David Letterman Slams O'Reilly For Not Telling The Truth
1-24-08 -- Letterman had John Edwards on and he asked him about Bill O'Reilly, this is what they said.
LETTERMAN: Tell me a little bit about your feud with Bill O'Reilly. Now there's a tough guy. He's been on the show a couple of times. And he's a tough guy. What's going on there? What's at the core of the feud?Notice that John Edwards did not say the veterans are homeless because of the economy. And he has never said that, he is only saying it is embarrassing to have 200,000 homeless vets in America. He does not link it to the ecomomy, and he never has, Edwards says it is a moral issue, not an economic issue. And Letterman is exactly right, O'Reilly does not really care about the truth. All he cares about is putting out right-wing propaganda and spin to make liberals look bad.
EDWARDS: Well, the core of the feud is I've been talking about homeless veterans and the fact that we have a couple hundred thousand homeless veterans who have no place to sleep at night. They're either in shelters...
LETTERMAN: It's embarrassing, isn't it?
EDWARDS: It's incredibly embarrassing for America. Huge moral issue facing the country. And he kind of went on his show and said that I was exaggerating, making it up. And I think he got a lot of correspondence, a lot of homeless veterans have been calling in.
LETTERMAN: Well, you know what I've noticed about Bill O'Reilly ? and he's a marvelous communicator. But he's not -- he doesn't really care much about telling the truth.
Two More Bill O'Reilly Lies Exposed
- 1-23-08 -- Billy had Newt Gingrich on the Factor monday night and he said nobody is watching the Democratic debates on CNN, or MSNBC, haha, that's a lie.
Dems on CNN: Most Watched Primary Debate in Cable News History
The Democratic Debate in South Carolina on CNN (from 8pm-10:05pmET) was the #1 most-watched primary debate in cable news history among total viewers and all key demos.
The debate averaged 4.9 million Total Viewers and nearly 2 million in A25-54.
A few months ago in November of 2007 ABC News actually beat NBC News in the ratings a few times, for 3 or 4 weeks. Billy used that to claim the reason NBC News is getting beat by ABC News is because NBC has moved to the left and people stopped watching them. But since November of 2007 NBC News has beat ABC News virtually every week, yet not a word of that has been reported by O'Reilly.
The real truth goes like this, there was a short period of 3 or 4 weeks when ABC beat NBC, the rest of the year NBC beat ABC. And NBC has beat ABC for 7 weeks in a row.
What O'Reilly did was cherry pick a month of ratings where ABC barely beat NBC, then claimed ABC beats them all the time because NBC moved left and their viewers are leaving.
The facts show a whole different story. The news ratings year is from September to September.
Evening News Ratings: 2006-2007 Season
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams wins in total viewers for the 2006-2007 season. The season ran from Sept. 18, 2006 to Sept. 23, 2007.
NBC - 8.4 Million Total Viewers
ABC - 8.36 Million Total Viewers
CBS - 6.74 Million Total Viewers
Evening News Ratings: Week of Jan. 14, 2008
NBC Nightly News with Brian Williams finished first for the seventh straight week.
Total viewers: NBC: 9,570,000 / ABC: 9,230,000 / CBS: 7,240,000
Proof Bush Lied (Will Billy Report The Story)
- 1-23-08 -- O'Reilly has said over and over in the last few years that George W. Bush has never lied about anything, and he said if you have evidence he has lied send it to him and he will report it. But I send him evidence all the time about Bush lies and he never reports any of it. At least once a month I send an e-mail to Billy showing him a bush lie, or lies, and he never reports it, ever, not once.
Now we have a new study that shows Bush, or someone in his administration lied 935 times about Iraq, if O'Reilly is a man of his word (which it has already been proven he's not) he will report on this study tonight on the factor. I would bet the farm he will not report it, just as he did not report on the Republican Congressman charged with 3 counts on conspiracy to fund a terrorist.
President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard
On at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony, and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration's case for war.
