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.
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.
(BEGIN 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!
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)
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.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.
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.
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.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.
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.
| 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. |
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.
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.
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.Article 3
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.
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.And that is not all, there are 33 articles that cover torture, you can read them all here.
2. Each State Party shall make these offences punishable by appropriate penalties which take into account their grave nature.
1. Each State Party shall take effective legislative, administrative, judicial or other measures to prevent acts of torture in any territory under its jurisdiction.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.
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.
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.
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.
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.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.
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!
GRODIN: We can waterboard you?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.
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.
"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.
HENICAN: You’re coming out for torture now?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.
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.
"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.
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.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.
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.
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.Full Story Here:
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.
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.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.
McCain later reiterated his point, "The image of the United States of America throughout the world is a recruiting tool for Islamic extremists."
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.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.
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.
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?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.
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.
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:
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.
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?
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.
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.
* Beck says the report singled out veterans and targeted them for investigation of possible far-right extremism.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.
* 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.
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.
"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.
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.
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.
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.
"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.
"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.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.
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.
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.
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."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.
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.
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.
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.
