price for both books, so the autograph is essentially worthless.

The value of a Bill O'Reilly or Newt Gingrich autograph is zero, nada, zip, zilch.

O'Reilly Hypocrisy on Journalists Giving Money to Politicians
By: Steve - April 10, 2009 - 12:50pm

In June of 2007 O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: I choose not to give money to political causes or candidates because my beat is to watch all these people not pay their bills.
Then last week O'Reilly did a segment on the ethics charges against Governor Palin, and the legal bills they're causing her to rack up. After Lis Wiehl pointed out that politicians are not allowed to advertise these funds, and that the max contribution is $1000, O'Reilly promised that he would advertise the fund so she wouldn't have to, and contribute $1000 himself.

Hey Billy, about two years ago you trashed all the liberal journalists who donated money to Obama, you said they proved their bias by giving that money. Now you not only say you will give money to Sarah Palin, you say you will also promote her legal defense fund.

This is a journalist giving money to a politician, and that's wrong, at least you say it is when Democrats do it. Let me guess, it's ok when a Republican Journalist gives money to a Republican politician, like you plan to do, and that it's only wrong when a Democrat does it, because you say so.

What say you Billy?

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Obama Approval Numbers
By: Steve - April 10, 2009 - 11:20am

I guess this is some of that fair to Obama reporting O'Reilly claims to have. Last night O'Reilly said this:
Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thank you for watching us tonight. Can the Republicans find a leader? That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo."

Writing in "The Wall Street Journal" today, Karl Rove points out that President Obama's job approval rating among Independents has dropped nine points in a month to 52 percent. Also, the president has polarized Americans. 88 percent of Democrats approve, but only 27 percent of Republicans like the job he's doing.
There is one big big problem with that statement, it's all lies, and 100% right-wing propaganda. Not only have the Obama approval ratings not dropped 9 points with Independents in the last month to 52%, they have not dropped at all. They were at 60% a month ago, and they are still at 60% today. And here is the proof.



On March 1st Obama was at 60% approval with Independents, and as of 4-7-09 it was still 60% approval. Here is what Gallup wrote 3 days ago on April 7th.
Obama's approval ratings among Democrats and independents have been highly stable. Last week's averages of 90% approval from Democrats and 60% from independents nearly match the averages for his presidency to date.
Karl Rove is a partisan Republican who worked for Geroge W. Bush, he hates Obama and lied about his approval with Independents dropping. So what does O'Reilly the so-called Independent with a no spin zone do, of course he picks up the Rove lies and reports them as fact. Which is something only a dishonest Republican would do. Even after O'Reilly said he has been fair to Obama, if that is being fair I'm dating Pam Anderson.

The Gallup numbers show the exact opposite of what O'Reilly and Rove claim, which proves they are both right-wing liars. I am calling on O'Reilly to have me on his show to discuss it, and I am calling on him to issue a correction, and admit he is a lying Republican idiot. Is this being fair to Obama, lying about his approval ratings dropping with Independents.

What say you Billy?

And btw, the TPM was about the Republicans having no leader. But O'Reilly used it to claim the Obama approval numbers have dropped 9 points in the last month with Independents. Ummmmmm, ok, so what does that have to do with the Republicans not having a leader, answer, nothing.

To begin with it's a lie, his approval has not dropped at all with Independents in the last month. What it shows is that O'Reilly hates Obama so much even when he talks about Republicans not having a leader he still has to get an Obama smear in the mix. If that's not biased and dishonest Journalism, I don't know what is. And remember, O'Reilly claims he has been fair to Obama.

O'Reilly Goes Nuts Over The Right's Call to Arms
By: Steve - April 9, 2009 - 9:20am

Last night O'Reilly did a segment about right-wing Republicans possibly being partly to blame for some of the recent cop killings in Pittsburgh etc. As usual O'Reilly twisted the facts to spin it for the right, and claim it was ridiculous. O'Reilly did a terrible job reporting the story with the Republican Amanda Carpenter, who is his internet cop, and no Democrat to provide any balance.

Here is the story, and all the facts O'Reilly left out. The guy who killed the cops was a far right gun lover, he loved Glenn beck and watched his show every night. Now recently Beck has been calling for a modern day revolution, like a new civil war. He actually told people to do something to take their country back. Then you have Michelle Bachmann, she is another Republican who actually told people to take up arms and take their country back.

O'Reilly never reported any of that. Then he said the DailyKos was blaming him and Beck and other right-wingers for the cop killings. When that is not exactly true, I have not seen anyone blame O'Reilly. They are talking about Beck and Bachmann. And they do not blame them 100%, as O'Reilly claims, they say it's possible they are partly to blame for lying to them that Obama is going to take their guns away, etc.

That is the story, not the right-wing BS O'Reilly put out last night. And here is the 2nd part of the story. O'Reilly said it is crazy to blame the right-wingers who talk about taking up arms and lying that Obama is coming for your guns. But he has also said that Movies, TV, Video Games, and Rap is to blame for the more violent society we have, O'Reilly believes that, and has said so many times.

So it's massive hypocrisy from O'Reilly. Not to mention the terrible reporting he did about the story, he left out all the facts and just said it was crazy. And if you believe Movies, Video games, etc. can make people do more violence, then it would make sense to also believe if people you see on TV and in Congress tell you to take up arms and take your country back someone will listen to them, that's just common sense.

Not in O'Reilly world, somehow one is crazy and the other is not. There are right-wing gun nuts who watch Beck and Hannity, and listen to Bachmann. They are telling them Obama is coming to get your guns, and that they should take up arms and take your country back, this happened, and it's a fact. Yet O'Reilly never said a word about any of that, and claims the people who say Beck was partly to blame for the cop killings are nuts.

When O'Reilly himself has argued that Movies, Rap, and Video games make people more violent. It's the same damn thing O'Reilly, and the people like Beck, Hannity, and Bachmann are probably worse than the Movies and the Video Games, because they are real people, so that gives them more influence than a fake Movie or a fake Video Game. But as usual O'Reilly has to protect his right-wing friends by spinning or lying for them, as he did in this case.

