The Friday 5-29-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 30, 2009 - 1:55pm

The TPM was called Civil Rights Watch, Billy said left-wing zealots are violating his civil rights by speaking out for gay rights and calling him a bigot. Which is just ridiculous, and if you read the next blog posting I have below you can read all about his insanity. Basically he called them left-wing loons, and said they violated his rights for speaking out on issues they support and calling him names. The whole thing is just crazy, it was like watching a skit on Saturday Night Live, or MadTV, not a so-called hard news show.

After the insane Jami Floyd and Tanya Acker segment Billy had Bartle Bull on to discuss a Black Panther voter intimidation legal case from 2008, and yes that is his real name. Billy and Bartle spent 4 minutes crying about Eric Holder dropping the charges against THREE Black Panthers who intimidated voters at ONE voting location in Philly. Earth to morons, it was done by THREE guys at ONE voting location, should we spend a million dollars of taxpayer money to prosecute THREE guys for minor charges of voter intimidation at ONE polling place.

I say no, what they did was wrong, it should never happen again, and the polling places should be monitored in the future to make sure it never happens again, but we should not waste taxpayer money to prosecute THREE guys for it. So I agree with AG Eric Holder, he was right to drop the charges and use their resources to prosecute more serious crimes.

Then Geraldo was on, they talked about the pharmacist who shot and killed a 16 year old kid who was trying to rob him, then was charged with 1st degree murder. Geraldo cited the right to self defense and said he thinks the pharmacist will be found not guilty. But the store video shows a different story, after shooting the kid in the head 16-year-old Antwun Parker who was on his back, unconscious, and unable to defend himself was shot again in the chest 5 times.

The owner went to a back room and got a 2nd gun, returned to the kids body, and shot him again with 5 rounds in the chest as he lay on the ground unconscious and bleeding from a head wound. The D.A. said that is not defending yourself, that is murder. And geraldo left out one important thing until right at the end, he said oh btw Bill, the man lied about it in his statement to the Police. Which shows that the guy knew he did wrong, and he lied to cover it up. Yet Geraldo defended the man anyway, and predicted he will be found not guilty. If I were on the jury I would vote guilty, because the man went beyond self defense, and murdered the kid. I do think 1st degree murder is wrong, maybe 2nd or 3rd degree would be better, but he did murder the kid.

Then O'Reilly trashed Andrea Mitchell at MSNBC for what he called an unfair attack on the Bush administration and John Bolton. Billy played a clip of Mitchell saying Obama inheritited the North Korea problem from Bush, then he claimed she was wrong. Billy had John Bolton on to discuss it, and the first thing Bolton said was that the Bush administration policy on North Korea was misguided. So he basically admitted she was right, then O'Reilly put a spin on what she meant and got Bolton to trash her, but only after he said the Bush policy was misguided.

Basically it was one sided biased garbage to make Andrea Mitchell look bad, but it never worked, because Bolton pretty much admitted she was mostly right. O'Reilly tried to spin it to make her look like a biased liberal who just hates Bush and is covering for Obama. And it backfired, because Bolton said the Bush policy on North Korea was bad, and he said it 3 times, O'Reilly just ignored it and would not even talk about it. All he wanted Bolton to do was agree with him, but it did not work out so well. In the end it just made O'Reilly look like a fool, and prove that Mitchell was right.

Then Billy had the crazy far right Glenn Beck on to talk more non-news ACORN story garbage. Yeah yeah we get it, you 2 right-wing freaks do not like them raising money to register Democratic voters, now move on freaks and report some real news. Beck is a joke, and O'Reilly is almost as bad as he is. They talked about ACORN and wondered why nobody else in the media is reporting it. Because it's a non-story you fools. Billy said he is going to ask Gov. Jindal and the Feds to investigate them, lol. Good luck sparky, have fun on your wild goose chase.

Beck said it's a huge story, and that when the truth comes out ACORN will collapse and go out of business. If it's a huge story how come nobody is reporting it but you 2 biased losers. Then Billy asked Beck about the comedy tour he plans to do, when I thought he was already on a comedy tour, it's called the Glenn Beck Show. His entire show is nothing but comedy, and I laugh my ass off whenever I watch any of it.

Then Billy had the results of his stupid poll of Factor viewers asking what the worst tv show ever was. 5) Cop Rock, 4) The Gong show, 3) Friends, 2) Jerry Springer, 1) My Mother The Car, from 1965.

Huh? Friends was a bad show, #3? are his viewers nuts, it was the #1 rated show for years, and it's crazy to list friends as one of the worst shows ever. I did not watch it, but I saw a little of it, it was pretty funny and clearly a pretty good show. My mother the car was #1, I am 49 years old and I have never even heard of it, you have to be 70 years old to even know it was on the air. Which just shows how old the average Factor viewer is.

Their #1 show was I Love Lucy, and it was on in 1950, so you know his viewers are a bunch of crazy right-wing 70 year old gimmers that don't have a clue. The best show ever was Seinfeld, and pretty much anyone under 60 years old agrees with that. It sure as hell was NOT I love Lucy. And btw, the reason Billy's 70 year old conservative viewers voted friends the #3 worst show ever is because of all the sexual situations. They all grew up in the 40's and 50's watching Ward and June Cleaver on Leave it to Beaver, and they think that's how America should be now.

Remember that when you see the results of those unscientific Factor website polls, remember that most of the people voting in those polls are 70 year old right-wing fools that think I Love Lucy was the best show ever, and Friends was one of the worst because it has sexual situations in it. Then the pinheads and patriots and the stupid e-mails. And another ridiculous O'Reilly Factor was over.

Bill O'Reilly Has Officially Lost His Mind
By: Steve - May 30, 2009 - 11:50am

Last night Billy had a talking points memo where he claimed left-wing zealots are violating his civil rights.
O'REILLY: Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly. Thanks for watching us tonight. How left wing zealots are violating our civil rights, that is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo."

Please stay with me on this one. One of the most fundamental rights that we have in this country is to speak freely without fear of reprisal. That right is being violated every day by zealots, some on the right, but most intensely on the left. Two words, Miss California. She spoke her mind. She was punished by the left.
That is ridiculous right-wing garbage, O'Reilly is saying because people criticize him, and call him names, he has been libeled and his rights have been violated. Which is what O'Reilly does every night, he calls people nuts and loons every night, and he criticizes every liberal in America for everything they do. He just don't like it when someone does it to him. Nobody is stopping him from saying anything, so his rights have not been violated at all.

The First Amendment is part of the Bill of Rights that expressly prohibits the United States Congress from making laws "respecting an establishment of religion" or that prohibit the free exercise of religion, infringe the freedom of speech, infringe the freedom of the press, limit the right to peaceably assemble, or limit the right to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

What part of that do you not understand Billy? Nowhere does it say a private citizen can not call another citizen a bigot, so your free speech rights were not violated. You have free speech, just as they do, you can say whatever you want, and they can too, so what part of that do you fail to comprehend.

Billy continued with his insanity:
Right now, gay marriage and illegal immigration are the two areas where rights violations are most apparent. Of course, the left will tell you that banning gay marriage is a civil rights issue, but that will be decided by the courts. However, those who oppose gay marriage are being attacked. Here's a good example. Actor Charlize Theron was angered by the California Supreme Court upholding the vote against gay marriage and publicly stated quote.

"I don't agree with the homophobia or discrimination of any kind. I will continue to fight this fight for equality and speak up for the basic civil rights of all Americans."

Does that include the rights of Americans who sincerely oppose gay marriage not to be called homophobes Ms. Theron?
With all due respect, you are a total fricking idiot O'Reilly. She is simply stating her support for gay people to have the same rights as straight people, how in the hell is that violating your rights. You do not have a right to not be called a homophobe, if someone wants to call you a homophobe they can, because they have the right to do it, it's called free speech. So your rights have not been violated, they are just using their right to free speech to say what they want to, just as you do.

At the end of the insane points memo Billy said this:
O'REILLY: Now I'm a big boy with a big mega phone and can I defend myself, but many of you can't. If you're labeled a bigot or punished in the marketplace for holding a non-liberal opinion, you can't right the wrong. And this far left fascism is very wrong. It must be called out. Fair-minded Americans can disagree on issues, but our freedoms must be protected.
Fascism? Stating an opinion of you is now fascism. That's ridiculous, and if stating an opinion is fascism then you are the king of fascism, because you do it to liberals every night, and what you do is worse because you have a tv show and a lot of people see you do it. Nobody is trying to take away your freedoms, if anything people like you are the ones trying to take away our freedoms.

You want to take freedom away from a woman to have an abortion if she wants one, now that would be taking a freedom away, by you and your right-wing pro-life friends. You and your right-wing friends want to take the freedom for gay people to marry away from them. So it's the people on the right who try to take freedoms away from people, not the left. Not one liberal I know wants to take any freedoms away from anyone, they support freedom, and they want that freedom for everyone, even if they are gay.

Calling you a bigot is not taking your freedoms away, or violating your rights, and if you actually think it is, you are totally insane. Ms. Theron has a right to voice her opinion, just as you do, and that is not a violation of your rights, in any way.

After that insanity, Billy had Jami Floyd on, she is an attorney for Court TV, and it was very funny to watch O'Reilly disagree with an attorney about the law, then after he lost the argument his comeback was "I don't care about the law." Good one Billy, NOT, you fricking moron. What happened to the rule of law you talk about, and that if we do not go by the laws you have chaos, what say you?

Just read this for a good laugh:
All right now, I was libeled by two newspapers, "The Post," "The L.A. Times," "Denver Post," "L.A. Times," and legions of other people. I'm famous so I can't hire you to go in there and sue on my behalf, because I would lose. And I understand that. That's the law here. But the spirit of the attacks on people, that is a violation of my rights. They're trying to hurt me for my speech. What say you?

JAMI FLOYD, ATTORNEY: Disagree entirely. First of all, you are right, you couldn't - well, you could hire me, but you would lose because you haven't been libeled. Libel is very specifically defined in our law. And calling someone a bigot, quite frankly is, not libel.

But in terms of the spirit, I hear where you're coming from. You know, I would die to defend your right to speak, right, Bill? But that is not a constitutional right from criticism by others, whether you're a public or a private citizen.

O'REILLY: The difference between criticism and attacks is the difference between -- and I disagree with you. Libel is basically saying something untrue about another person.

FLOYD: But the law is very specific about what libel is.

O'REILLY: It doesn't matter - I don't care about the law. My rights were violated here because they tried to punish me for my speech. It's happening all over the place.

FLOYD: The First Amendment protects us from government action that would violate our right to speak. Not from discourse, however ugly it might get among citizens.
And there you have it, in the past Billy has said we must obey the rule of law or you have chaos. And last night he even admitted he understands what the law is and how it works. Then after losing the debate to a liberal attorney he screams out that he don't care about the law, that his rights were violated, and that he is gonna take his ball and go home, lol. What a childish idiot, did this moron actually graduate from Harvard and get a Masters Degree, I want proof.

This is insane right-wing garbage, from a total moron who thinks his rights were violated because a journalist at a newspaper (who has the same free speech rights as he does btw) called him a bigot, and who thinks if someone speaks out in support of equal rights for gay people it's a violation of his civil rights. Earth to idiot, you have no right to not be called a homophobe, or a bigot, or an idiot, or a fool, the Constitution does not protect you from being called names.

What part of that do you not understand? And if it did, you would be in jail for libel, slander, and defamation. Because you (O'Reilly) libel, slander, and defame more people than anyone, and you do it every night. You call people loons, pinheads, nuts, far-left fascists, and on and on, so if it was libel, slander, and defamation you would be more guilty than anyone. And remember that this is the guy who called liberals Anti-American traitors for simply speaking out against Bush and the Iraq war, amd he wanted to put them on trial for sedition for simply voicing their opinions, which is far worse than someone calling him a bigot. Not to mention the liberals were right, the Iraq war was wrong, and based on lies about WMD's that were never found.

You (O'Reilly) complaining about someone calling you names is like Keith Richards complaining that other people do too many drugs. It's insanity, and you are a total idiot. Calling you names is not taking your freedoms away, and it sure as hell is not a violation of your civil rights. So get a clue, you are an idiot who has lost his mind, and maybe it's time you retire and let someone have your time slot that has a sound mind, because you are crazy.