It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda. This was the conclusion of numerous bipartisan government investigations, including those by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (2004 and 2006), the 9/11 Commission, and the multinational Iraq Survey Group, whose "Duelfer Report" established that Saddam Hussein had terminated Iraq's nuclear program in 1991 and made little effort to restart it.
In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003. Not surprisingly, the officials with the most opportunities to make speeches, grant media interviews, and otherwise frame the public debate also made the most false statements, according to this first-ever analysis of the entire body of prewar rhetoric.
President Bush, for example, made 232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Secretary of State Powell had the second-highest total in the two-year period, with 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed by Wolfowitz (with 85), Rice (with 56), Cheney (with 48), and McClellan (with 14).
UPDATE - 1-24-08 -- This study shows that Bush and people in his administration LIED, it shows they knowingly made false statements, it shows that at the time they made the statements they knew it was a lie. O'Reilly has been saying they did not lie because at the time they made the statements they thought what they were saying was true because of the intelligence.
This study proves they knew they were lying at the time they made the statements. So the spin from O'Reilly that they did not lie (because they believed the intelligence) is no good anymore. The study shows that at the time they said the lies they knew they were lying.
And as I predicted yesterday, Bill O'Reilly did not say a word about the Study showing the 935 false statements made by Bush and his administrstion on the wednesday 1-23-08 Factor. The story was totally ignored, even though O'Reilly had asked people to send him evidence of Bush lies, he ignored the evidence and did not report it, as he said he would. This was a breaking news national news story yesterday, it was reported on Yahoo News, ABC, NBC, CBS, The NY Times, The Washington Post, Headline News, CNN, and MSNBC, but not on the O'Reilly factor, or any FOX so-called News shows.
The study got a short mention on Brit Hume, in the grapevine segment. They dismissed the facts as old news and the report itself, even though they did not dispute any of the study's findings. No other FOX News show said a word about the study, none.
Bill O'Reilly is Lying About John Edwards
- 1-21-08 -- Billy claims that John Edwards said the 200,000 veterans are homeless because of the economy, and he claims that is why he is so mad at John Edwards. That is a lie, Edwards never said that, ever. Bill O'Reilly has linked the two statements from the Edwards speech when there is no link.
Here is the real truth. The 1-3-08 Iowa Iowa Caucus speech by John Edwards was about the two America's. I just read a transcript of the entire speech.
Edwards talked about the America he sees today. How he is speaking up against corporate greed and speaking about the 37 million Americans who live in poverty. Then later in the speech he mentioned the 200,000 homeless veterans, and how in the great country of America not one of those veterans should be homeless. John Edwards did not say the 200,000 veterans are homeless because of the economy, not once.
Bill O'Reilly made that part up so he could attack Edwards. What John Edwards said is that we need one America, not two America's, as Bush and the Republicans have created, and then he also said we should take care of the homeless veterans. He thinks it is wrong to pay a CEO $150 million dollars a year, when Republicans vote against raising the minimum wage to $7 an hour.
But not once did John Edwards say the 200,000 veterans are homeless because of the economy. He only pointed out that in the America George W. Bush has control of the Republicans let 200,000 veterans go homeless. He was not saying they are homeless because of the economy.
John Edwards was saying they are homeless because chickenhawks like Bush, Cheney, and O'Reilly claim to support the troops. But when they come back from war they kick them to the curb and dont take care of them. He is saying that war mongers like O'Reilly, Bush, Cheney, etc. support the wars, then ignore the troops when they come home from those wars.
And John Edwards is exactly right. Bush and the chickenhawks like O'Reilly have no problem spending $8 Billion dollars a month on the Iraq war, but when the Democrats try to get a couple Billion dollars for homeless veterans the Republicans vote it down. The VA only spends $500 million dollars a year on the veterans, which is about what the Bush administration spends in 2 days in Iraq.