How hard is it to believe that a right-wing gun nut who loves Beck, and watches him every night, would suddenly get his guns and go do what Beck told him to do. It's clearly possible, and the left is not blaming them 100%, they are just saying they are partly to blame, and it makes perfect sense to everyone, except O'Reilly and his right-wing stooge Amanda Carpenter.

Now remember this, these are the same two idiots (O'Reilly and Carpenter) who claim there is no hate on the right anywhere on the internet, that they looked everywhere, and they can not find any. When a quick look at any of the right-wing blogs or websites will get you tons of hate on the right, they just ignore it and fail to report it. I have a web page on this website that details that hate, the hate they ignore, so their credibility on this is zero.

The Wednesday 4-8-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 9, 2009 - 9:00am

The TPM was called No Confidence? Billy said the people have lost confidence in the American leadership, then he showed poll numbers for the job approval of Congress. But as usual he put a right-wing spin on it. He showed the overall approval for all of Congress. When the Democrats approval is 25 points higher at 43%, to the 19% approval for Republicans.

And the Obama approval is still in the 60's, yet O'Reilly claims the people have no confidence in their Government, which is just right-wing propaganda. They have confidence in Obama and the Democrats, they just do not have confidence in the Republicans in Congress. Then O'Reilly said it's only a matter of time before the Obama job approval numbers drop, how does he know, maybe they will, maybe they will not. Nobody knows, and once again it was just pure right-wing speculation.

Then O'Reilly said he is tired of the Obama team blaming Bush for everything. He is tired, already, after Obama has been president for less than 90 days. Bush is to blame, he left Obama all these problems, so what is he supposed to do, take the blame for what Bush did, that would be crazy. Bush ruined the economy, so get ovet it O'Reilly, it was your hero's fault, you and the right want to blame Obama for what Bush did. So Obama has to remind people that he is trying to fix the problems Bush left him, so get a clue man.

Then O'Reilly had Dick Morris on to agree with him and put his right-wing spin on everything, and of course no Democrat anywere to dispute any of this right-wing garbage. This segment is worthless, it's just two right-wing fools who sit around and spin and speculate about Obama and what might happen, and what he might do. None of it is fact based, and none of it is reality. It's just a biased one sided right-wing propaganda segment.

Then Billy put another right-winger on to discuss the Cheney comments that we are less safe with Obama as the President. He had Dana Perino on and even O'Reilly told her that is just speculation, because nobody knows, and she ignored that to just back up Cheney, because she worked for him. It was total bias, and spin. They acted like Biden and Obama were in the wrong for speaking out against Cheney. When Cheney is in the wrong to criticize the current administration, which even Bush is not doing.

The rule is, you do not criticize the new administration after you leave, and Cheney is violating that rule. On top of that his criticism is just speculation, which makes it even worse. So what does O'Reilly do, he has one Republican on with him and they hammer Biden and Obama for standing up to Cheney. It's twilight zone time, Cheney is in the wrong, and O'Reilly ignores that to hammer Biden and Obama, in a one sided biased piece of crap segment.

Then it got really insane, lol. Billy cried about the new Eminem rap video that disrespects Sarah Palin. First, who cares, and second, who cares. Earth to O'Idiot, it's a rap video, so nobody cares. O'Reilly had the stupid Tammy Bruce on to discuss it. He said it was media hypocrisy because they said nothing about it. Billy compared it to when he called Helen Thomas a witch, and said the media ignored the Eminem video so it's the same thing and big time hypocrisy.

WHAT? It's not even close to the same thing, and it's insane to make that comparison. O'Reilly is a JOURNALIST who called another JOURNALIST a witch, the wicked witch of the west. Eminem is a Rapper, he does music videos, he is a punk who makes rap videos, how in the hell is that the same thing as a JOURNALIST calling another JOURNALIST an old witch?

You have to be nuts to even make that comparison, and of course Bruce agreed with O'Reilly, so she is just as crazy as Billy. Bruce also said the left attacks women, which is wrong, and insane. Rush Limbaugh and the right attack women, as in feminazis, Rush said that crap, not the left. The left only attacked Sarah Palin, because she is a stupid far right nut job who ran for Vice President when she was not qualified. The whole segment was like watching the twilight zone, instead of a so-called hard news show.

Then Dennis Miller was on to cry about the Obama bow again, when nobody cares, no-body, except a few far right idiots, O'Reilly even said he does not care, then he keeps reporting it every fricking night. If you do not care, why keep reporting it every damn night? Then they hammered Barney Frank again, and talked about Nick Cage selling his castles in England, huh? O'Reilly said the left hate rich people, which is just insane. The left does not hate rich people, that's a right-wing myth. They only hate the righ guys who ruined the economy, and that's all, so O'Reilly was lying again.

Then some religious crap with the FOX News Pastor, pinheads and patriots, and the lame e-mails. And another one sided biased right-wing propaganda factor was over. Not one Democrat was on in the entire show, and the whole hour was nothing but one sided right-wing garbage, or as O'Reilly calls it, the fair and balanced no spin zone by the Independent host who is fair to Obama and fair to both sides.

And if you believe that I have some land to sell you.

Notice How O'Reilly Stopped Spinning Obama Job Approval
By: Steve - April 8, 2009 - 11:10am

A couple weeks ago O'Reilly tried some big time right-wing propaganda on how the folks feel about Obama, that nobody fell for, so he stopped doing it. Billy was saying that the folks have turned against Obama and his job approval numbers were falling. Which was a total lie and nothing but right-wing propaganda put out by the Republican party. Obama is popular, and his job approval numbers are in the mid 60's. so they can not attack him when the vast majority of Americans approve of the job he is doing.

The Republican party came out with plan to trash and smear Obama to try and get his approval numbers down so they could attack him and his policies. O'Reilly jumped on the right-wing bandwagon and put out the lies that the Obama job approval numbers were dropping. There was only one problem with their plan, actually two, it was stupid, and his numbers were not dropping. And yet, Billy and his right-wing friends tried it anyway, and it was a massive failure.