The Thursday 5-28-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 29, 2009 - 11:00am

The TPM was called Identity Politics. Billy attacked what he calls the liberal media for what he claims is biased reporting on Sotomayor. His evidence of that bias was one thing said by a host at MSNBC. Norah O'Donnell was talking with Pat Buchanan about Obama having 4 people up for the SC, all women. Then she made a sarcastic comment saying maybe no white men were qualified, basically she was kidding. Yet O'Reilly used that as evidence of bias from the media. When she was not being serious, it was a sarcastic comment. And btw, all the right-wing websites and blogs are reporting what O'Donnell said as if she was serious.

O'Reilly picked it up and spread the lie too, like the good little dishonest Republican he is. Earth to O'Reilly and all his idiotic right-wing friends, it was sarcasm, she was not being serious, you morons.

Then O'Reilly had the biased one sided right-wing partisan Karl Rove on to discuss Sotomayor. He basically said she was a racist activist judge that will not go by the rule of law. When he has no idea what she will, or will not do, and he hates all Democrats so nothing he says about a Democrat can be believed anyway. What's funny is neither O'Reilly or Rove have ever mentioned that Sotomayor was appointed by a Republican president, George H.W. Bush, and that she has voted with the Republicans 95% of the time. Or that of her 381 rulings in 17 years only 6 were reviewed, and only 3 of them reversed. Somehow they just accidently failed to mention any of that.

Then O'Reilly had the insane far right nasal nose Laura Ingraham on to talk about California and their budget problems. Ingraham is a biased right-wing partisan who was on all alone to spin out right-wing propaganda, and she did a good job of it. She said California was a socialist state that is out of control, that the left has ruined the entire state, and run them into bankruptcy. And Billy sat there like a stump on a log while she spewed that right-wing propaganda out.

Earth to Ingraham, Arnold Schwarzenegger is a REPUBLICAN. He took over as the Governator 6 years ago in 2003, after the Democrat Gray Davis was recalled for not keeping the state on budget. Arnold (The Republican) promised to fix Cal-i-For-nia and balance the budget. And here we are 6 years later and they are in more debt now then when Gray Davis was in power. And yet Ingraham blamed the states problems on the left, when a REPUBLICAN has been running the state for 6 years now. The stooge O'Reilly sat there and never said a word about any of it.

And btw, O'Reilly supported the recall of Gray Davis, he blamed Davis personally for the budget problems and said he must go. Now that they have a Republican Governor O'Reilly and Ingraham have a whole different story, they do not blame the Governor anymore, they blame everyone but the Governor, and claim the left bankrupted the state. It's bias, massive hypocrisy, and a double standard.

Then O'Reilly had the CEO of ACORN on Bertha Lewis, she debunked all the right-wing spin on ACORN from O'Reilly, and she basically told him everything they do is legal, to help the poor, and register people to vote. Billy said they use his money and he does not like it, she said they get Government grants just like everyone else does. Then O'Reilly called them a socialist group, and she laughed at him. Then she told him they simply raise money to help the poor and register voters, and denied they are socialists. Billy asked to see their books, and she basically told him the Government sees them, and that's good enough. Basically telling O'Reilly to shove it, and that they do not have to let some right-wing cable news idiot see their books.

Then O'Reilly put the biased, one sided, corrupt Republican pollster Frank Luntz on to talk about a focus group he did on torture. The whole segment was worthless, because it was done by a biased partisan fraud of a pollster. No Democrat pollster to counter what Luntz said, just one sided right-wing garbage that is not even worth reporting. All I will say is that when you use a biased and partisan pollster (especially one that has been caught cheating on polls before) on your show, not only does that pollster have no credibility, the person who puts him on their show has no crebility either, that's you Billy.

Then the biased Republican from FOX News Megyn Kelly was on to talk more about Sotomayor. Do you see a pattenr here, every single guest that talked about Sotomayor was a Republican on all alone to spin out right-wing propaganda with no Democrat to counter anything they said. Billy had 2 Democrats on the show, both from ACORN, and both were only on to talk about ACORN. And of course Kelly hammered Sotomayor with the same right-wing talking points all Republican are using against her.

They both predicted Sotomayor would be reversed on the New Haven firefighter ruling, the one where O'Reilly bet Colmes a dinner. What they did not report is that the other 2 judges both agreed with her, and they are Republicans. They simply upheld a lower court ruling, which happens 99% of the time. They act like she made this terrible ruling because she is some crazy liberal. Ignoring the fact that the 2 Republican judges agreed with her, that it was a 3 to 0 ruling, and that it simply backed up a lower courts ruling on the case.

Then the stupid reality checks, that are not checks, just O'Reilly spin on reality, the pinheads and patriots crap, and the lame e-mails that are not even worth reporting. The pinhead was Arnold Schwarzenegger for making a joke about Limbaugh weighing 650 lbs. And the patriot was exercise, yes exercise. Billy said it was patriotic to exercise, ummmm, huh? If that's the best you can do just drop the segment. Why not pick a different member of the military, and make them the patriot every night, dumbass.

O'Reilly Caught Violating Journalistic Standards Again
By: Steve - May 29, 2009 - 10:30am

On the Wednesday night Factor O'Reilly had Amanda Carpenter on for the policing the net segment. She is the Republican Factor internet cop. They reported what a few blogs were saying about Sotomayor. But their reporting was dishonest, and very misleading, as usual.

Blogs have a writer who signs his or her name to the posting, some blogs have more than one person who writes for them. They write a blog, then put their name on it so you know who they are. Some blogs have a comments script that allows anonymous people to register any name, and leave a comment on what the blogger wrote. So you have no idea who this person is, whether they are a Republican or a Democrat, there is no way to know who they are.

In fact, I could go to a conservative blog right now and register any name then leave a comment, and pretend to be a Republican. I could make some crazy comment, and nobody would know who I am. The comments section of a blog is basically a free speech zone, where anonymous people can say anything they want. The comments left by anonymous people have nothing to do with the people who own the blog, or the people who write the blog postings.

O'Reilly and Carpenter both know this, especially Carpenter. Because in the past they have both admitted there is a difference between a blog posting by a named blogger, and a comment left on that posting by an anonymous internet user. Yet Wednesday night O'Reilly and Carpenter dishonestly cherry picked partial quotes from a few blogs, they pulled these partial quotes from the comments left on a blog posting, not from the named blogger who wrote the posting.

The problem is this, they did not disclose that the partial quotes they used were from the comments section of a blog posting, and they implied that a writer for the blog wrote them. Both things are dishonest, and they knowingly did it to make the blogs look bad. This is terrible journalism, it's dishonest and a violation of journalistic standards. Especially when an anonymous person could go to a blog and say anything, just to make that blog look bad, and you have no idea who they are.

O'Reilly read this quote from a comment left on a blog posting at thinkprogress:
O'REILLY: It will be so funny seeing a bunch of old white guys questioning her during the Senate hearings.
And now, here is the entire comment from CParis:
The GOP is going to look like morons with these attacks on Judge Sotomayor. I'm sure claiming she's unqualified (because she's a female and a minority) will attract even more women and minorities to the GOP. It will be so funny seeing a bunch of old white guys questioning her during the Senate hearings.
That is taking a partial quote out of context, and not disclosing it's a partial quote, or the fact that it's from the comments section, not an actual writer for the blog. O'Reilly and Carpenter made it look like an actual blog writer said that, when it was a comment left on a blog posting by an anonymous person.

Nobody should ever pull partial quotes from a blogs comments section, then use them to smear the blog owner or a writer there. Especially if you do not tell people you are using partial quotes from the comments section, and not from the actual writers who write for the blog. If you plan to quote someone at a blog, you should only quote from an actual blog posting. Using a comment is wrong, and should never be done, because you have no idea who the person is, and they could be there for the wrong reasons.

O'Reilly did this knowingly, and Carpenter did too, she never said a word about the quotes being from the comments sections of the blogs. Not to mention, they used partial quotes, they took them out of context and only quoted part of what the person said. Which is a big deal for O'Reilly, and in the past he has said it should never be done, then he does it himself.

Both O'Reilly and Carpenter were dishonest, and the worst part is they did it knowingly, they knew it was wrong, and unethical, yet they did it anyway. And btw, they even did it to a Conservative blog, like HotAir. Michelle Malkin called O'Reilly dishonest on Fox & Friends yesterday morning, and last night in the reality check segment O'Reilly admitted it was wrong to do what he did. He admitted that he should have pointed out the quotes were from comments, not from the actual blog writers.

What O'Reilly should do is never use a partial quote, or any quote, from the comments section of any blog ever again. O'Reilly is the only person in the media who does it, it's wrong, and it's simply done to smear the blog owner and make them look bad for what someone else said, which is just ridiculous.

And if you do quote a blog posting, at least have the journalistic integrity to quote the person who actually wrote the blog posting, not some anonymous fool that left a comment on a blog posting.

The Wednesday 5-27-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 28, 2009 - 9:40am

The TPM was called Republican Dilemma. Billy talked about how Obama nominating a Latino woman to the Supreme Court was a smart political move. Because it puts the GOP in a tough situation, they need to increase their votes with Latinos, so if they hammer her too hard it may cost them politically. And for once, O'Reilly was right. Then Billy gave the GOP some advice on how to handle the situation. Basically he sounded like a Republican strategist, instead of a so-called Independent journalist.

Then Dick (hooker toe sucker) Morris was on to discuss it, and of course he agreed with O'Reilly 100%, Billy even asked, was that not a brilliant and accurate TPM or what, and Morris the ass kisser said yes Billy you are a genius. When every journalist in the country had the same analysis over the last 2 days, and they had it before O'Reilly did. Billy and Morris brainstormed how the GOP should deal with it, and O'Reilly played a clip of Ann Coulter talking about it, then he said Coulter was right.

Which is insane, and anyone who says that is a far right nut, just like she is. Coulter is a right-wing idiot, who just says crazy stuff to sell her insane books. If you agree with anything she says, you need mental help, she probably don't even agree with half of what she says herself. She is running a con, it's called say crazy things to get publicity and it will make you famous and sell books. So anyone who listens or believes anything she says is a moron.

And btw, during the Morris segment O'Reilly said Ginsberg is a crazy left-wing nut, and last week he called Souter a left-wing loon. But he never says a bad word about Scalia, Thomas, Alito or Roberts, and if anyone does, he attacks them, then he does the very same thing he attacks other people for doing.

Then Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about the media bias in their coverage of Sotomayor. Which is just ridiculous, because Goldberg is a partisan Republican who hates all liberals, and hates all the media except for FOX News. He even wrote a book about the slobbering love affair the media had with Obama. Then O'Reilly puts this far right stooge on and bills it as an objective analysis of the media. It's insane to put him on as an objective analyst, because he is a far right partisan. And of course there was no Democrat to provide the balance, so the whole segment was one sided biased garbage.

Then Amanda Carpenter was on to do the very same thing Goldberg did. She is a biased right-wing Republican from She is the Factor internet cop, but there is no Democrat. Carpenter is on all alone to spin out right-wing propaganda about what is on the internet. They reported one bad comment about Sotomayor from, when I saw hundreds and hundreds of them. So they ignored 99% of it, but if Kos has a bad comment about a Republican they report 10 of them. And the freerepublic stuff is made by actual members there, the Kos stuff is usually done by an anonymous guest in the comments section. It's biased one sided garbage, it's done to make liberals look bad, and to cover up all the hate from the right on the internet.

Then a tabloid garbage story about sexting with Dr. Keith Ablow. Billy cried about some Professor in CANADA, who said sexting was ok. O'Reilly was all upset that this Professor would say that, and asked why the media was not reporting it, then stated that he was the only person reporting it. Because it's not a story, the Professor is in CANADA, and nobody cares but you. Why should we care what some Professor in CANADA says, we don't. And why in the hell should the American media report what he said in CANADA, answer, they should not. Earth to O'Reilly, nobody cares what some dork in CANADA says, about anything, so get a clue man and report some real news for a change.