O'Reilly took Edwards quotes out of context then put his spin on what Edwards was saying. The speech had 2 parts, one part talked about the two America's and poverty, and the other part talked about the bad treatment the homeless veterans are getting from the Republicans and the Bush administration.
Billy linked the two parts of the speech, when there was no link, go read the speech for yourself. Then you will have the truth, not the right-wing spin from Billy trying to make John Edwards look bad after he told everyone to boycott FOX because of their right-wing bias. O'Reilly did it for revenge, because he got mad at Edwards when he told all the Democrats to not do the debate sponsored by FOX.
And Edwards was right about that too, FOX has a bias to Democrats, so none of them should ever do any FOX (fake) News shows. The FOX News Network is nothing but an arm of the Republican party. And everyone knows it, the only people who deny it are the stooges who work for FOX. Every other person in America knows that, the only people who dont admit it are FOX employees, or other Republicans.
Perfect Example of Republican Bias by Bill O'Reilly
- 1-17-08 -- Yesterday we had breaking news on the internet, in the newspapers, and on the cable news networks, it was reported by CNN, MSNBC, and even Shepard Smith on FOX News had a one minute report on it. The story is about a former Republican Congressman from Michigan being charged with conspiracy to help fund terrorism.
The money laundering, conspiracy and obstruction of justice charges against former Michigan Rep. Mark Deli Siljander are part of a 42-count indictment released by the U.S. attorney's office in Kansas City, Missouri. Siljander is accused of lying to federal agents and prosecutors about his work for the group, which allegedly steered $260,000 to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar -- an ally of the Taliban and al Qaeda.
Now we all know that Billy is the terror warrior, and that he constantly reports on terrorism and national security, yet as I predicted yesterday in my forums Billy never said a word about the story, not a word. Billy ignored the story because they guy is a Republican, if he were a Democrat you can bet your house Billy would have done 15 minutes on it, with follow up stories telling everyone how Democrats are helping terrorists.
Yet because the guy is a Republican it is totally ignored by Bill O'Reilly. But he had time to report a local news story in some hick town that nobody cares about, where some swingers have a club. This is not a national news story, hell it's not even real news, it's tabloid garbage that should be reported by TMZ.com, not a so-called national news show. So Billy ignores the real news (a national news story) because it's a Republican, and reports on a swingers club instead.
Good job Billy, once again you prove that loyalty to the Republican party is more important than reporting real news.
O'Reilly Downplays Number of Homeless Veterans
- 1-17-08 -- By Iraq veteran Paul Rieckhoff
Tuesday night on The O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly repeated his ridiculous assertion that there are few, if any, homeless veterans in America. O'Reilly raised an important topic: the plight of homeless veterans. Too bad he got the facts wrong.
There are almost 200,000 homeless veterans in America. Let me introduce you to one:
Less than a year after serving with the 3rd Infantry Division in Iraq, twenty-five year old Herold Noel found himself unemployed, homeless, and unable to provide for his wife and four children.Herald is not alone. Already, an estimated 1,500 Iraq and Afghanistan veterans are homeless or at risk for homelessness. They are joining the increasing ranks of veterans who are homeless.
As a homeless Iraq veteran suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and living out of his car in Brooklyn, Herold was not greeted by a support system for veterans. Instead, he met resistance from the Housing Authority, the VA, and New York's city shelter for families, filling out form after form and added to waiting list after waiting list.
According to Herold, "I thought New York was going to look out for me, I just got back from war. I felt like I'd been stabbed in the back."
Bill, here are the facts. Veterans represent one-third of the adult homeless population in this country, and that number is rising. While almost 200,000 homeless veterans line the nation's streets every night, almost twice as many experience homelessness at some point throughout the course of a year. Essentially, we have the population of Des Moines, Iowa or Montgomery, Alabama "sleeping under bridges."
This is a national disgrace. As Americans we should be ashamed and outraged that the brave men and women of our Armed Forces are being abandoned under bridges, not denying their existence. As one of the most watched cable news hosts on television, Bill O'Reilly has a great opportunity to help homeless veterans by bringing more attention to the issue. Join IAVA in urging him to be part of the solution.