Obama is at 62% in the Gallup poll, and 66% approval in the NY Times/CBS poll. The Obama approval numbers have never dropped below 61%, and most of the time were in the mid 60's, so the garbage O'Reilly was putting out was made up right-wing propaganda. And he has the nerve to say he has been fair to Obama, yeah and I'm Donald Trump too. Then on top of that O'Reilly ignores the fact that the approval ratings for the Republican party are 31%, the lowest rating they have ever had.
Two-thirds of Americans approve of President Obama’s job performance, a New York Times/CBS News poll finds. “By contrast, just 31 percent of respondents said they had a favorable view of the Republican Party, the lowest in the 25 years” of the poll. Sixty-three percent thought President Obama was most likely to make the right decisions for the economy, versus 20 percent who said Congressional Republicans were more likely.
So while lying about the Obama job approval ratings dropping O'Reilly is also ignoring the lowest approval ratings ever for the Republican party. He smears and lies about Obama every night, then claims he has been fair to him, and totally ignores that fact that his party is in bad shape and getting worse. Billy also ignored the Obama buget passing the House and the Senate with no Republican votes, none, and Billy said nothing.

But if a Bush budget passed with no Democrat votes O'Reilly would call them un-American traitors who hate Ameria, who did not vote to help America in a time of war. When Republicans do it, he is silent as a mouse, and does not even report it. In O'Reilly world he calls that journalism, in the real world we call that biased partisan propaganda meant to hurt Obama and help the Republicans.

The Tuesday 4-7-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 8, 2009 - 10:40am

The TPM was called White House Spin? Which is just more proof O'Reilly is a Republican, because you never saw a TPM like that when Bush was the president. In fact, if you just look at the difference in how O'Reilly covers Bush and Obama, you can see that O'Reilly is a Republican. During the Bush years all the O'Reilly TPM's talked positive of Bush and defended him, now they all talk negative of Obama and none of them defend him.

It's like night and day, because O'Reilly hates Obama and hates everything he does. Billy said " some people say the Obama bow was controversialyeah and those are Republicans who tried to make it controversial. They claim wrong un-American for Saudi Prince. When these right-wing idiots that hypocrites fools.

When Bush met the same Saudi Prince he kissed him on the face, then held his hand and walked with him as they talked, yet these same "some people say" right wing jerkoffs said nothing about that. Now it's suddenly an outrage that Obama did a bow to him, when these same a-holes said nothing about the Bush kiss and hand holding. Here is a message to anyone who said a word about the Obama bow, shut your pie hole, you are a biased idiot and a massive hypocrite.

Then O'Reilly had Brit Hume on to talk about the Obama trip and grade him. Hume said he had two grades, an A and a C. He gave Obama an A for giving good speeches and being well liked, and a C for what he got done. Hey Brit, it's Europe and they hate us because of Bush, so why blame Obama for the problem Bush caused. He can not force Europe to help us, all he can do is ask, and if they say no it's not his fault, it's the fault of Bush for making them hate us. And Obama did get something, he got 5,000 support troops, which is more than Bush could have ever got them to do.

Republicans like O'Reilly and Hume just can not give Obama credit for anything, and they never blame Bush for any of it, when he is the problem, not Obama. They like Obama, they just do not want to send troops to the wars Bush started, and that shoud not be blamed on Obama. Yet they do, because they are biased Republican idiots who want to blame all the Bush problems on Obama for political reasons, mostly because the Obama job approval ratings are so high and they hate that.

O'Reilly said Obama's failure to confront weak nations is annoying. When that was the Bush strategy, and look what that did, nothing, except piss off all of Europe so much they refused to help us, so why should Obama do the same thing Bush did, it would be insane, and yet that's what O'Reilly and all the stupid Republicans want him to do. Not to mention, the other night O'Reilly said it was sort of a smart strategy, even though he does not like it, then he smears Obama again for a strategy that got us something from Europe, which is more than what Bush could have got us.

Then stupid O'Reilly actually did a segment on the Obama bow, was it a bow or not. The White House said it was not a bow, earth to right-wing idiots, nobody cares but you, and it's not news to real people. Who gives a damn if Obama did a bow or not, nobody. I personally think it was a bow, and I could care less. Nobody cares, so get over it and report some real news for a change. O'Reilly even put two right-wing guests on to say they hated the bow, when Bush kissed the guy and held his hand, it's insane, and nobody but a few right-wing jerks care. The economy is crashing and you idiots want to talk about a stupid bow, get a clue.

Then O'Reilly was going to talk to crazy Ann Coulter, but she had to cancel for some reason. And you can imagine what she would say, she would trash everything Obama did and call him un-American etc. That's why O'Reilly has her on, so she can trash Obama and he does not get blamed for it. There is no other reason to put her on, other than doing his dirty work for him. So O'Reilly had Cavuto on to do it, and they also attacked George Soros for making money.

O'Reilly called Soros a gangster, and told Cavuto he does not like him making money in a down economy. While ignoring the other 25 hedge fund managers who made a total of $11.6 Billion last year. Including the 4 that made more than Soros did, yet they do not say a word about any of them, they only attack Soros for making money because he is a Democrat who gives money to Democratic political groups. Even though it's all legal, and how things work in a Democracy, O'Reilly and Cavuto still smear him for simply making money legally.

To be fair, it was mostly O'Reilly smearing Soros, Cavuto sort of defended him. Cavuto just smeared Obama and his economic plans, so he was not Mr. Innocent. What gets me is O'Reilly loves Republicans who make money and give it to Republican groups, he is even one of them, but if a Democrat makes money and gives it to Democrat groups he is a bad man and a gangster. It's bias, hypocrisy, and a double standard, and classic right-wing O'Reilly propaganda.

Then the body language mumbo jumbo I refuse to report, because it's garbage and not even close to news. Then is it legal with Guilfoyle and Wiehl. They talked about the Franken/Coleman case, and they said they talked to the Coleman attorney and reported what he said. But they did not talk to the Franken attorney and they did not report what he said.