Then O'Reilly did more on the Jon & Kate Plus 8 garbage, even though O'Reilly said he hates it, did not watch it, and does not care about it. Then he reports on it 2 fricking nights in a row. Billy had Dennis Miller on to talk about it, and it was so funny. Billy played a clip of the show with no sound, in the clip it showed the father Jon, and Miller said who is the Polynesian kid, is he the oldest. When it was the father, not one of the kids, lol. Which proves what a total idiot Miller is, he was doing an analysis of the show and he thought the father was one of the kids. That shows he knows nothing about the show, and O'Reilly never said a word about Millers screw up, he just let it slide.

Billy asked Miller about the AT&T American Idol scandal, and Miller said he don't care, and refused to even talk about it. And they never even reported what happened, they just ignored it and moved on. What happened is AT&T got caught violating the shows rules by helping people vote using text messages, and sending 10 at a time with one push of a button. They helped the religious guy win, by teaching people how to send multiple text messages using AT&T employees, but they did not do the same for the gay guy. Now imagine what O'Reilly and Miller would say if the religious guy lost, and they found out what AT&T did, they would flip out and scream bloody murder. But when it helps the religious guy they barely even mention it, and say they don't care, then make jokes about it.

Then the stupid Barack & a Hard Place garbage with Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes. This segment is a total waste of tv time. All it does is give Crowley and O'Reilly a segment to trash Obama and make fun of Colmes. And if Colmes had an ounce of integrity in his body he would quit doing it. Billy and Monica agree on almost everything, then they make fun of Colmes and make him look like a fool. Even though Colmes is usually right, it's still 2 Republicans who disagree with him and make it look like he is wrong. He is only put on for the 2 Republicans to beat up on, because O'Reilly gets e-mails saying they love how they hammer Colmes.

Then the pinheads and patriots garbage, and the lame hand picked and highly edited Factor e-mails. And of course there were 6 Republicans on the show and 1 Democrat. That 1 Democrat was on with a Republican, so he barely had time to speak, and when he did speak O'Reilly and Crowley just made fun of everything he said. Billy had time to report what some idiot Professor in CANADA said, but he ignored what Patraeus said about Gitmo and Torture, and ignored Mancow being waterboarded.

To this day O'Reilly has not said one word about the Patraeus statements, or Mancow being waterboarded and admitting it is torture.

O'Reilly Ignores Gen. Petraeus on Gitmo & Torture
By: Steve - May 27, 2009 - 10:50am

Over the weekend (Billy's hero) General Petraeus said he supports President Obama’s decision to close Gitmo, and opposes the use of enhanced interrogation techniques:
PETRAEUS: In fact, I have long been on record as having testified and also in helping write doctrine for interrogation techniques that are completely in line with the Geneva Convention. And as a division commander in Iraq in the early days, we put out guidance very early on to make sure that our soldiers, in fact, knew that we needed to stay within those guidelines.

With respect to Guantanamo, I think that the closure in a responsible manner, obviously one that is certainly being worked out now by the Department of Justice -- I talked to the attorney general the other day and they have a very intensive effort ongoing to determine, indeed, what to do with the detainees who are left, how to deal with them in a legal way, and if continued incarceration is necessary -- again, how to take that forward.

But doing that in a responsible manner, I think, sends an important message to the world, as does the commitment of the United States to observe the Geneva Convention when it comes to the treatment of detainees.
Not only does General Petraeus agree with Obama on closing Gitmo and torture, he also disagrees with Cheney that Obama has made us less safe.

During the March 20th, State of the Union on CNN, Gen. David Petraeus -- who Cheney has previously called “extraordinarily capable” -- said he doesn’t agree with Cheney’s assessment that Obama has made us less safe:
PETRAEUS: Well, I wouldn’t necessarily agree with that. I think in fact that there is a good debate going on about the importance of values in all that we do. I think that if one violates the values that we hold so dear, that we jeopardize...We think for the military, in particular that camp, that’s a line that can’t be crossed.

It is hugely significant to us to live the values that we hold so dear and that we have fought so hard to protect over the years.
And yet after saying all that O'Reilly has not reported a word of it, so he can continue his right-wing propaganda that only liberals want Gitmo closed, that only liberals believe waterboarding is torture, and that only liberals say we should not be using torture. When in fact, many Republicans agree with Obama, including John McCain and General Petraeus.

The problem is this, O'Reilly is so dishonest and so biased he refuses to report any of this, because it goes against his personal opinions, and the opinions of most the right-wing nuts who watch his show. This is called no spin journalism by O'Reilly, when it's bias, dishonesty, and right-wing spin.

The Tuesday 5-26-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 27, 2009 - 10:30am

The TPM was called Obama vs Cheney. O'Reilly called it one of the most important debates in U.S. history. O'Reilly started with Obama, he played a partial video clip then replied to what Obama said. And did that about 5 or 6 times. Of course O'Reilly disagreed with everything Obama said, and had nothing good to say about the Obama speech. Then he played 5 or 6 partial clips of the Cheney speech, and of course O'Reilly agreed with everything Cheney said, and had nothing bad to say about him.

The whole thing was just a biased one sided review of the two speeches, O'Reilly is a Republican so he loved the Cheney spin and lies, and hated the Obama speech. A real journalist at the McClatchy newspaper wrote an article about the Cheney speech, and pointed out 20 dishonest statements made by Cheney, yet O'Reilly never disputed anything Cheney said, and even said Cheney won the debate and that he had the facts on his side. Basically O'Reilly agreed with Cheney, and disagreed with Obama, on everything. O'Reilly even called Obama naive about national security, and hammered him for closing Gitmo.

Then Billy had Mary K. Ham on and Ellis Henican to discuss his biased talking points memo. O'Reilly told Ellis that Cheney has the stronger ground, which is just ridiculous, and something only a partisan far right Republican would say. Most of the people agree with Obama, and support him, even General Petraeus supports Obama, he said we should close Gitmo, and he disagrees with Cheney that Obama is making us less safe. Petraeus also thinks we should not be using torture on anyone. I will have more on this in another blog posting.

Ellis nailed O'Reilly on his bias, and actually called him on it. He pointed out that O'Reilly disagreed with Obama on everything, and agreed with Cheney. Then O'Reilly admitted he agrees with Cheney, which is proof he is a biased Republican, because nobody agrees with Cheney, except for a few far right Republicans. Of course Ham agrees with O'Reilly and Cheney, as she always does. She is just a joke of a right-wing idiot who always agrees with O'Reilly, no matter what he says. The Obama vs Cheney TPM by O'Reilly proves beyond a doubt that he is a partisan Republican, because only a few right-wing stooges agree with Cheney on anything.

Then Billy did an is it legal segment on the Obama Supreme Court pick, Sonia Sotomayor. And of course he had 2 Republicans on, Lis Wiehl and Megyn Kelly to talk about it, with no Democrats, none. O'Reilly said from what he read about her there are some things that are disturbing, Kelly called her controversial, and Lis Wiehl defended her a little, not much, but she did say she would probably be confirmed. O'Reilly also trashed justice Souter, and said at least she will be better than him. Billy also called her an activist judge, which is just ridiculous, and nothing but right-wing talking points.

Basically they trashed her and had almost nothing good to say about her, especially O'Reilly and Kelly. With no Democrat guest to defend her, or de-spin all the propaganda from O'Reilly and Kelly. What O'Reilly failed to mention is that Sotomayor was appointed to the bench by George H.W. Bush, or the fact that she voted with the other 2 Republicans on the court 95% of the time.

That is very important information, yet O'Reilly never said a word about it, even though it was mentioned on almost every news show I watched yesterday, except for the Factor. Billy left that information out to make her look like a far left activist judge, which is bad journalism, and bias. And it's why no Democrat guest was on to discuss it, because they would have spoke out for her and mentioned those facts, the facts O'Reilly ignored on purpose.

Then O'Reilly had the 2 Republican culture warriors on, Gretchen Carlson and Margaret Hoover. They talked about the Jon & Kate plus 8 tv show, and the French president kissing his wife on the lips on tv. This was just tabloid garbage, and not news, that no-body cares about. And I mean no-body. O'Reilly said the Jon & Kate show was tabloid crap, that he hated it, did not care about it, and did not watch it. Then the jackass does a whole segment on it with his 2 culture warriors, on what he calls a hard news show.

Huh? Earth to jackass, if it was tabloid trash, you don't care, you hated it, and you did not watch, why did you do a whole freaking segment on it. And why on earth would I (or anyone) in America care that the French president kissed his wife on the lips. The whole segment was total garbage, and a waste of tv time, clearly it's not news, and has no news value at all, to anyone. It's just an excuse for Billy to have 2 more Republicans on to spin out right-wing culture views.

Then O'Reilly had 3 reality checks, or so he called them. Number 1 was ACORN, no check, and nobody cares. Number 2 was about media matters, they used O'Reilly as a check on Beck. And number 3 was Gene Simmons from KISS saying he loves Bill O'Reilly, that was it, no check. Then pinheads and patriots and the lame e-mails.

O'Reilly never said a word about Mancow being waterboarded and then admitting it is torture, even though he had been saying it was not torture for a year. And O'Reilly never said a word about General Petraeus saying we should close Gitmo, stop the torture, and that he disagrees with Cheney that Obama has made us less safe, he said that in an interview over the weekend, and this is Billy's hero who a year ago (when Bush was in office) said we should listen to what Petraeus says.

The Monday 5-25-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 26, 2009 - 9:30am

The Monday Factor was a re-run because of the holiday so I did not do a full review. I did watch the show anyway, and it was a re-run from May 19th, the show Billy called his all star show. The so-called all stars were, Dr. Marc Lamont Hill, Laura Ingraham, Glenn Beck, Monica Crowley, Alan Colmes, Dennis Miller, Lis Wiehl, and Megyn Kelly.

O'Reilly named Jesse Ventura a pinhead for asking on the View why we did not waterboard McVeigh and Nichols to get info from them. Billy said because they were captured in America so they had rights, while the muslim guys were captured in a foreign country in a war zone. O'Reilly said Jesse had the facts wrong so he is a pinhead.

That is just ridiculous, and the only person who has the facts wrong is Bill O'Reilly. The United States of America signed the UN Convention Against Torture in 1988, and it was signed by Ronald Reagan.
The UN Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment was signed on behalf of the United States by Deputy Secretary of State John C. Whitehead on April 18, 1988, at the United Nations. The United States became the 63d nation to sign the convention, which was adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1984 and entered into force on June 26, 1987.

The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention. It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.
It even says the agreement covers all human persons throughout the world, which proves that Jesse was right, and O'Reilly was wrong. Nowhere does it say if you are captured in a foreign country you lose your rights, and you can be tortured.
Considering that, in accordance with the principles proclaimed in the Charter of the United Nations, recognition of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family in the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Recognizing that those rights derive from the inherent dignity of the human person,

Considering the obligation of States under the Charter, in particular Article 55, to promote universal respect for, and observance of, human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Having regard to Article 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, both of which provide that no one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Here is what O'Reilly never reports, ever, not one time, because he is a dishonest right-wing coward.

and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment

Article 1, section 1 says this:
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.
The United States of America signed that torture agreement and they are bound by it, as is every other country who signed on to it. Article 2, section 1, 2, and 3 says this:
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.
What part of that does O'Reilly not understand. Nowhere does it say that if someone is captured in a foreign country the US can torture them, in fact, it says the exact opposite. It says no exceptional circumstances whatsoever, none, ever. O'Reilly ignores all that, when it's the law, the law the United States Government agreed to go by, then he claims Jesse Venture does not have the facts right.

The facts tell us that Bill O'Reilly is a spinning lying right-wing idiot, who just makes this garbage up and hopes someone believes it. The facts show Jesse Venture is exactly right, and if you torture someone you are not only breaking US law, you are violating International law, and the UN Convention Against Torture.

And don't just take my word for it, go read it for yourself, right from the UN website, who are you gonna believe, O'Reilly, or your own eyes.

Notice that O'Reilly never puts the text of Article 2, section 2 on the screen and shows you what the actual law says. Because then you would see the truth, and know that there are no exceptions, and you would also see what a biased piece of right-wing neo-con crap O'Reilly is, for lying to you about the facts.