Click here to sign an open letter to Bill O'Reilly, telling him to set the record straight about the very real problem of homeless veterans in America. We also have a resource center where people can learn more, and find ways they can help.
STEWERT: Here is my question, now that Billy knows there is a real problem with homeless veterans, will he do something about it, or continue to deny it, and ignore the problem because it makes him, Bush, and all the Republicans who claim they support the troops look bad.
What say you Billy?
Earth to Bill O'Reilly (There Are 195,000 Homeless Veterans in America)
- 1-16-08 -- Last night O'Reilly had the progressive Ed Schultz on the Factor, thet talked about the statement by John Edwards that 200,000 veterans are homeless in America. O'Reilly said this:
"They may be out there, but there's not many of them out there. Okay? If you know where there is a veteran, sleeping under a bridge, you call me immediately, and we will make sure that man does not do it."
Well Billy you better get busy, because right now on the Department of Veterans Affairs website says about 195,000 veterans are "homeless on any given night."
The department believes that one-third of the adult homeless population of the United States "have served their country in the Armed Services." About 195,000 veterans are "homeless on any given night" and perhaps twice as many experience homelessness at some point during the course of a year.Note to Billy: You may be able to fool the clueless viewers who watch your pretend News show, but the facts dont lie. And those numbers do not come from the NY Times, or some liberal, they are from The Department of Veterans Affairs.
Veterans Affairs estimates that about 45 percent of homeless veterans suffer from mental illness, and 70 percent from alcohol abuse or other drug abuse problems. Roughly 56 percent are African American or Hispanic.
Another O'Reilly Spin/Lie Exposed
- 1-14-08 -- Billy claims that www.mediamatters.org only attacks Conservatives like him at FOX, and other Conservatives in the media. Yet if you go to their website the whole front page is filled with attacks on Chris Matthews at MSNBC. And they also attack the NY Times for bias too.
Media Matters attacks anyone who has a bias, Conservative or Liberal. What Billy does is try to demonize them by claiming they only attack him and other Conservatives. That is just not true, and it's more proof of the spin and bias from O'Reilly, and why mediamatters.org attacks him.
They do attack more Conservatives than Liberals, that is true, because they have the most bias, and they tell the most lies. But they also attack so-called Liberals like Chris Matthews and the NY Times. In fact, right now Media Matters has attacks on MSNBC, Chris Matthews, The NY Times, Tim Russert, Bob Herbert, and ABC News, all so-called Liberals according to O'Reilly etc.
Great O'Reilly Spin on Liberals And Religion
- 1-11-08 -- On the January 4th O'Reilly Factor, in a discussion with Laura Ingraham about Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson's 2008 predictions, O'Reilly stated:
"The secular-progressive far left says, look, all these people are crazy; all believers are nuts. They're dangerous people. ... Mitt Romney is a dangerous Mormon."
That is so wrong I don't know where to start. To begin with the far left does not think all religious people are crazy. And in fact, a great deal of the far left are religious, and they also believe in God. We do not think all believers are nuts, only a select few, like Pat Robertson for example. Some on the left think Romney could be dangerous, but only if he were to become president and let his religion guide him on political matters.
Liberals could care less about your religion, as long as you keep it to yourself, in your church, and in your private prayers. We just don't want religion in Government, Politics, or schools. So O'Reilly's claim that the far left thinks all believers are crazy nuts is ridiculous.
Basically O'Reilly said Liberals would not vote for a Morman because we all think believers are crazy nuts. This was said to demonize Liberals and make it look like they hate people of faith, which is totally insane. And here is the real truth.