Which is pure bias, and nothing but spinning it for Coleman, especially when Franken is winning by 315 votes, and he was certified the winner of the recount. They failed to mention that, and reported it like Coleman was the winner, when Franken won the recount, and all the court rulings since then. O'Reilly called Franken a pinhead, and told the people of Minnesota they are dumb if they make him a Senator. When it's well known that O'Reilly hates him, and a real journalist would recuse himself from the story and say nothing. Not to mention in a Democracy the guy with the most votes wins, even if you hate him.

Then the lame culture quiz with Doocy and McCallum, it's so lame I changed the channel and did not watch it. This is not news, it's tabloid crap for ratings. Then the pinheads and patriots and the e-mails. And another right-wing spinfest was over.

Hey folks as you know the economy is bad and things are tough for everyone, especially people like me. Donations for charity and websites are way down, so if you can visit the donation page and make a donation to www.oreilly-sucks.com.

Click Here to Make a Donation

The Monday 4-6-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 7, 2009 - 10:00am

The TPM was called Combat Weary? Billy said Obama failed to get combat troops from Europe for the war in Afghanistan. Just as he predicted, except he said he had no confidence Obama could get any help from Europe, when they did agree to send 5,000 troops, so he did get something, and O'Reilly was wrong, even though he refused to admit it.

O'Reilly also speculated that Israel may attack Iran, and that Obama may have to deal with that too. Which is just more speculation, what O'Reilly said he never does. In fact, Billy speculates so much now he should change the name of the show to The Speculation Factor.

Then the far right Newt Gingrich was on to spin the Obama trip and trash Europe. Newt and Billy trashed Obama and Europe, Newt said Obama was too nice. That he should get tough with them like Bush did. When that was tried by Bush and look what that did, it only pissed them off, then after Bush asked them for help they told him to shove it. And Newt wants Obama to do what Bush did, which just shows how stupid he is, and why he was booted out of Congress.

Newt Gingrich is a far right neo-con idiot, if he were the president we would be at war with every country in the world, and he would be worse than Bush was, which is damn hard to do. Yet O'Reilly puts this far right idiot on the air pretty much every week to give us his biased and insane opinions on how to run America and the world. When nobody cares what Newt thinks, except a few far right morons in the Republican party, that's why he was booted out of Congress.

Then O'Reilly had the far right Karl Rove on to trash Obama and Europe some more. Billy asked Rove about Obama saying he would close Gitmo, not torture anyone, and not be an idiot to Europe like Bush was. It was like a straight man setting up a joke for the comedian, Billy set it up and Rove hit it. Rove said Obama made a grave mistake that diminishes him. Which is just crazy, and not true. It's right-wing propaganda from a former Bush administration member.

Europe hated Bush, so how could Obama saying Bush was bad diminish him to Europe, they loved it, and they liked what Obama said, so how in the hell could it diminish him. Rove is a moron, and so is O'Reilly for not calling him on that garbage. Then Billy and Rove said Obama should not say America did anything wrong, when we did, under Bush, they just do not want to ever admit it. Basically it was more one sided right-wing propaganda, with no Democrat to provide any balance, which is a violation of the rules of journalism.

Then O'Reilly had Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on to discuss it. Billy asked them to grade Obama, Juan gave him a B, and Ham gave him a C, or a C-. Juan actually sounded like a Democrat for once and said Obama did well, Ham was the same right-wing idiot as Rove and Gingrich, except not as smart. She trashed Obama and Europe and saw nothing good, and nobody cares what she thinks, and who in the hell is she anyway. She must be a cousin of O'Reilly or something, otherwise she would not even get on tv, she is a right-wing clown, and not a very smart one.

Then O'Reilly went into tabloid trash mode and had a segment on Farah Fawcett and her son, and the culture warriors Hoover and Crowley were on to talk about Palin and Levi, then American Idol gay photo garbage. Billy says he is not a homophobe, but if that's true why did he make a big deal about photos showing two gay men kissing, and he even cropped the photos so you could not see their lips. But when two women kiss he shows that, and shows it over and over, which proves he is a right-wing homophobe, he is just too chicken to admit it.

Then the no reality Reality Check in O'Reilly's mind, except most of the time there is no check. Billy reports 6 stories and usually half of them have no reality, and the rest have no check. So basically the whole segment makes no sense, and O'Reilly just mails it in, just like the pinheads and patriots garbage.

1) Billy said Obama should not have said America did bad things under Bush when he gave his speech in Turkey. Even though Obama was right, it was just reporting a criticism he had of Obama with no check. O'Reilly said Obama was naive, and he said Obama should contact him to write his next speech, yeah right, like that's gonna happen.

2) Billy reported a tobacco ad that used a young boy, no check, just that. Billy did not like it, so I guess somehow that was the reality check, how, I have no idea. Your opinion of a tobacco ad is not a reality check, it's just your opinion.

3) Jolie and Madonna spoofed on SNL, no check, he just played the video from the Saturday SNL show. How that is a reality check on anything, only Billy knows in his warped mind.

4) Billy trashed GE and Jeff Zucker because an NBC affiliate said they will not pick up the new Jay Leno show. How that is their fault is beyond me. It made no sense, and had no check.

5 & 6) Billy told us for the millionth time how great his ratings are, and how he has been #1 for 100 months, no check, and nobody cares but him.

Then pinheads and patriots, and the bogus hand picked and highly edited e-mails. Billy got another e-mail saying he is not fair to Obama, and O'Reilly denied it again for the 100th time. Then he said he has been very fair to Obama. Earth to O'Idiot, if you have to say you have been fair to Obama every other night week after week, then you have not been fair to Obama.

I would also like to point out that O'Reilly has still not said a word about the Obama budget passing the House and the Senate, with no Republican votes, not one. If the Democrats did that to a Republican president O'Reilly would call them un-American traitors. But when Republicans do it to a Democrat president he says nothing, and does not even report the story, because it makes Republicans look bad and he is trying to protect them.