The Friday 5-22-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 23, 2009 - 1:30pm

The Factor was a re-run from May 6th, so I did not do a full review. O'Reilly was the host, and the show was all Republican guests, except for Alan Colmes, who of course was on with Monica Crowley so he barely got a word in, and when he did O'Reilly and Crowley made fun of what he said.

It was the show with Ann Coulter, Billy let her respond to Colin Powell saying the Republican party is hurt by people like Coulter and Limbaugh, and that they should move to the center more. Of course neither Powell or anyone else was allowed to be on the show to reply to what Coulter said. It was Coulter all alone spinning out her right-wing lies and propaganda with nobody to counter a word she said.

Dick Morris was also on the show, he talked about Sarah Palin, and said the liberal women all hate her because she is so normal, and they are not normal. Which is nothing but pure insanity, and only a total right-wing jackass like Morris would say something so stupid. Palin is a freak, and a stupid one. She is an extreme far right pro-life witch doctor worshipping moron, who could not even name what Newspapers she reads, and thought living near Russia gave her foreign policy experience.

She is flat out dumb, and a far right nut. The only reason non-conservatives hate her is because she is so far right and so stupid. Only Republicans like her because they think she is hot, and she agrees with all their crazy far right extreme views. The rest of the country sees here for what she is, a dumbass right-wing idiot that will never win a big election for president or vice president.

That was the show O'Reilly picked to run while he was on his 5 day weekend. Which proves once again what a right-wing stooge he is, because 99% of the show was right-wing spin and propaganda, put out by right-wing idiots.

Another Republican Admits Waterboarding is Torture
By: Steve - May 22, 2009 - 5:30pm

And of course you will never see him as a guest on the Factor, because O'Reilly refuses to have any Republican on his show that admits waterboarding is torture, including John McCain.

Mancow Waterboarded, Admits It's Torture

"It is way worse than I thought it would be"


And so it went Friday morning when WLS radio host Erich "Mancow" Muller decided to subject himself to the controversial practice of waterboarding live on his show.

Mancow decided to tackle the divisive issue head on -- actually it was head down, while restrained and reclining.

"I want to find out if it's torture," Mancow told his listeners Friday morning, adding that he hoped his on-air test would help prove that waterboarding did not, in fact, constitute torture.

Listeners had the chance to decide whether Mancow himself or his co-host, Chicago radio personality Pat Cassidy, would undergo the interrogation method during the broadcast. The voters ultimately decided Mancow would be the one donning the soaked towel and shackles, and at about 8:40 a.m., he entered a small storage room next to his studio that was compared to a "dungeon" by Cassidy.

"The average person can take this for 14 seconds," Marine Sergeant Clay South answered, adding, "He's going to wiggle, he's going to scream, he's going to wish he never did this."

With a Chicago Fire Department paramedic on hand, Mancow was placed on a 7-foot long table, his legs were elevated, and his feet were tied up.

Turns out the stunt wasn't so funny. Witnesses said Muller thrashed on the table, and even instantly threw the toy cow he was holding as his emergency tool to signify when he wanted the experiment to stop. He only lasted 6 or 7 seconds.

"It is way worse than I thought it would be, and that's no joke,"Mancow said, likening it to a time when he nearly drowned as a child. "It is such an odd feeling to have water poured down your nose with your head back...It was instantaneous...and I don't want to say this: absolutely torture."

"I wanted to prove it wasn't torture," Mancow said. "They cut off our heads, we put water on their face...I got voted to do this but I really thought 'I'm going to laugh this off.'"

Last year, Vanity Fair writer Christopher Hitchens endured the same experiment -- and came to a similar conclusion. The conservative writer said he found the treatment terrifying, and was haunted by it for months afterward.

"Well, then, if waterboarding does not constitute torture, then there is no such thing as torture," Hitchens concluded.

The Thursday 5-21-09 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - May 22, 2009 - 8:20am

Laura (far right) Ingraham was the fill-in host for O'Reilly Thursday night so there will not be a full review. I will say this, just letting such a crazy far right idiot host your show proves that O'Reilly is a die-hard Republican. Because only another Republican would ever let Ingraham fill-in for them. She is a biased partisan hack, and pretty much the same as Ann Coulter.

Ingraham basically spent the whole show smearing Obama and any Democrat she could think of trashing. While having mostly Republican guests on to agree with her, they praised Dick Cheney and defended him. Even though he is a lying piece of garbage who approved of torture, and lied us into Iraq. Not to mention his approval rating is about 19%, so most people in his own party do not even like him, let alone the rest of America. Anyone who defends Cheney should be locked in prison with him, because they are helping a guy who authorized illegal torture.

Ingraham had 3 Democrats on the show, but 2 were on at the same time in the same segment. So the rest of the show was almost all Republican guests, and they were all on alone with no Democrat to counter what they said. Basically it was about the same thing O'Reilly does, except Ingraham did it. It was 95% right-wing propaganda, with 95% Republican guests.

She did have 3 Democrats on, just to make it look good, but they are only put on for Ingraham to make fun of and talk down to. They are made to look like they are wrong about everything, and un-American because they do not agree with her and Dick Cheney. Just like O'Reilly using Colmes in the Barack And a Hard Place segment. Colmes is just there for O'Reilly and Crowley to make fun of, with the 2 of them there he barely gets a word in, they just throw insults at him, and make fun of everything he says.

During one segment on Gitmo, Ingraham asked if it was possible to send all the Gitmo prisoners to the International Space Station. This is a serious issue and she spent most of her time making stupid jokes about it. Basically it was like watching the Hannity show, except it was a woman. And yet O'Reilly claims to be a moderate Independent with no agenda, who is fair to both sides, if that's true, how does he explain having only far right fill-in hosts when he is not there.

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Robert Gibbs Statement
By: Steve - May 21, 2009 - 1:40pm

Here is yet another example of that honest journalism O'Reilly claims to do, the stuff he says is being fair to Obama. On the May 20, 2009 O'Reilly Factor, Billy aired a video clip of Robert Gibbs saying this:
GIBBS: "It was a mistake to set up something that became a rallying cry for our enemies around the world. We've made some hasty decisions that are now going to take some time to unwind. And closing Guantánamo Bay obviously is one of those decisions."
O'Reilly then said:
O'REILLY: All right. It sounds like he's, Jim, admitting a mistake, and still didn't have a real plan to deal with it.

VANDEHEI: Right. And you can -- you don't even need to listen to us for a critique of this.

O'REILLY: But this is what I don't understand, you know --

VANDEHEI: -- where these detainees would be. And think about this. This is not -- go ahead, Bill.

O'REILLY: Yeah, this is what I don't understand. Obama's a savvy guy. And tomorrow he'll come up with something, because unlike the Bush administration, whenever the Obama administration is embarrassed, they react instantly, whereas the Bush administration did not.


O'REILLY: So he'll come up with something tomorrow, Obama will. God knows what it's going to be, but he'll come up with something. He's going to talk at 10 o'clock in the morning.

Wrong, neither O'Reilly, or Politico executive editor Jim VandeHei, who appeared during the O'Reilly Factor segment, mentioned that during that May 20 briefing in which Gibbs made the remarks O'Reilly aired, he made clear that he was not characterizing as "hasty" President Obama's decision to close the detention facility at Gitmo, but rather he was "discussing decisions that were made in the Bush administration."

Earth to O'Idiot, Gibbs was talking about the hasty decisions made by the Bush administration, you right-wing stooge. Here is part of the transcript:
Q: Thank you. All right. And you said hasty, that it's going to take some time to unwind. Are you talking about the President's hasty decisions or the previous administration's hasty decision as it regards Guantanamo?

MR. GIBBS: No, no, no, I'm sorry, let me be -- good question. My boss might want to know the answer to that. (Laughter.) No, no, I'm discussing decisions that were made in the previous administration --

Q: You were not referring to the executive order --

MR. GIBBS: No, no, no --

Q: -- as a hasty decision.


Q: Absolutely not?
Only 2 people in the media pulled that dishonest and misleading garbage on what Robert Gibbs said, Bill O'Reilly and Lou Dobbs, both Republicans, and both dishonest and corrupt so-called journalists.

What say you Billy?

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The ACLU & Racial Profiling
By: Steve - May 21, 2009 - 12:40pm

On the Tuesday night Factor O'Reilly talked about racial profiling, the ACLU, and crime in New York city. He said this:
O'REILLY: It's not about torture tonight. It's about the ACLU's America-hating attacks on something “right here in New York City.” All because the ACLU objects to the use of racial profiling by the New York City Police Department.

Once riddled with violent crime, New York is now largely safe thanks to aggressive policing instituted by Bill Bratton and Rudy Giuliani, the cops here are proactive, they try to stop crime before it happens by keeping close tabs on the bad guys. From the jump, the ACLU opposed that.
But as usual O'Reilly got one big thing wrong, and left out some very important details. He wants to smear the ACLU so bad he just makes up stories about them, then calls himself an honest journalist.

The ACLU had nothing to do with it, The Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR) filed the lawsuit, NOT the ACLU. That's a pretty big mistake for a so-called truth telling honest journalist, right? Billy has a fact checking staff of 15 people that he claims never screw up, wrong, they just did, and they got it very wrong.

A simple google search will get you this, from the NY Daily News:
January 2009 -- The NYPD is on pace to stop and question a record half a million citizens this year - about 80% of them black or Latino, a new report says.

The Center for Constitutional Rights, citing NYPD data obtained in a suit, said the vast majority of those stopped and questioned in 2005 through June 2008 weren't charged with any crime. In 2007, the last complete year of data, cops arrested only 5.8% of the 472,096 people they stopped.

"The New York City Police Department continues to prey on African-American and Latino communities in New York City," Vincent Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, said.
Dear Bill O'Reilly, if you can not even get simple facts right, why should we believe anything else you reported on this story. O'Reilly said the New York Chapter of the ACLU recently filed a complaint, wrong, it was filed by CCR not the ACLU, about 4 months ago in January of 2009.
O'REILLY: Recently the New York Chapter of the ACLU filed a complaint against the police charging they were stopping black people more than white people for questioning. The ACLU says that's bias, their usual charge.
What O'Reilly failed to mention is that the RAND Corporation was subpoenaed last week for data the NYPD gave it to analyze. O'Reilly never said a word about any of that. It's like when the cops shoot an unarmed man 42 times, then they investigate their own people and they never find they did anything wrong. And how reliable is a study on cops using racial profiling, when they provide the data for the study, answer that Billy.

The lawsuit aims to stop what CCR considers the police department’s systematic racial profiling in African-American neighborhoods. The RAND subpoena is needed to gain access to stop and frisk information compiled by the NYPD, which the attorneys will use to try and prove a pattern of racial profiling, then force changes to these practices through the courts.

The vast majority of those stopped and questioned weren't charged with any crimes. And O'Reilly failed to mention one other thing, civil rights, as in probable cause and the laws against unreasonable search and seizure. These cops are doing random stops of mostly innocent people, their own stats say 95% of the people they stop are innocent, and not arrested.

This is a violation of their civil rights, and racial profiling, but O'Reilly claims it's ok, because 5% of the people they stop are arrested. It's the same as arguing that torture is ok if you get information from it, even though it's illegal. O'Reilly even said it was anti-American to not racially profile them.

The RAND study found no racial profiling in its examination. But St. John's University student David Ourlicht, 21, sees it differently. He was stopped on the street three times by cops - once at gunpoint - and never charged with a crime. The Manhattanite, who is half black and half white, was among 1 million people snagged in the NYPD's stop-and-frisk net since 2005.
"It's something that I have to deal with every day," Ourlicht said. "I can't trust the people that are supposed to protect me and that's scary."
So in O'Reilly world it's ok to racially profile 95% of the population if 5% of them are arrested. That means he thinks it's ok to violate the rights of 95% of the people who did nothing illegal. Hey Billy, what about the 95% who were innocent and did nothing wrong, you claim to stand up for the little guy, then you throw 95% of the little guys to the curb. Don't their rights matter to you?