The group of Americans most likely to say they value religiosity in a president -- white evangelical Protestants -- is also the group most apt to be bothered by Romney's religion. More than one-in-three evangelical Republicans (36%) expressed reservations about voting for a Mormon, a level of opposition much higher than that seen among the electorate overall.These poll results prove that O'Reilly just makes it up as he goes to fit his agenda. Which is to do everything possible to make Liberals look bad. Even when the facts show the opposite, O'Reilly still lies about it to fit his right-wing agenda. More Liberals (75%) are willing to vote for a Mormon than Conservatives (66%) are, yet Billy said the exact opposite.
According to a February 9-11, 2007, USA Today/Gallup poll, 75 percent of "liberals" would be willing to vote for a Mormon for president, compared with 66 percent of "conservatives." Gallup's analysis of the poll stated: "Conservatives are less willing than moderates or liberals to vote for candidates with several of the characteristics [of a 'non-traditional candidate'], including being of Mormon faith or married three times.
I personally do not care what religion a person is, I judge them on their policies, the issues they support, and what they say and do, not what religion they are. I don't even want to know what religion a person is, because I don't care. I just want them to keep their religion out of politics, Government, and schools.
O'Reilly Spins Media Bias Study
- 1-10-08 -- A new study on media bias came out while Billy was on his 2 week holiday vacation. It was done by the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA). Last night Billy had Dr. S. Robert Lichter of the CMPA to discuss the study that surprise, surprise, found FOX News to be more fair than the network nightly news when it came to reporting on politics.
Then Billy and the Dr. spent the entire segment spinning the biased study. Not once did Billy mention that Dr. Lichter is a far right conservative. From 1986 to 1988, Robert Lichter was a fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Funny how Billy never mentioned that.
Hey Billy what happened to full disclosure? He also failed to mention this:
CMPA's claim to be non-partisan is incompatible with the fact that nearly all its funding comes from conservative foundations.
The Center for Media and Public Affairs was founded in the mid 1980s by S. Robert Lichter and Linda Lichter. The seed money for the center was solicited by the likes of Pat Buchanan and Pat Robertson.
CMPA's claim to be 'non-partisan' is undermined by an analysis of its sources of funding. Information provided by mediatransparency.org reveals that the overwhelming proportion of CMPA's funding comes from conservative foundations.
The funding information, covering 1986-2002, lists the following donors:
* Carthage Foundation, part of the Scaife Foundations - $267,000 from 5 donations
* Earhart Foundation
* John M. Olin Foundation - $730,000 from 15 donations
* Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation
* Sarah Scaife Foundation, part of the Scaife Foundations - $760,000 from 9 donations
* Smith Richardson Foundation - $416,916 from 3 donations
Here is a sample of other right-wing causes funded by these donors, as listed by their respective SourceWatch articles:
* John M. Olin Foundation - American Enterprise Institute, Project for the New American Century
* Scaife Foundations - American Enterprise Institute, Heritage Foundation
* Smith Richardson Foundation - American Enterprise Institute, Hudson Institute
These foundations also contribute heavily to more overtly right-wing media pressure groups like Reed Irvine's Accuracy In Media, L. Brent Bozell's Media Research Center, and David Horowitz's Committee on Media Integrity.
According to Joe Conason, the availability of this information does not indicate an openness on the part of the Center for Media and Public Affairs. In a Jan 2003 exchange of views with Lichter, Conason said "The IRS form 990 returns filed by Lichter's center redacts the names of all the individuals and organizations that contribute to it, thereby concealing them from public scrutiny.
In summary. The CMPA is a biased right-wing media watchdog group, all their funding comes from Conservatives. They ignore all Conservative bias in the media and only report on Liberal bias (that they cherry pick) based on biased studies that they do, or studies from other biased Conservative media watchdog groups. And the only people who use them as a source for anything, are other Conservatives who want to make the media look like it only has a Liberal bias.
The old line, one guy lies and the other guy swears to it, fits here. Groups like Accuracy In Media, L. Brent Bozell's Media Research Center, and David Horowitz, put out biased and rigged studies on media bias that skew the results and ignore important data. Then they claim FOX News is the most fair and balanced news network on television.