More Proof O'Reilly Ignores Right-Wing Hate
By: Steve - April 6, 2009 - 11:30pm

Billy claims there is no hate on the right, and even does show after show telling his braindead viewers how he can not find any hate anywhere on the right. He even has his stooge Amanda Carpenter on once a week to say there is no hate on the right. Yeah, if you are deaf, dumb, and blind.

There is hate on the right everywhere, O'Reilly and his stooges just ignore it, then lie to the American people about it. I even have a web page where I document example after example of hate and racism from the right, and O'Reilly ignores it all, then claims there is no hate on the right, and he can not find any.

Now we have another example, and of course it was totally ignored by O'Reilly and everyone at FOX. On Saturday at a Kentucky gun show they sold Obama-Hitler t-shirts, with a picture of Hitler and Obama, the text on the shirt said Hitler gave great speeches too. Here is a photo of the t-shirt.



Now compare that to when Bush was president, any time a Democrat mentioned Bush and Hitler O'Reilly did an entire segment about it and said it was wrong. Now it's a whole different story when Republicans do it to Obama, O'Reilly says nothing. Just like when he ignored the Obama waffles, the Obama sock puppet, the Obama Bucks, the Obama Watermelon patch white house photo, and on and on, he ignored it all.

And btw, all the Obama-Hitler t-shirts sold out by 3pm the first day.

The Friday 4-3-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 4, 2009 - 12:30pm

O'Reilly opened the show with a report on the mass killing story in Binghamton NY. He had Geraldo on to discuss it, which was pretty much a waste of time, because we learned nothing new. The story had been on all 3 cable networks all day so we already knew everything O'Reilly and Geraldo reported.

Then Billy did the TPM, it was called European Strategy. Billy said Europe does not like America, wow he's a genius I tell ya, then he asked why, and put out 2 right-wing spin answers. Some crap about how Europe is weak and soft and they worship socialism so that's why they do not like us. When the real answer is George W. Bush, he just will not admit it. Europe liked us when Clinton was president, they only started hating us after Bush took over, and that's a fact, yet O'Reilly denies it.

O'Reilly talked about the Obama speech and said it was good and bad, Billy is skeptical the Obama plan will work, what a shocker, not. He said Obama pandered to them and it still got him nothing. During the speech Obama said America will no longer be arrogant towards Europe and we will no longer torture people, Billy hated that, and called it far-left propaganda, when it's 100% true, he just can't handle the truth.

Bush was an arrogant jerk to Europe and they did torture people, it's a fact, and only right-wing stooges like O'Reilly deny it. And when Bush was the president Billy said we must respect the president, then he calls Obama a liar and a far-left propagandist, talk about disrespect, shut up you jerk, and respect the president.

Then O'Reilly had Major Garrett on again to report live from Europe. And it was the same old right-wing spin we heard the night before, so it was just a waste of tv time. It was probably done just to get Garrett some face time on the #1 rated show on cable news. Then Geraldo was back on to talk about Blagojevich getting indicted. Geraldo said he might get out of it because no money ever changed hands, and he thinks the prosecutor jumped the gun.

O'Reilly told Geraldo he was nuts and said he would be found guilty, yeah and you know what the O'Reilly legal predictions are worth, nothing. He also predicted Tiller would be found guilty, and that Ward Churchill would lose his lawsuit, and he was wrong on both of them. They even talked about the Churchill lawsuit, Billy called him vile and disturbed. Churchill won so he could care less what O'Reilly calls him, and he might get his job back, they have not ruled on that yet. The lesson here is, do not ever believe an O'Reilly legal prediction, because usually he is wrong.

Then O'Reilly had the crazy Glenn Beck on again, he is rubber room crazy yet O'Reilly puts him on every friday night. Billy asked Beck about the Obama speech and he said Obama played it mostly smart, yeah after he spent an hour saying what all he did wrong. Beck does not like what Obama did, what a shocker, and who cares what either Beck or O'Reilly think, nobody except the 1% of Americans who watch their lame shows.

O'Reilly and Beck pretend they are big shots and they have all this power and these massive ratings. When the truth is they are lame ass right-wing spin doctors on a biased cable news network. In an average day about 1.5 million people watch FOX, which is about 0.5% of the population. And 90% of them are Republicans who want to see their news with a right-wing bias. Then O'Reilly gets 3 to 4 million viewers a night, which is maybe 1% of the population.

So in reality almost nobody is watching their lame cable news shows, every night 297 million Americans decide not to watch O'Reilly and Beck. During the segment Beck said Europe is a disaster, it is? They seem to be doing pretty well, and some would say they are doing better than America. No details, just Beck saying it, so it must be true. Beck also said the Federal Government is drifting into fascism. Does he even know what fascism is, I doubt it.

Here is the deal, the weekly O'Reilly/Beck segment is total right-wing propaganda. It's two right-wing spin doctors who sit there and agree with each other, with no Democrat there to provide any balance. It's the same as watching Hannity interview Rove, there is no difference, except Beck is far more crazy than Rove, other than that it's the same thing. It's just time for O'Reilly and his crazy right-wing friend to lie and spin the American people into believing their right-wing propaganda. And it may be the most worthless segment on any news show in the world.

Then the TV Icon crap with 82 year old Cloris Leachman, the pinheads and patriots garbage, and the ego trip e-mails. In answer to one e-mail O'Reilly said he has been fair to Obama, which he has to say at least once a week. Other than being totally ridiculous, think about this, if O'Reilly were actually fair to Obama he would not have to say he is every fricking week. And he would not be getting e-mails every week saying he is not fair to Obama, yet he still denys it, talk about reality check, O'Reilly needs one.

Virtually every night O'Reilly is unfair and disrespectful to president Obama, it's non-stop, and O'Reilly denies it all. But if you just watch his show, and read my blog you will see it. O'Reilly is constantly lying and spinning what Obama said or meant, and what he might do, or not, if it's not a flat out lie, it's spin or total speculation. And he did not do any of this when Bush was president, he only does it now to a Democrat president.