Billy said if the cops do not do this more people will die, which is just laughable. The 5% that were arrested were not all murderers, they were mostly arrested on minor charges, theft, robbery, drugs, etc. Nobody is saying all the people arrested were killers. O'Reilly acts like they took thousands of killers off the streets with this program, which is just not true.
O'REILLY: Most criminal justice experts say if you cut back on proactive policing, more Americans will die in the streets. I believe the ACLU is the most dangerous anti-American organization in the country and if clear-thinking Americans do not confront this group and their members, and their support system in the media, people will die.
Basically, O'Reilly got most of the facts wrong, blamed the ACLU when it was the CCR, said it was ok to use racial profiling, claimed the cops do not just do random stops on black people for no reason, when that is exactly what they are doing, ignored the fact that it's a violation of a persons civil rights against unreasonable search and seizure, ignored the fact that the cops provided the data for the RAND study, and ignored the fact that 95% of the people stopped are innocent and never arrested.

Those are the facts, all the facts, not the partial facts O'Reilly reported. Now you see the whole story, not the partial right-wing spin O'Reilly put on it. The NY Police stopped 427,000 people in 2007, and 80% were black or latino, while only 5% were arrested. With no probable cause, just random stops, and O'Reilly said it was all ok with him, while ignoring or spinning all the facts of the story.

The Wednesday 5-20-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 21, 2009 - 8:40am

The TPM was called Acorn Investigation. Here we go again, Billy is doing another bogus right-wing biased investigation of ACORN. He even called it the biggest con in the history of America, which is just ridiculous. Remember that this is the same guy who back before the election said ACORN was guilty of voter fraud, and claimed it was a massive scandal. O'Reilly and FOX News spent months reporting on the so-called massive voter fraud by ACORN. And you know how many cases of voter fraud they found, none, zip, zero. So how can you trust anything O'Reilly says about ACORN now.

This is only a story with far right idiots like Beck and O'Reilly, nobody else is reporting it, and nobody else cares. It's just another bogus right-wing smear job on ACORN because they have a lot of money and they use it to register Democratic voters. There is nothing there, it's all made up garbage by Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly. O'Reilly even did another ambush interview on people at an ACORN office, hey jackass, what happened to those privacy rights you were talking about. And of course Billy called for the Feds to investigate, good luck with that one sparky.

The lead story was the Senate voting 90 to 6 against giving Obama money to close Gitmo, because he did not have a plan yet. And of course O'Reilly made a big deal about it because most of the Democrats voted no too. Then he had two reporters on to criticize Obama for not getting the money. So all 3 of them hammered Obama, not one guest to defend Obama, as usual. This is pretty much a non-story, yet O'Reilly leads with it. Obama has been busy trying to fix the economy, and he has not had time yet to get a plan together.

Soon Obama will have a plan, and then he will get the money, so it's stupid to try and make a big deal about it. But that's what right-wing stooges do, because their braindead viewers like to see Obama made to look bad. Billy said nobody in the US is willing to take the Gitmo prisoners, which is a lie. There is a brand new (empty) 460 bed prison in Hardin Montana, and they want them. The city council already voted to accept them, yet O'Reilly never says a word about it. At the end of the segment O'Reilly made a joke that the Gitmo prisoners should all be sent to Vermont, haha, funny, not.

Then O'Reilly did a tabloid garbage segment about John Edwards mistress, with some FOX News stooge, Nina Easton. Earth to O'Reilly, this is not Inside Edition, report some real news jackass.

Then another segment on the week old prison abuse photo story, hey moron, Obama already blocked the photo release, so the story is over, let it go man. O'Reilly put 2 right-wing stooges on to talk about it, Oliver North and Pete Hegseth. The 3 of them trashed the NY Times, the ACLU, and the LA Times, again, for the millionth time, on the same story that's over and done.

O'Reilly even told them that Obama did the right thing, yet he keeps reporting the story, which makes no sense, if he did the right thing, why do you keep reporting it every night, and putting nothing but right-wing idiots on to talk about it. North and Hegseth trashed Obama over and over, and O'Reilly had to tell them Obama did the right thing so he is not the enemy. But that did not stop them, all they wanted to do was trash Obama, finally O'Reilly told them they are making a mistake.

It just shows what right-wing idiots they are, they are blinded by partisan bias and they can not see straight. Then the body language mumbo jumbo with the right-wing blonde bimbo. This stuff is tabloid garbage and I refuse to report it, because it's not news. It's biased crap to get ratings, all she does is read Democrats body language and say they are lying, the whole segment is a scam, and a waste of 4 minutes of tv time.

Then a segment called media lies and corruption, with the biased and corrupt Bernie Goldberg. Billy said his ratings are great, and NBC lied about their ratings. Yeah, this is the guy who said he get's 6 million viewers a night, then changed it to 5 million, then back to 6 million, he just makes it up, the real number is about 2.8 to 3.4 million a night. Goldberg is a biased right-wing hack who was kicked out of the real journalism business, so now he makes a living lying about how biased the media is, except for him and FOX News of course.

These 2 morons sit around and complain about how biased everyone else is, when they are more biased than anyone they complain about, they just refuse to admit it. And they never find any bias at FOX News, or any Republican media outlets. When I document their bias right here in this blog just about every day, yet they never report any of it. They are the laughing stock of media watchdogs, when you are more biased than anyone on tv, you should never criticize anyone else, yet they do, and still sleep well at night, knowing they lie to the American people.

If anyone takes them serious, you need to be locked up in a padded room. It's 2 biased and partisan right-wingers crying about bias in the media, with no Democrat to report on any Republican bias. They cherry pick a few isolated examples of bias, and then claim it proves the entire media has a liberal bias. When I could cherry pick a few examples of Republican bias from the same source they used, and imply they have a Republican bias. It's dishonest reporting, bias, and just wrong. Which O'Reilly calls fair and balanced journalism.

Then the bogus reality check garbage, the pinheads and patriots, and the e-mails. All of which was so lame it was not even worth reporting on. It was 6 stupid and worthless reality checks, most of them did not even have a reality check, just some lame video or something.

Obama Job Approval 65% - GOP Still Attacking Him
By: Steve - May 20, 2009 - 6:30pm

Today the Gallup Daily Tracking Poll has president Obama at a 65% job approval, which is pretty much right where it was the day he took office. The Obama job approval numbers are not dropping, yet O'Reilly, Gingrich, Rove, Morris, Ingraham, Beck, Miller, Crowley, Ham, Goldberg, and on and on, do nothing but attack everything Obama has done, and what he might do in the future.

They are clueless, and out of touch with the American people. It shows that they are partisan hacks who have no sense of reality. They attack Obama even when he has a 65% job approval, they criticize everything he does, when the vast majority of the people support him. It's a look into the mind of a biased, partisan, Republican spin doctor, who gets on tv, or does a radio show, or both.

No matter what Obama does they hate it, if he cured Cancer tomorrow they would find something negative to say about it. These are the Factor regulars, the Factor all stars. These are the people O'Reilly goes to every week to give us political analysis. Obama has been the president for 120 days, and in that 4 months he has tried to fix the massive problems Bush left him. I for one think he is doing a pretty good job, considering the mess he had to deal with.

Now look at what O'Reilly, Hannity, and Beck do, they spend their entire show attacking Obama and everything he does with 95% Republican guests. And while they are doing it 65% of the people like what he is doing. Just think about that for a minute, even when Obama is doing well, and the vast majority of the people like him, O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends still spend 95% of their time attacking everything he does.

The problem here is, they hate Obama, and their hate has blinded them to the truth, that Obama is a good president, and he is doing a good job. Their partisan ideology can not let them admit that, so they attack him even when the majority of the people approve of what he is doing. Even when he has not even been the president for a year, and most of his policies have not been put in place yet, or had time to work.

It shows how biased and corrupt people like O'Reilly and his right-wing friends are. They spend 95% of their time attacking a man with a 65% job approval, how crazy is that. Then they defend guys like Dick Cheney who approved of torture, and has a 19% job approval, if he's lucky. It's like watching the old Twilight Zone tv show, it's not reality, it's biased partisan right-wing garbage. I could see if Obama was at 40% approval, or 45%, it would make sense to attack him, then you could at least argue that half the people agree with you. But it's crazy to attack a man with 65% approval, it just makes you look biased, and stupid.

And one last thing, if O'Reilly or any of his Republican friends are reading this, let me say something to you. All your right-wing spin, lies, and hate towards Obama and the Democrats, is not working, his poll numbers are not dropping, you are wasting your time and basically making a fool of yourself. The polls show the GOP losing support with all major demographics in America. You have no leader, except for Limbaugh and Cheney, ok maybe the braindead Sarah Palin.

I say this to you right-wing freaks, run Cheney and Palin for president and vice president in 2012, or Limbaugh and Palin, and see what happens. I beg you, because if you do it would be a landslide re-election for Obama. Those are your leaders, and it's frankly pretty sad. The party of Reagan is now the party of no, and the party of Limbaugh, Cheney, and Palin, which is just pathetic.

O'Reilly & Hannity Win Worlds Worst Person Awards
By: Steve - May 20, 2009 - 4:00pm

Monday night Keith Olbermann awarded the silver and gold to Hannity and O'Dummy in worst person in the world for being clueless right-wing idiots, with no facts, and massive hypocrisy.

OLBERMANN: Runner-up, Sean Hannity, coward; apparently missed another memo from recent American history. Attorney General Eric Holder announced there would be the turn over of US attorneys typical to the start of the new presidency. Hannity, parenthesis, coward, replied, “remember how outraged Democrats were when President Bush replaced a handful of his own US attorneys?

Now liberals claim that the prosecutors were unjustly removed for political reasons and argued that President Bush had no right to replace his appointees. Elections matter, that‘s your reason? Correctly if I‘m wrong, but isn‘t that considered political motivated?”

OLBERMANN: Seriously, Sean, it‘s no longer necessary to say correct me if I‘m wrong. You‘re always wrong!

Of the 93 U.S. attorneys Ronald Reagan inherited, he replaced 89 of them in the first two years. Clinton replaced 89 himself. Bush 88. The start of term stuff is tradition. When you fire nine guys for refusing to corrupt our system of justice and to try to send people to prison because they are in the opposition party and do it on phony charges of voter fraud that never happened, that‘s politically motivated and it‘s illegal.

But our winner is Skeesics. Sit back, please, because this may be the world record for short-distance hypocrisy.


O‘REILLY: Policing the net now. The reason I keep doing this privacy stuff is I‘m trying to protect you. Somewhere along the line in your life—believe me, it‘s happened to me—somebody‘s going to come up and start snipping pictures of you.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We‘re with Fox News. I want to ask you a few questions.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: From “The O‘Reilly Factor,” wanted to ask you a couple questions about the website.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Fox News, how are you?

O‘REILLY: You know, if you can, avoid them. You know, nothing good in this high-tech age comes out of anybody intruding on you in that way.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Want to comment on that?

Hey, judge.

O‘REILLY: You might be able to go after people that took the picture, posted it. it‘s A long slog and ain‘t gonna diminish the embarrassment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you leave me alone for just a second.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: That‘s truly disgraceful.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I beg your pardon.


O‘REILLY: So I want everybody to know, privacy in America, done.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Now I‘ll ask you to leave my private property or I will call the police.

Please leave my premises.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You guys are done.

O‘REILLY: Technology means we don‘t have any privacy at all. It‘s a shame.


OLBERMANN: And it‘s your fault. According to Think, he has now sent his stalker producers out there to ambush 40 different people while trying to protect your privacy. But revenge often comes swiftly and from odd places. “Somewhere along the line in your life—believe me, it‘s happened to me—somebody is going to come up and start snipping pictures of you.”

Friday night at Yankee Stadium in New York on the 100-foot wide high definition screen on the scoreboard, a shot of Donald Trump sitting in the crowd. He got some mild booing. Then they showed the guy next to Him, Skeesics, wild sustained booing. Appropriate for today‘s worst person in the world.

More Evidence FOX News Lies to You
By: Steve - May 20, 2009 - 8:30am

FOX News just hired Tucker Carlson and the right-wing idiot has already been caught lying about Obama, wow that was quick. He may have the new record for lying about a Democratic president after being hired by FOX. How can these guys ask anyone to believe a word they say when they are caught lying about simple things like this, especially now with Google and youtube, and it is so easy to find out if they are lying.

In a May 18, 2009 discussion, Fox News contributor Tucker Carlson falsely asserted that President Obama was afraid to use the word "abortion" during his May 17 commencement address at the University of Notre Dame.