Then right-wing stooges like O'Reilly, Hannity, etc. cite their biased and flawed studies to claim it as fact. They have no credibility at all, none. And the fact that O'Reilly used their biased and flawed study (from a biased Conservative watchdog group) without telling anyone about their bias or disclosing who funds them says it all.
O'Reilly screams bloody murder about corruption in the media, when he is more corrupt than anyone. Billy demands full disclosure from everyone else, then fails to do it himself. He knowingly put Dr. Lichter on the air to report on a biased and flawed study put out by a partisan media watchdog group, without disclosing their bias or who provides their funding.
And O'Reilly did it with no guest to give the counterpoint to the CMPA study, because he knew he would be exposed for his corruption and bias if he did. It's fraud, unethical, and wrong. But standard procedure for the right-wing biased O'Reilly Factor.
On top of all that, the CMPA study only used the firt 30 minutes of Special Report with Brit Hume as a comparison to the other nightly news shows on NBC, ABC, and CBS. The study basically excluded the part of the Brit Hume show with all the bias, the last 30 minutes. The study also excluded the other highly right-wing biased shows like the O'Reilly Factor, Hannity & Colmes, John Gibson, etc. and all other FOX News shows, which is where all the right-wing bias is on FOX.
So the CMPA study is totally flawed and totally bogus, it has zero credibility, none, nada. Basically the study is not even worth the paper it was printed on. It would be like having a Liberal media watchdog group do a study on bias at MSNBC, and excluding the Keith Olbermann show. That study would be totally bogus and have no credibility also. If CMPA wanted to do a real fair and balanced study of the nightly news shows, they should have used the entire hour, or the last 30 minutes of the Brit Hume show, because that is where all the bias happens.
Bill O'Reilly Actually Attacks Somebody Taller Puppet Theater
- 1-8-08 -- Then there is Bill O., reduced to doing his impression of stuttering John from the "Howard Stern Show", seeking an interview with Senator Obama. He pushed an Obama staffer and had to be restrained by the secret service.
Bill O. then told his audience he did not push an Obama staffer and was not restrained by the secret service. Tonight, he told them he had to push Marvin Nicholson to, quote, "uphold the Constitution" or, maybe, it was the Declaration of Independence-sometimes, Bill gets those two confused. With "You Tube" enthusiast, we have video of everything that happened.
Gee whiz, Bill, he was on this show in October 2006. Airing his version of the altercation tonight, Bill O. actually bleeped that phrase 'son of a bitch'. He bleeped himself calling Nicholson a, quote, "son of a bitch". Anyway, for what we did not see, of course, we have "Bill O'Reilly Actually Attacks Somebody Taller" puppet theater.
PUPPET 1: I don't think we are supposed to be here, Bill. This is for the public so that they can shake Senator Obama's hand. I think they want us to move.
PUPPET BILL O'REILLY: Behold, I'm Bill O'Reilly, destroyer of worlds. No one on this earth is going to block a shot on "The O'Reilly Factor". It is not going to happen. Don't you know who I am? I am Bill O'Reilly, Fox News channel noise network. You're in our way. You're blocking our shot.
PUPPET 2: Oh. Am I?
PUPPET BILL O'REILLY: Move. Move. Mooove. Moooooove.
Oh, no, the secret service.
PUPPET MARVIN NICHOLSON: Sir, I'd really appreciate it if you didn't shove me again.
PUPPET BILL O'REILLY: You son of a bitch. I can edit out that 'son of a bitch' part later. Hey, senator! Senator, a word please. That's really low class, pal. Really low class. And, everybody in the world will see it. Senator!
PUPPET SECRET SERVICE AGENT: Sir, you need to calm down and get behind that barricade with the rest of the presseys.
PUPPET BILL O'REILLY: I'm Bill O'Reilly, Bill O'Reilly, Bill O'Reilly, testing one, two, three. Loofah! Loofah! The secret service is not involved. The secret service is not involved. Don't tase me, bro, don't tase me.