FOX News Caught Lying About Obama Budget Numbers
By: Steve - April 4, 2009 - 7:30am

I sure would love to see O'Reilly and Goldberg report this bias, but that will never happen, because they are right-wing stooges who never report any bias at the FOX News Network.

On April 3rd, 2009 America's Newsroom, the morning news show on FOX, claimed that President Obama's $3.6 trillion fiscal year 2010 budget is "4x bigger than Bush's costliest plan." And here is a screen capture to prove it.



There is one big problem with that statement, it's a bold faced lie. The 2008 Fiscal Year budget for George W. Bush was $2.9 Billion. And the 2009 Fiscal Year budget for George W. Bush was $3.1 Trillion. So not only is it not 4x the Bush budget, it's not even 1x the Bush budget. One time the Bush budget would be $6.2 Trillion, to be 4x the Bush budget it would have to be $12.4 Trillion.

So you FOX kool-aid drinkers will say, ok they just made a mistake and later in the show they got it right. Even though it's almost impossible to make an $8 Trillion dollar mistake, let's just say it was a mistake this one time.

Then how do you explain making that same mistake 2 more times in 2 more different segments. What say you Billy? What say you Bernie?





So not only did FOX lie about the size of the Obama budget compared to the Bush budget, they did it 3 times and never corrected the lie. And what makes it even worse is that in the last Bush budget of $3.1 Trillion he did not include money that would be needed for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. He let it go into the Obama budget so it would make his budget look smaller, and make the Obama budget look bigger.

And FOX News never reported any of that, while at the same time they get caught lying 3 times about the size of the Obama budget. O'Reilly used to say if you have any evidence that FOX News has a right-wing bias send it to him and he will report it. Well Billy, here it is, so you will report it on Monday right? Yeah, and I will also win the lottery on Monday, even though I never bought a ticket.

The Thursday 4-2-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 3, 2009 - 1:30pm

The TPM was called Selling Out? It was O'Reilly basically calling Obama a sell out to Europe, but he adds the question mark so if someone calls him on his disrespect for the president he can say he just asked the question, yeah right a-hole. That's an old FOX News trick they use all the time to smear Democrats. It's like asking if Obama supported Hitler? You imply he did by even asking the question, and it's highly disrespectful, especially when O'Reilly never did anything like that to Bush.

Billy read some crazy op-ed from the WSJ by the president of Denmark, then he implied Obama was going to do the same thing, with Global Justice and shared sacrifice etc. Once again it's nothing but right-wing propaganda, put out by Limbaugh and Hannity, and O'Reilly repeated it like a good little Republican. O'Reilly even said there is no evidence that Obama is doing any of it, yet he did a whole TPM on it and implied he would. It's just more right-wing speculation that has not happened, and he has no evidence it has, yet he reported it anyway.

And think about this, none of this crazy speculation was ever done by O'Reilly when Bush was the president. In fact, O'Reilly had a rule against it, he said he will not speculate and that he only deals in the facts. But now that Obama is the president that rule went out the window, and he speculates his ass off every night about what Obama MIGHT do, according to O'Reilly, even though none of it has happened.

Then O'Reilly put the totally nuts Laura Ingraham on and she was even more off the charts crazy than O'Reilly. She is Glenn Beck crazy, in fact, her and Beck should do a show together and call it Dumb and Dumber. She basically said the same thing O'Reilly did in his TPM, x10 on the crazy meter. Obama is a sell out who did not stand up for America, and that's being respectful to the president, how?

She said Obama should talk tough and lay down the law to the Europeans, just like Bush did. Yeah and look what that did, it made all of Europe hate us, then after we asked them for help in Iraq and Afghanistand they told us to shove it. Even O'Reilly pointed that out and said Obama is trying a different plan from Bush because his tough Texan plan failed big time. Ingraham would have none of it and would not listen to reason, which just shows how crazy she really is, and yet O'Reilly puts her on every week to spew out her insane garbage.

Then Major Garrett from FOX was on to give a report from Europe. Not much to report here, he just said Obama did not get much of what he wanted, and downplayed the trip as not very good. And all during this right-wing propagandafest not one Democrat was ever put on to counter any of it. In O'Reilly world that's fair and balanced journalism.

And btw, during the commercial I found out that Ward Churchill won his wrongful termination lawsuit. The lawsuit O'Reilly and his two right-wing legal experts all said he would lose. That's 0 for 2 Billy, first Dr. Tiller, now Ward Churchill. Billy and his two legal stooges put their partisan ideology ahead of evaluating the facts. They said Dr. Tiller would be found guilty and get 20 years in prison, he was found not guilty on all 19 counts in an hour. Then they said Churchill would lose his lawsuit, and he won. And btw, O'Reilly never said a word about it.

Then O'Reilly did a totally crazy religious segment where he implied the media is anti-religion. Then he played clips of Bill Maher and Lewis Black making religious jokes. Earth to O'Reilly, they are comedians, who tell jokes, and not in the media. He had two Republican religious nuts from FOX, Lauren Green and Gretchen Carlson on to waste a whole segment on this garbage. They claim religion is under attack, which is just insane. Nobody attacks religion, unless they try to force it into schools or Government, and less people are religious today, but they do not attack religion.

It's just another made up attack by O'Reilly, just like the war on Christmas. Billy makes this crap up to create an enemy that's not there, this fires up his right-wing viewers and leads to higher ratings. It's nothing but a fraud to get ratings by making his 95% right-wing viewers think the evil left and the media is attacking religion.

Then O'Reilly reported on the cop killer rally again, why, ratings, there is no other reason to report it again. Billy had Dr. Hill and James Harris on to discuss it, again. Hill is the Democrat and I have to say I disagree with him. He said the people at the rally did not praise the cop killer, ummmmm, yes they did, they called him a hero. So Dr. Hill was wrong. I also think the rally was wrong, you dont march in support of a rapist and a cop killer, period, ever.