During the discussion, a reader asked Carlson and Ana Marie Cox, who was also answering questions: "How do you both think Obama did at Notre Dame yesterday? Do we move forward with a dialogue on abortion or did Obama just say what people at ND wanted to hear?"

Carlson replied:
You can't have a real conversation about abortion if you're afraid to use the word.

Pro-choice? Pro-life? Those are slogans designed to obscure rather than illuminate.

The debate is about whether abortion ought to be legal, not about whether you respect "life," whatever that is, or whether you think people ought to have "choices," whatever those may be.

So let's call it what it is. That'd be a good first step. Obama, who's deeply interested in language, knows this but not surprisingly failed to mention it.
Obama did not fail to mention the word abortion, in fact, he used it seven times during his speech. And of course these right-wing idiots like Tucker Carlson (who work for FOX) never let the facts get in the way. They just make this garbage up and hope someone believes it, even though he knew it was a lie, and he damn well knew Obama used the word "abortion" seven times.

I think Congress should pass a three strikes law for journalists, it would say if you get caught lying three times you are banned from tv, and any job in journalism. O'Reilly would be off the air in 45 minutes, and Tucker would probably be off the air in 24 hours, maybe less. Hannity would not even make it an hour, Beck would be gone in 15 minutes, and Limbaugh would not even make it 10 minutes.

The Tuesday 5-19-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 20, 2009 - 8:00am

The TPM was called Hating America. O'Reilly did another talking points memo about the ACLU trying to get the 2,000 prison abuse photos made public. Even though Obama has already blocked their release, O'Reilly hammered it again for his right-wing viewers who love to see him trash the ACLU. Billy repeated his right-wing propaganda and said they hate America. Earth to O'Jerkoff, Obama already blocked the photo release, so move on idiot. Report some real news for once, and stop re-hashing week old stories.

Then O'Reilly had Dr. Marc Lamont Hill on to discuss a story about cops in NY not being racist based on some bogus right-wing Rand study. O'Reilly denied the cops are racist, even though 80% of the people they stop and do those random searches on are black. After Dr. Hill pointed that out, O'Reilly still disagreed and denied the cops had any racism. Hey Billy, if there is no racism by the cops, explain how every time an unarmed man is shot 22 times it's always a black man. And no matter how you want to spin it, if the people they are stopping in random searches are 80% black, that's racism sparky.

Then O'Reilly talked about the Obama speech at Norte Dame. Billy actually said Obama did well, and that he gave a good speech. Then he ruined the whole thing by having the far right nasal nose Laura Ingraham on to trash Obama and slam everything he does. And of course Ingraham hated the speech and did not have one good thing to say about Obama.

She even trashed Norte Dame, claimed the school was hurt by the Obama speech, and called it a disaster. Which proves that Ingraham is a total far right idiot, because almost everyone liked the speech and said it was good, even O'Reilly. Billy did agree with her on one crazy thing, she said Norte Dame is now a secular school, and O'Reilly agreed, because they dared to let a pro-choice president speak there, which is just ridiculous, and they are still a catholic school morons.

O'Reilly mentioned the new CAFE standards Obama is putting in place, 35.5 mpg by 2016, O'Reilly said it was a great plan, and of course Ingraham hated it. She called it a Government takeover and a war on the middle class, ummmmm, huh? We already have CAFE standards, Obama is just going to raise them, how in the hell is that a war on the middle class, it was just insane, and even O'Reilly disagreed with the far right nut Ingraham. She hates Obama so bad she can't see straight, or think straight. Even when Obama has a good idea she still hammers him and claims it's a disaster, when the only disaster is Ingraham, and O'Reilly for putting that nut on his show.

Then O'Dummy had the truly crazy Glenn Beck on, two right-wing loons in a row. Beck is even crazier than Ingraham, if that's possible. Billy and Beck spent the whole segment talking about the bogus ACORN story, earth to right-wing jerks, let it go, the election is over, there was no voter fraud, it was all made up by FOX and all you other right-wing partisans. Billy and Beck are just trying to smear ACORN because they register a lot of Democratic voters, and they hate that with a passion, it's all partisan garbage.

Then the dumbest segment ever put on a cable news show. It's called Barack And a Hard Place. Now get this, it's a segment to report the best and worst thing Obama has done this week. Think about that for a second, it's Tuesday, and there are still three days left in the week. How can you do a best and worst of the week on a fricking Tuesday, it's insane. This segment does not even make sense unless you do it on a Friday, because that is the end of the week. Billy has Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes on to do it, but I refuse to report on it because it's just stupid, the damn week is not even over yet.

Then the stupid and unfunny right-wing stooge Dennis Miller was on to trash Pelosi and Biden. Billy just puts him on to make jokes about liberals, and then he laughs like crazy at all of them, when it's not even funny, just sad. It's all the things O'Reilly wants to say, so he has Miller on to do it for him. Miller called Pelosi a train wreck, and a shrieking harridan magpie, talk about disrespect for women, that's it, and Billy said nothing, in fact he loved it and thought it was funny. But if a liberal makes a joke about Miss California having fake boobs O'Reilly does a whole segment on it and calls for the womens groups to protest them.

Now that's some big time hypocrisy and double standards. Miller basically called Joe Biden a dumbass, he called him V.P. Chew Gum. This hack of an unfunny right-wing idiot insulted the Speaker of The House, and the Vice President, and Billy said nothing, because he loved it, and laughed at the insulting and disrespectful hate from Miller. But if a liberal does a Bush joke, or a Cheney joke, or a Palin joke, O'Reilly does a whole fricking segment on it and screams bloody murder. Then he puts Dennis Miller on his show to do the same damn thing he complained about when liberals did it to a Republican. Miller even said the guys at Gitmo are doing Gods work, since when is torture, Gods work.

Then O'Loser had the two right-wing legal morons on, Lis Wiehl and Megyn kelly. They talked about a couple lame legal cases that nobody cares about, some ADF lawsuit about gay people who protest at churches, they are the right-wing ACLU btw, who O'Reilly loves and agrees with everything they do, he even donates money to them. And some tabloid garbage about a female teacher having sex with a male student.

Then the pinheads and patriots, but no e-mail. And btw, this show was billed as the Factor all star show. If these are his all stars, I feel sorry for him. O'Reilly named Jesse Ventura the pinhead for a statement he made about torture on the View. Which is funny, because O'Reilly will not even have him on the Factor to debate torture, so he is a coward who calls people names when they are not there. And I would bet the farm Billy would never call Jesse a pinhead to his face. But he's a tough guy when the guy is not there.

The Monday 5-18-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 19, 2009 - 10:30am

The talking points memo was delayed for a big brand new breaking news story, the two week old Pelosi/CIA story. Yes I'm serious, O'Reilly made the two week old right-wing Pelosi smear job, his lead story and delayed the TPM for later in the show. And yet, if a real breaking news story like the Senate Torture Report is released, O'Reilly not only does not delay his TPM, he did not report that story at all.

Which is just more evidence that O'Reilly is a partisan right-wing hack, and later in the show, Ham, Williams, and O'Reilly all admitted it is a partisan story. With the Republicans taking the CIA side, and the Democrats taking the Pelosi side. So O'Reilly basically admitted he is a Republican, because he is part of the GOP smear job on Pelosi, and he takes the CIA side of the story. O'Reilly had Newt Gingrich on to discuss it, all alone, with no Democrat, the far right Newt Gingrich, now that's some fair and balanced objective journalism, NOT!

And of course Billy and Newt smeared and lied their right-wing asses off about Pelosi, without reporting all the facts. Like the fact that former Senator Bob Graham said the CIA misled him on the briefings too, and that he has proven 3 of the 4 briefings they said they gave him did not happen. The CIA even admitted they got it wrong with Graham, yet Billy and Newt said the CIA is never wrong, and the CIA never lies. These are the people who used torture for Bush, and now we are supposed to believe what they say, even after they were caught in a lie about the briefings they gave Graham.

Newt said Pelosi insulted and defamed the entire CIA, which is just ridiculous. She was only talking about the people at the CIA who briefed her, not the entire CIA, you right-wing jackass. Not to mention, what if Pelosi is proven right, nobody knows the truth yet. Billy and Newt act like it has been proven that Pelosi is the liar, when nothing has been proven yet. But these two right-wing idiots have already convicted Pelosi, and crazy Newt has called for her to step down as speaker, even before it has been proven she was wrong. And O'Reilly calls that fair and balanced journalism, haha, now that's funny.

Then O'Reilly did the TPM, called War on The NY Times, huh? Again? I did not know the last war on the Times had ended, but I guess he re-started it, again. Billy is still harping on about some ACORN story the NY Times killed before the presidential election, and he had two guests on to discuss it. One Republican attorney who hates Obama and ACORN and some woman who claims to be a Democrat, which is questionable, because she want's to get Obama, so I have doubts she is a real Democrat.

Earth to O'Reilly, the election is over, Obama won big, even without ACORN, Obama still wins by a landslide, let it go man. What's really funny is when the word got out that Bush might be investigated for torture, Billy said we should not look back in history, and that we should just move forward and deal with the problems we have now. But if some right-wing nut digs up a year old crazy ACORN story, that might link Obama to them, Billy loves looking back in time. And even if the story was reported it would not have changed a thing, Obama won the election 360 to 170, and it was not even close, idiots.

And then O'Reilly had his two favortie FOX stooges on, Mary K. Ham and Juan (the fake Democrat) Williams. And of course they both kissed Billy's ass and agreed with everything he said. Juan even said O'Reilly is correct, and not partisan at all. Which blows my mind, because a braindead monkey can see that O'Reilly is nothing but a right-wing hack. Dear Juan, I know you have to kiss Billy's ass to stay on the show, but my God man, how can you sleep at night after saying that garbage.

If there was a top 5 list of partisan right-wing idiots, O'Reilly would be in the top 5 of any list. My top 5 would be, Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly, Beck, and Gingrich. Yet Juan claims O'Reilly is not partisan, yeah and I'm Joe The Plumber too.

Then O'Reilly did some tabloid garbage segment about American Idol, and asked if the religious guy will be hurt in the voting. Ummmmmmmmm, who cares, and how is this news. O'Reilly did a whole segment on this crap, then during the segment he said he never watches the show and does not care about the story. Then he does a whole segment on it, wasting 5 minutes of tv time on a so-called news show, which makes him a total idiot.

Then the two culture warriors were on, Hoover and Carlson. And for people that do not know, there are no Democratic culture warriors, just the two Republicans that work for FOX. They are on to agree with O'Reilly on the lame culture issues he decides to talk about. They talked about the myspace suicide lady story, the myspace owned by News Corp, the parent company of FOX News, but they never disclosed that fact. They also cried about Axelrod making a joke about Miss California, when it was a joke. Even O'Reilly said it was just a joke and that he was not offended, then why report it dumbass.

They also talked about some gay issue, and crazy Carlson told O'Reilly that 70% of Americans oppose gay marriage. Which is just a total lie. I looked at 5 or 6 different polls and the highest I could find was 54% opposed to it, 54% is not 70%, not one poll has it at 70%, so Carlson is a proven right-wing liar. She makes it up and hopes someone believes it, just like her hero O'Reilly. Even Billy knew she was wrong, because he told her he does not think that's right.

Then the stupid no reality, just Billy's spin on reality, Reality Check segment. He had 6 reality checks that were just lame, and not even worth reporting. Then pinheads and patriots and the highly edited e-mails. O'Reilly then promoted the Tuesday night Factor as an All Star show, but every guest is a Republican, except Alan Colmes. It's just a bunch of right-wing idiots, and Billy calls them all stars. I will report tomorrow what these great all stars said.

O'Reilly/Republican Spin on Polls & Torture
By: Steve - May 18, 2009 - 9:30am

Billy and his right-wing friends are spinning the recent Gallup poll that says 51% are pro-life, and 42% are pro-choice, on the Friday May 15th Factor Billy said this:
O'REILLY: "Impact" segment tonight. New Gallup says that for the first time since 1995, the majority of Americans describe themselves as pro life. 51 percent. 42 percent say they are pro choice. The rest don't know.
And that was it, that's all he reported from the poll. What Billy failed to mention is all the other poll results he does not want you to know. That same Gallup poll also found that 76 percent of Americans believe abortion should be legal under most circumstances, and that only 22 percent believe abortion should always be illegal.