Keith-O Names Billy Worst Person in The World (Again)
- 1-8-08 -- our winner-it's Bill O. night. He brushed at John Edwards for noting in Iowa that 200,000 vets sleep each night under bridges and on graves. Quoting Bill O.:
"The only thing sleeping under a bridge is that guy's brain. Ten million illegal alien workers are sending billions of dollars back home and Edwards is running around saying nobody has any money."
Seriously, first off, Lou Dobbs is going to kick your backside for working his side of the street. Secondly, it's 200,000 tonight over the course of the year. The veterans administration says 336,000 vets will be homeless on and off. Why don't you try changing positions with one of them, Bill? See how long you last and then run your mouth about Edwards.
The over/under on that, by the way, would be three minutes. Bill O'Reilly:
tonight's "worst person in the world".
O'Reilly Roughs Up Obama Aide, Forced Back by Secret Service
- 1-6-08 -- On Friday O'Reilly crossed into a Secret Service security zone around Obama, without permission, and got into a scuffling match with an Obama senior staffer.
The incident was triggered when O'Reilly with a Fox News crew shooting was screaming at Obama National Trip Director Marvin Nicholson "Move" so he could get Obama's attention, according to several eyewitnesses.
O'Reilly was yelling at him, yelling at his face, a photographer shooting the scene said.
O'Reilly grabbed Nicholson's arm, said "move" and shoved him, another eyewitness said. Nicholson said O'Reilly called him "low class." Numerous sources say Secret Service agents came after O'Reilly pushed Nicholson and the agents flanked O'Reilly.
O'Reilly later tried to justify his breach of security by declaring, "We're sorry we had to have that little confrontation, but no one on this earth is going to block a shot on "The O'Reilly Factor." It is not going to happen," O'Reilly said, according to the Associated Press.
The Associated Press also noted that the Obama aide, Marvin Nicholson, "said O'Reilly yelled at him to get out of the way of his cameraman's shot. Nicholson said O'Reilly came around the waist-high barricade separating Obama from well-wishers. Then he grabbed me with both of his arms and tried to push me out of the way.
The Secret Service stepped in and moved O'Reilly outside the security zone.
According to the AP, O'Reilly was also seen trying to coax an audience member into asking Hillary a question about Iraq. It's what you call a set-up. The same kind of set-up Billy said was wrong when CNN did it with the Gay General.
Obama's aide commented, "I've never seen a member of the press lay hands on a staffer before."
O'Reilly said he will report on it monday, hey Billy, why not show the tape un-edited, no spin zone right?
O'Reilly insists that there was no scuffle, only a "removal" of a man that was blocking his shot. As for reports of profanity, O'Reilly says he may have called his target an "S.O.B." but nothing more. He also denies being "restrained" by two Secret Service agents, reported to have flanked him and escorted him away.
That's funny because there is a photo showing the two secret service agents restrainng O'Reilly.
Billy Just Lied About His Ratings
- 1-2-08 -- About 15 minutes ago Billy had a segment on Iowa, and he had a Democratic strategist on with a Republican strategist, both women. Billy ran the Huckabee ad and asked for opinions. The Republican strategist told Billy he helped Huckabee by running that ad because 2 million people just saw it.
Billy cut her off and said wrong, double that, and he said 4 million people just saw it. Earth to Billy, that is a lie. And here are the numbers to prove it. The monthly December numbers are not out yet, so I will post the October 2007 and November 2007 numbers.
The O'Reilly factor averaged 2.2 million total viewers a night in October of 2007.
The O'Reilly factor averaged 2.3 million total viewers a night in November of 2007.
Hey Billy, 2.2 million, or 2.3 million, is not 4 million, it's not even close, so stop lying. Even if you count the 11:00pm re-run (which nobody does) the Factor only gets 3 million total viewers a night, and 3 million is not 4 million either, so he's still lying even if you add the re-run numbers.