Then the no reality Reality Check insanity, I am not going to report it all because most of it was stupid and had no reality check. O'Reilly talked about Sean Penn, dont care, and no check. He said the Chicago Sun Times filed for bankruptcy because they are a liberal paper, when all papers are in trouble because of the recession. And he told us for the millionth time that FOX is #1 in the ratings, when nobody cares but him.

He also lied about MSNBC again, he said their ratings have hit rock bottom. When their ratings are up 24% year to year. That's an improvement, yet O'Reilly calls it sinking to the bottom. And for the first time even MSNBC beat CNN in March, yet O'Reilly ignores all that to lie about their ratings. It's dishonest journalism, and classic O'Reilly lies to make himself look better and make everyone else look bad.

Then the lame pinheads and patriots that O'Reilly just mails in, his pinhead was Madonna, what did she do to be a pinhead, she had a $2,800 outfit on when she visited Africa. How is that being a pinhead? Then the lame ego trip hand picked and highly edited e-mails. And another biased right-wing propaganda filled O'Reilly Factor was over. O'Reilly had 1 Democrat on the entire show, and he was only allowed to talk about the cop killer rally for about 1 minute, while splitting the time with another guest.

The Wednesday 4-1-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 2, 2009 - 10:30am

The TPM was called Crazy Time. Billy cried about the G-20 protests in England, called them loons, the usual right-wing garbage. He said because of the internet they can now plan their operations better and it's a serious deal. Earth to O'Dummy, it was 4,000 people at a protest. Yes a whole 4,000 people, if that's serious I'm Karl Rove. If it was a million people it would be serious, but 4,000, get real. And the 4,000 number may be over-stated, so it might not have even been 4,000.

Then O'Reilly had the right-wing nut Nile Gardiner on from the Heirtage Foundation, and a reporter from London, Olly Barrett. Gardiner agreed with O'Reilly, and the reporter from London said nothing really happened and it was no big deal. Billy said Obama is popular and like a rock star in England, and he wanted to know why, when that is just a stupid question. Barrett said one reason is because he is not Bush, among other things. Billy told Gardiner the internet deal is serious, haha, not. It was a lame 4,000 people, so get a clue man.

Then O'Reilly cried about the NY Times ignoring an ACORN story before the election. Which is so funny, because O'Reilly and FOX News ignore thousands of stories every year that make Republicans look bad. Not to mention the story has not been proven, we dont know the facts yet, and as of today it's all speculation. Billy hammering someone else in the media for ignoring stories is like Dennis Miller hammering other comedians for making bad jokes, it's hypocrisy, and ridiculous.

Billy had Dick Morris on to spin it with him, and he even pointed out to Morris that it was all speculation, O'Reilly admitted it. Yet he reported it anyway, but when Bush was president O'Reilly did not allow speculation and said he only deals in the facts. Now it's nightly speculation when it involves Obama, a Democrat, or a liberal group. So the rules have changed in the middle of the game. And there are two sets of rules now, one for Democrats and one for Republicans.

Note to O'Reilly: try to be a real journalist and only report it when you have the proof, and the facts. This speculation garbage only makes you look like a fool, and the fraud of a journalist you are.

Then the biased one sided policing the net segment with the Republican Amanda Carpenter from townhall.com. You ask where is the Democrat internet cop, Billy dont have one, just Amanda the right-winger. O'Blowhard asked her for reaction on right-wing blogs to the Biden daughter story, she said nothing bad was said about her, anywhere, on the whole internet. And if you believe that I have some land to sell you. I found bad things said about her in 2 minutes, and I only looked at 2 or 3 right-wing blogs and website. Yet Amanda could not find anything, Billy even said he believes her and that she is honest.

Billy compared it to the left hammering Palin, when that is just ridiculous. Palin was running for Vice President, and she proved herself to be a moron in all her interviews. Bidens daughter is the child of a Vice president, and they are supposed to be hands off. To even make that comparison shows how crazy O'Reilly is with the right-wing spin. Then Billy said the left is afraid of Jesse Watters, yeah right. They are just opposed to unfair ambush interviews, especially when they break your own rules. Nobody fears you Billy, and you are the coward, you are afraid to even have me on your show, so you are the coward, and you are afraid of me.

You go on Letterman because you know he dont watch your show and he can not nail you like I could. So you hide from me and you are afraid to let me on your show, so the only coward is you. Then Billy had a stripper on to talk about going from wall street to the strip club. Which was just an excuse to run video of girls in strip clubs for his perverted old viewers who get a cheap thrill from it.

Then Billy went on another ego trip and pimped his appearence on Letterman. He showed video clips of the interview, and of course he edited it to make himself look as good as possible. Letterman called Billy a Goon, two times, O'Reilly ignored that part. Letterman compared O'Reilly to Limbaugh and Beck, and O'Reilly tried to deny it. Dave was not buying it. O'Reilly defended Limbaugh and said it was a cheap shot. Letterman also said O'Reilly makes stuff up, Billy denied it and said he is a journalist who deals in the facts.

I guess he dont watch his own show because it's light on facts and heavy on speculation. I report on his speculation pretty much every night in this blog, just read it. So basically O'Reilly lied on Letterman, right to his face. Letterman also said O'Reilly is too smart to believe what he says, earth to Dave, no he's not. He is that stupid, and he actually believes most of the right-wing garbage he spews out, so you are wrong Dave.

Then a repeat of old Dennis Miller garbage, Billy called it the best of Dennis Miller. I call it old and tired crap we already saw that was not funny then, and it's not funny the 2nd time either. Then the pinheads and patriots and the lame e-mail segment.

Not a word about the crazy Republican budget they came out with, the one that gives $4 Trillion dollars in tax cuts to the wealthy, and the same budget that makes the defecit $400 Billion more than the Obama budget. Of course O'Reilly never reported that, because it makes Republicans look like the fools they are. And not a word about the Ted Stevens story, the Democrat AG threw his guilty verdict out for prosecutor misconduct.

And Billy ignored both of them, I guess real news is too boring for him, and he might have had to cut the stripper segment. And that was another fact filled real news show from Billy and all his objective and non-partisan guests, NOT!