O'Reilly is in that 22% btw, the crazy far right 22% that is extreme pro-life, who believe no abortion should ever happen. He also failed to mention that the 7% increase in people who say they are pro-life is from Republicans who now say they are pro-life, there was no increase with Democrats or Independents. Funny how O'Reilly never reported any of that, he just forgot I guess, yeah that's it, he just forgot, haha.

Not to mention O'Reilly and his far right pro-life friends spin pro-choice as supporting baby killing, which is just ridiculous. They call abortion doctors baby killers, and most pro-life fanatics say Obama supports baby killing. I am pro-choice, but I do not support baby killing. I am actually opposed to abortion, but I am pro-choice. Because I believe in real freedom in what is supposed to be a free country, that means the woman has a choice, it's called freedom to choose. Without having some pro-life right-wing nut telling her what to do with her body.

And btw, O'Reilly calls himself a journalist who tells you the truth. If that was an accurate statement how do you O'Reilly loving fools explain this:

1) O'Reilly has totally ignored the 232 page Senate Torture Report, and to this day not said one word about it, the detailed report that proves Bush and Cheney approved of torture. Even though it was the biggest story in the country for a week, O'Reilly never said a word about it.

2) O'Reilly has totally ignored the Senate Torture hearing where Ali Soufan, the FBI interrogator (who recently broke a seven year silence) to say he was getting info without using torture, and faster then after they started the torture.

3) O'Reilly has totally ignored the reports that Cheney ordered the torture to get a confession of a link between Al Qaida and Iraq, and it worked, but then the guy later said he told them that just to get them to stop the torture. And we know there was no link, yet Cheney had them torture a confession out of the guy anyway, proving that torture gets you false information.

4) O'Reilly has not had 1 Republican on the Factor who says waterboarding is torture, ever, even though many of them do, including John McCain. This is done so O'Reilly can spin out his right-wing propaganda that only Democrats say waterboarding is torture. O'Reilly will not even call it torture, he uses the GOP talking points and calls it harsh, or Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, which is just code for torture.

5) O'Reilly has totally ignored all the former CIA agents who say torture is not a good way to get information, like Bob Baer, that most of the time they just tell you what you want to hear. Not one of those CIA agents has even been on the Factor, the only CIA agents he has on are the Republican agents who have an agenda, and who worked for Bush and Cheney, and were part of the group that supported the torture.

6) O'Reilly also failed to report that the UN Convention Against Torture says no torture is ever allowed, no exceptions, even in a time or war, or a threat of war, and even if a president orders it. I guess Billy just forgot to report that too, yeah right. Article 2 of the UN Convention Against Torture says this:
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.
7) O'Reilly is also ignoring one big thing, there is no proof, none, zip, zilch, zero, that they could have got the same information without using torture, there is no proof of that, yet O'Reilly and his right-wing friends act like the info they claim they got could only obtained by using the torture. In fact, Ali Soufan says he was getting more info, and faster, before they started the torture.

But you will never hear any of that on the Factor, because O'Reilly (the so-called journalist) ignores it all.

Dick Cheney Story O'Reilly Has Totally Ignored
By: Steve - May 16, 2009 - 1:30pm

Everyone should read this article, it details how corrupt Dick Cheney is, and it also shows that O'Reilly has ignored it all, proving that he ignores important news to cover for his good friend Dick Cheney. Here are a couple questions for O'Reilly, how come you have never had one Republican on the Factor who says waterboarding is torture, and how come you have never had Col. Wilkerson on the Factor. Answer that smart guy.

The Truth About Richard Bruce Cheney

May 13, 2009

This is a guest post exclusive to The Washington Note by Col. Lawrence B. Wilkerson, who is former chief of staff of the Department of State during the term of Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Last night I was on Rachel Maddow's show on MSNBC at the top of the hour. But before I came on, through the earpiece I listened to the five minutes that Rachel sketched as a lead-in. Most of it was videotape from the last few days of former Vice President Dick Cheney extolling the virtues of harsh interrogation, torture, and his leadership. I had heard some of it earlier of course but not all of it and not in such a tightly-packed package.

Let's just say that five minutes of the Sith Lord was stunningly inaccurate. So, when I got home last night, I thought long and hard about what I knew at this point in my investigations with respect to the former VP's office. Here it is.

First, more Americans were killed by terrorists on Cheney's watch than on any other leader's watch in US history. So his constant claim that no Americans were killed in the "seven and a half years" after 9/11 of his vice presidency takes on a new texture when one considers that fact. And it is a fact.

There was absolutely no policy priority attributed to al-Qa'ida by the Cheney-Bush administration in the months before 9/11. Counterterrorism czar Dick Clarke's position was downgraded, al-Qa'ida was put in the background so as to emphasize Iraq, and the policy priorities were lowering taxes, abrogating the ABM Treaty and building ballistic missile defenses.

Second, the fact no attack has occurred on U.S. soil since 9/11--much touted by Cheney--is due almost entirely to the nation's having deployed over 200,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and not to "the Cheney method of interrogation."

Those troops have kept al-Qa'ida at bay, killed many of them, and certainly "fixed" them, as we say in military jargon. Plus, sadly enough, those 200,000 troops present a far more lucrative and close proximity target for al-Qa'ida than the United States homeland. Testimony to that fact is clear: almost 5,000 American troops have died, more Americans than died on 9/11. Of course, they are the type of Americans for whom Cheney hasn't much use as he declared rather dramatically when he achieved no less than five draft deferments during the Vietnam War.

Third--and here comes the blistering fact--when Cheney claims that if President Obama stops "the Cheney method of interrogation and torture", the nation will be in danger, he is perverting the facts once again. But in a very ironic way.

My investigations have revealed to me--vividly and clearly--that once the Abu Ghraib photographs were made public in the Spring of 2004, the CIA, its contractors, and everyone else involved in administering "the Cheney methods of interrogation", simply shut down. Nada. Nothing. No torture or harsh techniques were employed by any U.S. interrogator. Period. People were too frightened by what might happen to them if they continued.

What I am saying is that no torture or harsh interrogation techniques were employed by any U.S. interrogator for the entire second term of Cheney-Bush, 2005-2009. So, if we are to believe the protestations of Dick Cheney, that Obama's having shut down the "Cheney interrogation methods" will endanger the nation, what are we to say to Dick Cheney for having endangered the nation for the last four years of his vice presidency?

Likewise, what I have learned is that as the administration authorized harsh interrogation in April and May of 2002--well before the Justice Department had rendered any legal opinion--its principal priority for intelligence was not aimed at pre-empting another terrorist attack on the U.S. but discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and al-Qa'ida.

So furious was this effort that on one particular detainee, even when the interrogation team had reported to Cheney's office that their detainee "was compliant" (meaning the team recommended no more torture), the VP's office ordered them to continue the enhanced methods. The detainee had not revealed any al-Qa'ida-Baghdad contacts yet. This ceased only after Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, under waterboarding in Egypt, "revealed" such contacts. Of course later we learned that al-Libi revealed these contacts only to get the torture to stop.

There in fact were no such contacts. (Incidentally, al-Libi just "committed suicide" in Libya. Interestingly, several U.S. lawyers working with tortured detainees were attempting to get the Libyan government to allow them to interview al-Libi.

Less important but still busting my chops as a Republican, is the damage that the Sith Lord Cheney is doing to my political party.

He and Rush Limbaugh seem to be its leaders now. Lindsay Graham, John McCain, John Boehner, and all other Republicans of note seem to be either so enamored of Cheney-Limbaugh (or fearful of them?) or, on the other hand, so appalled by them, that the cat has their tongues. And meanwhile fewer Americans identify as Republicans than at any time since WWII. We're at 21% and falling--right in line with the number of cranks, reprobates, and loonies in the country.

When will we hear from those in my party who give a damn about their country and about the party of Lincoln?

When will someone of stature tell Dick Cheney that enough is enough? Go home. Spend your 70 million. Luxuriate in your Eastern Shore mansion. Shoot quail with your friends--and your friends.

Stay out of our way as we try to repair the extensive damage you've done--to the country and to its Republican Party.

The Bob Graham Story O'Reilly Has Totally Ignored
By: Steve - May 16, 2009 - 1:00pm

Last night O'Reilly did another biased one sided smear job on Pelosi with 2 Republicans and no Democrats, they basically did a right-wing hit job on her with almost no facts. And they never once mentioned Bob Graham, or the news on what he is saying about the CIA, and how they mislead him too. Here is that story, the one O'Reilly refuses to report, because it kills his right-wing spin on Pelosi.

Graham: CIA was 'loose with the facts' about interrogation briefings

Published in the Gainesville Sun: Friday, May 15, 2009

Former U.S. Sen. Bob Graham said Friday that his detailed diaries show Democrats were told less about the interrogation of terrorists than the CIA claims. Graham said the CIA claimed he was briefed four times about extreme interrogation techniques as chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. He said he called the head of archives at the University of Florida, where his notebooks are stored, to check if he had listed the briefings.

"We established that three out of four of these alleged briefings never took place," he said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has been under fire this week about her knowledge of so-called enhanced interrogation techniques, which some have deemed torture. While the CIA has said she was fully briefed about the methods, Pelosi said she was briefed once and misled about the use of waterboarding. Graham backs her up, and said he doesn't recall being told about waterboarding or other extreme techniques in his briefing. He believes that "misinformation is out there" based on his experience.

"I think the Republican-led CIA of that era, among other things, was loose with the facts and loose with the record," he said.

Graham, Florida governor from 1989 to 1987 and U.S. senator from 1987 to 2005, is the namesake of UF's Graham Center for Public Service. He donated his notebooks to the university, but they are currently unavailable to the public. Carl Van Ness, UF historian and curator of archives and manuscripts, said the notebooks contain incredibly detailed, almost minute-by-minute, logs of Graham's activities.

"I've never seen anything like it as an archivist," he said.

Graham said the CIA reported he was briefed twice in April 2002 and twice in September 2002. But he said the notebooks show he was briefed just once, on Sept. 27 of that year.

And even more for Billy to ignore:

Bob Graham: The CIA Made Up Three Briefing Sessions

By: emptywheel Thursday May 14, 2009

Bob Graham just appeared on WNYC's Brian Lehrer Show. In addition to repeating earlier reports that he was never briefed on waterboarding, Graham revealed that the first time he asked the CIA when he was briefed on torture, it claimed it had briefed him on three dates when no briefing took place.

When asked to respond to Philip Zelikow's assertion that members of Congress from both parties had been briefed on this program, Graham said that when he asked the CIA when he had been briefed on the program, the CIA gave him the dates of four briefings, two in April 2002 and two in September 2002, when they claimed they had briefed him about the program. But after Graham consulted his own records, he pointed out that on three of those dates, he had not attended any briefing.

After Graham pointed this out to the CIA, they conceded their own dates were incorrect.

Graham went on to repeat his claim that he had no recollection of being told about waterboarding Zubaydah or anything else about extreme interrogations.

The Friday 5-15-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 16, 2009 - 12:50pm

The TPM was called Business Corruption. O'Reilly accused GE of a conspiracy with Obama. Billy claims they have this big plan to make Billions by getting Obama elected then Obama will give them Billions in Government contracts. Good luck proving that one sparky. His evidence, GE hired Tom Daschle and Obama wanted to put daschle in his administration. And GE is set to get some Government contracts while Obama is president. In other words, he has no evidence, just right-wing speculation and insane conspiracy pipe dreams.

O'Reilly even wants the Feds to investigate, lol. Hey Mr. watchdog, where were you on Halliburton and Dick Cheney, where there was real corruption, and real evidence of the corruption, you were silent, you said nothing, and you investigated nothing. Earth to O'Idiot, GE has many Government contracts already, they had them before Obama became president, and they will get more, Obama had nothing to do with it, and there is nothing to investigate. So investigate that moron, and if you want to investigate something, try investigating what Col. Wilkerson is saying about Cheney.

Then O'Reilly had the totally insane Glenn Beck on who of course agreed with every crazy thing O'Reilly said. Beck even went farther, and said it would be the biggest scandal ever, even bigger than watergate, ummmmm, huh? Bigger than watergate? If it's such a big scandal, how come nobody has ever heard of it? The scandal is in their mind, here is some advice, when there is a scandal, report it, until then, keep your right-wing garbage to yourself.