O'Reilly Gets a 2 For 1 in Worlds Worst Persons
By: Steve - April 1, 2009 - 1:00pm

From the Tuesday 3-31-09 Countdown with Keith Olbermann:

OLBERMANN: The bronze is shared by two men who we will identify in a moment. They believe to stop drug use here, we need to adopt a system used in Singapore. Public man number one says, “now, they have no drug problem in Singapore at all, because, number one, they hang drug dealers. They execute them.”

Number two, “the market is very thin because when they catch you using, you go away with mandatory rehab. The United States does not have the stomach for that.” So public man number two says, “I think it‘s time we get the stomach for that. I would dramatically expand testing. I would try to use rehabilitation. I would make it mandatory.

I think we have every right as a country to demand of our citizens that they quit doing illegal things which are funding, both Afghanistan and in Mexico and Colombia, people who are destroying civilization.”

Who are these dangerous men, proposing these socialistic, invasive, totalitarian measures that are used in some other country called Singapore? Who wants to hang drug dealers and mandate drug tests and have federal drug rehab centers? Maybe Barack Obama and Michael Moore?

No, Bill O‘Reilly and Newt Gingrich. Bill apparently went to Singapore on one of his tours of the east, if you know what I mean. And that Singapore, which has had one-party rule since 1959, has censorship and doesn‘t have jury trials.

Our runner-up, a two-fer for Bill-O. On his own, no Newt requited. Not happy that a Spanish magistrate is investigating possible indictments on war crimes of six ex-Bush administration officials, led his show with an announcement, right from the files of William Randolph Hearst from 1898, “Spain, insulting the USA.”

Well, he knows how to fix that. “So here‘s the deal, Spain. If this—so here‘s the deal, Spain: if this action goes forward, you‘ll be insulting America, implying we are the problem in the terror war. Unless this action is condemned by Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero, then I am not going to that country.”

That will show them! The prime minister should issue a one-word statement, gracias. Say, Bill, if we begin an investigation of these six Bushes in the U.S., will you promise not to go here either? As promised, there‘s a Bill-O two-fer. He also reiterated his delusion about the It Happened to Alexa Foundation, where Bill-O was thoroughly criticized for having the gal to address a fund raiser for rape victims, after twice publicly blaming rape victims, then sending a producer to stalk a woman who wrote a blog post about his hypocrisy.

UPS promptly dropped out as an advertiser in protest of Bill-O‘s victimization of Amanda Terkel of ThinkProgress.org. That‘s not how he sees it, of course. “Far left zealots have attacked a rape victim and her family because they asked me to speak at their fund raiser. Democratic operative John Podesta and NBC boss Jeff Zucker allowed underlings to trash the It Happened to Alexa Foundation, causing Alexa Branchini and her family great distress. Well, now we have some good news. A charity has donated 20,000 dollars to help Alexa‘s cause. And Raptor Technologies, which makes computer software, has donated 15,000.

By the way, Mr. Podesta and Mr. Zucker have donated nothing. One other footnote, disappointingly, the UPS Corporation helped Podesta and Zucker in their evil deed. Check is quite surprised. UPS needs to wise up fast.”

You saw what I did to Spain, UPS. By the way, Jeff Zucker did not make a donation to the It Happened to Alexa Foundation because I did of 25,000. Let‘s see if Bill really cares about the foundation enough to mention that on the air?

O'Reilly Busted For Spinning Judge Ambush
By: Steve - April 1, 2009 - 12:45pm

Last week, O'Reilly broadcast another ambush conducted by Jesse Watters. This one was of J. Rodgers Padgett, a Florida judge who angered O'Reilly by releasing a convicted sex offender on bail pending appeal. This time, Watters and Padgett nearly came to blows. The producer surprised Padgett inside a convenience store and then, when the judge tried to leave, Watters used his leg to block Padgett from closing his car door.

That this ambush nearly escalated to violence is bad enough, but what's worse is the way O'Reilly and Watters twisted the facts of the situation. Clearly, no one wants to see a newly convicted sex offender out on the street, certainly not one like the man convicted in this case, whose victim is mentally challenged. But O'Reilly and Watters made it seem as if the judge had a choice in the matter, with Watters even using some loaded language -- "obviously this guy's got some predilection to being soft on sex offenders" -- in a way that seemed to suggest that perhaps Padgett had ulterior motives.

Turns out, unsurprisingly, that the real story differs sharply from the way O'Reilly told it. John Campbell, a local defense lawyer, told Tampa's News Channel 8, "As a matter of law, Judge Padgett had no choice... I would like to see that gentleman locked up as well, but the law doesn't allow for it." According to Campbell, unless it was shown that the convict is a flight risk, he had to be let out on bail pending appeal.

Moreover, as he does in most cases -- O'Reilly claimed that the only reason he sent Watters out for the ambush was that they had contacted Padgett, who'd refused to speak to the show. That may be true, but it ignores an important fact: As News Channel 8 reported, "Under Florida law, sitting judges are not allowed to discuss pending cases."

O'Reilly's broadcast has inspired protests from local residents. It's also done some damage to our legal system, the idea that people are entitled to due process. Cable news shows focusing on crime generally oversimplify the law, but this sort of thing is on a different level entirely. In O'Reilly's world, if a judge acts in a way we don't like, then it's time to get him, facts and law be damned. That sort of attitude won't end well for anyone.

And that's how most of the O'Reilly ambushes turn out, he leaves out all the important facts, and spins it to dishonestly represent the situation. O'Reilly ambushed the judge because he refused to talk to the Factor, when by law he can not talk about a pending case. Then he implied the judge was a bad man who took it easy on a child molester, when all the judge did was follow the law, and he had no choice in the matter.

On the View O'Reilly admitted he has to create an enemy every night, well he did, but in this case he did it dishonestly, just to have an enemy to get ratings from his right-wing viewers. This is not journalism, it's fraud, and bias, and it shows that O'Reilly is just a right-wing con man who dreams up an enemy for his show, even when there is no enemy there.