During the segment O'Reilly said it was corruption with no oversight, then 2 minutes later he admitted it was all out in the open, that it might all be legal, that they are not even trying to hide it, and that Obama probably does not even know it's happening. So where is the scandal, if it's all in the open, it's legal, and Obama does not even know about it, how can it be a scandal. The whole segment was just a massive waste of tv time, and nothing but right-wing conspiracy garbage, with no evidence of any laws being broken. let alone proof they had a deal to do it before the election.

Then O'Reilly did another one sided biased smear job on Pelosi, with Chris Wallace from FOX News. O'Reilly said Pelosi is a proven liar, that her credibility is shot, and she is done. All that before all the facts are out, and before there has even been an investigation. But when a Democrat accused a Republican of something, O'Reilly would say it has not been proven yet, and you have to wait to see what the investigation finds. When it's Pelosi, Billy finds her guilty, before there has even been an investigation.

And they did it with 2 partisan Republicans, nobody to defend Pelosi, or give the other side of the story. And what a shocker, no mention of what former Senator and Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said, Bob Graham said the CIA lied to him too, and claims they gave him briefings that never happened. Graham said Friday that his detailed diaries show Democrats were told less about the interrogation of terrorists than the CIA claims.

Graham said the CIA claimed he was briefed four times about extreme interrogation techniques as chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. And he established that three out of four of these alleged briefings never took place. Graham was a U.S. senator from 1987 to 2005, is the namesake of UF's Graham Center for Public Service. He donated his notebooks to the university, but they are currently unavailable to the public.

Carl Van Ness, UF curator of archives and manuscripts, said the notebooks contain incredibly detailed, almost minute-by-minute, logs of Graham's activities. "I've never seen anything like it as an archivist," he said.

Graham said the CIA reported he was briefed twice in April 2002 and twice in September 2002. But he said the notebooks show he was briefed just once, on Sept. 27 of that year.

So what we have is proof the Bush run CIA mislead Pelosi and Graham, the CIA even admitted they got the dates wrong of the Graham briefings, yet O'Reilly and Wallace ignored it all to accuse her of lying. O'Reilly even said the CIA has detailed records and they could never be wrong, then he said he believes the CIA over Pelosi. Which shows his bias, because the evidence shows the CIA was not being truthful, but all that is meaningless to O'Reilly. He just smears Pelosi anyway, while ignoring the facts.

Then O'Reilly smeared Obama some more by doing a story on the Norte Dame speech, he had a Democrat and a Republican student on from Norte Dame. And of course Billy never said a word about the PEW poll that shows a majority of Catholics support Obama speaking there, and getting the honorary degree. Becaue then it would destroy his right-wing spin that all Catholics are opposed to the speech. At least he had a Democrat guest, but it was still a 2 on 1 with O'Reilly and the Republican against the Democrat.

Then O'Reilly had a segment called Twister Terror. He put some right-wing weather guy from Oklahoma on to deny Global Warming, the guy said it was bunk. O'Reilly said the Global Warming debate is dumb, and that nobody knows why the earth is getting warmer. Which just shows how ignorant he is, because they do know, and only right-wing idiots deny it and claim they do not know. I'm shocked they even admit the earth is getting warmer, most of them will not even admit that. This whole segment was just more one sided right-wing bias, with no actual scientist (who believes in Global Warming) there to give them the facts. Billy calls that fair and balanced journalism.

Then Geraldo was on to talk tabloid garbage, that was not even worth reporting. Then the Factor TV Icon segment on the Friends tv show, and where are they now. Who cares, and how is that news. Answer, it's not, it's just a way for O'Reilly to waste more time ignoring real news by doing this garbage that nobody cares about. Then the pinheads and patriots nonsense, and the hand picked, cherry picked, highly edited lame e-mails.

And of course O'Reilly ignored the Rove story about Attorneygate and his interview with the Government prosecutor. Not to mention he has still not said a word about the 232 page Senate Torture report, or Ali Soufan, or Bob Graham backing up Pelosi that proves the CIA was wrong, or the Torture hearing a few days ago. For a so-called journalist O'Reilly sure ignores a lot of important news, oh yeah that's right, I forgot his report on the old Friends tv show is more important.

More Proof O'Reilly is Wrong About Dick Cheney
By: Steve - May 15, 2009 - 12:40pm

O'Reilly claims Cheney is winning the PR war with Obama and the Democrats over torture, he wrote an article about it yesterday, and even told Dick Morris Wednesday night that Cheney is winning the PR war. Which is all just ridiculous, and only a right-wing fool would believe that. It shows that O'Reilly sees things through a right-wing filter, because only a few Republicans believe Cheney is winning, about 33 percent of them to be exact.

The vast majority of Republicans, 57 percent, believe Cheney is hurting the Republican cause more than he is helping. And a new poll of Republicans only proves it. In the latest National Journal poll of GOP insiders, 57 percent said that Cheney has “hurt” the party since leaving office.

Q: Has Dick Cheney helped or hurt the Republican Party since leaving office?

Helped - 33%
Hurt - 57%
No Effect - 5%
Both - 5%

Dick Cheney has been perhaps the most prominent conservative critic of the Obama administration. But his refusal to leave the public stage has many Republicans wincing. Speaking to National Journal anonymously, many of the insiders harshly denounced how he has acted since leaving office.
“Cheney represents the grumpy intolerance that has come to characterize the GOP.

Get off the stage!” said one.

“There is nothing Dick Cheney can say or do to help the Republican Party today,” said another.

“The best thing he can do is disappear for the next 10 years.”
So answer this Billy, how can Cheney be winning the PR war, when 57% of the people in his own party want him to just shut up and go away. And that does not even count the rest of the country, if you polled all of America, I bet 80% would want him to shut up and go away. Nobody believes the Cheney right-wing spin, except a few Republicans like O'Reilly, Hannity, Limbaugh, etc.

We all know Cheney is just doing it to make Obama look bad because he spoke out against the Bush torture, and blamed them for ruining the economy. Which was true btw, Cheney just can not let it go because he does not want (himself or Bush) to go down in history as the torture administration. That is why they refuse to call it torture, and they came out with this lame EIT mumbo jumbo.

They (including O'Reilly) think everyone is stupid, and that if they call torture enhanced interrogation techniques everyone will believe it, they were wrong, and Cheney is wrong. The kicker is that Democrats want Cheney to keep talking, because they know he is hurting the Republican party, and just making a fool of himself. But O'Reilly is so biased, and his judgement is so clouded he actually thinks Cheney is winning the PR war.

You have to be a complete and total right-wing spin doctor to even claim Cheney is winning, or to write an entire article saying it. Especially when 57% of your own party want you to shut up and go away, and the Democrats want him to keep talking, because it reminds people how they ruined the country over the last 8 years and used torture.

The Republicans want Cheney to go back to his undisclosed location and shut up, they do not want him speaking out because it makes people remember the last 8 years of disaster under Republican rule. Not to mention everything Cheney is saying is either unproven, or a lie, and proven to be a lie.

No if there was any doubt (with anyone) that O'Reilly is a die-hard Republican, that doubt is now gone. Because only a total far right spin doctor would defend Cheney, claim he is right, and winning the PR war. Which is exactly what O'Reilly did, and it's the very same thing Hannity and Limbaugh are doing, who are as far right as you can get.

Proof The Rasmussen Polls Have a Republican Bias
By: Steve - May 15, 2009 - 12:20pm

O'Reilly uses the Rasmussen polls now, he quotes them at least once a week, if not more. He used to quote Gallup polls, and say they are a good polling company, but that was before Obama took office. Now he only uses the Rasmussen polls, because they have a Republican bias, and they almost always agree with his position on an issue.

Scott Rasmussen is a Republican, that is a fact. During the 2008 presidential election all the ads on his website were for John McCain, not one was for Barack Obama, not a one. And I have reported many times that the Rasmussen polls have a Republican bias, in the way they word their poll questions. Now I have documented proof I was right, that Rasmussen puts a bias in his polls in the way he words the question.

Rasmussen's Notre Dame poll is a perfect example why conservatives like O'Reilly and FOX News love their polls. Because Rasmussen was the only polling company in America that said the majority of the people do not agree with Notre Dame inviting Obama to speak there. All the other major polling conducted on the question has found most Americans agree with the Obama choice.

Here is the actual Rasmussen Norte Dame polling question, which reads like it was typed up by Newt Gingrich:
Guidelines established by U.S. bishops state that Catholic institutions such as Notre Dame should not honor people whose actions conflict with the church's moral principles. Given these guidelines, should Notre Dame award President Obama an honorary degree?
That Rasmussen poll said 60% opposed the honor, and 25% supported it. While all the other polls show that a majority of Catholics support Obama speaking there. Now look at how the PEW poll was worded, with no bias, it was an objective and non-partisan question.
Do you think it was right or wrong for Notre Dame to invite Obama to give their graduation speech and receive an honorary degree?
In the PEW poll, it says 50% of Catholics think Obama should speak there, and get the honorary degree, while only 28% oppose it. Which is pretty much the opposite of what the Rasmussen poll found, and the PEW poll is close to what all the other polls say about the issue. The Rasmussen poll is the only one in America that came up with the biased results they did.

And another thing O'Reilly and his right-wing friends failed to mention about the polling on this topic is this. That same PEW poll shows that 52% of ALL Americans have never even heard about the story, and 48% of Catholics said they have never heard about it. So it's totally dishonest for Rasmussen to claim 60% of Americans oppose Obama speaking at Norte Dame, when his partisan worded poll is the only one that says that, and half the people have never even heard about the story.

Yet O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends use and quote these dishonest and biased right-wing Rasmussen polls all the time. While ignoring all the other polls from Gallup, Zogby, PEW, etc. Because he does not want you to see the whole truth, only his truth. An honest journalist will never quote or use just one poll, especially when that poll is known to have a Republican bias. Honest journalists quote all the polls on an issue, not just the one biased poll that agrees with them.

So the next time you see O'Reilly quote and report on a Rasmussen poll only, while ignoring all the other polls, you will be reminded that he is a dishonest partisan right-wing stooge, they are both dishonest partisan Republicans who only want you to see what they want, not the whole truth, just their spin on the truth.

The Thursday 5-14-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 15, 2009 - 9:20am

The TPM was called Shame on You ACLU. Billy attacked the ACLU for trying to get the abuse photos published, he claims they actually want the troops hurt, which is just insane. While I agree with Obama to delay the release of the photos, it is crazy to claim the ACLU only wants the photos published to hurt the troops. That is right-wing insanity from O'Reilly, and when he says crazy things like that it only hurts what little credibility he has left, because it's nonsense.

O'Reilly also said the ACLU is guilty, of what? They won their court case, the courts ruled those photos must be released, they are not guilty of anything, all they did was win their lawsuit. O'Reilly even called Professor Turley a radical left-wing loon for saying the photos should be published. Which just shows what a right-wing loon O'Reilly is, somehow anyone who agrees with him is a left-wing loon, yet he has the nerve to criticize other people in the media for calling people names, as in Sarah Palin, when he does it himself, it's called hypocrisy pal.

Then O'Reilly had Dr. Marc Lamont Hill and Mike Gallagher on to discuss it. And if you notice, almost every time Billy lets a Democrat on the show they are paired with a Republican. So it's always a 2 on 1, with O'Reilly and the Republican against the 1 Democrat. This is done on purpose, so O'Reilly has a 2nd opinion that agrees with him, then it always makes the Democrat look like he is wrong, because you have 2 people there that disagree with him. Not to mention, it takes time away from the Democrat, so the 2 Republicans get the most time to talk.

Dr. Hill disagreed with O'Reilly and said the photos should be released, and he tried to give his reason why, but O'Reilly cut him off before he could explain his position, then Billy went to Gallagher, who he already knew agreed with him. And of course Gallagher agreed with O'Reilly 100 percent. O'Reilly asked Gallagher if Obama gets credit for doing the right thing, and Gallagher said NO. O'Reilly said you should give Obama credit for doing the right thing, and Gallagher said NO, Again. This is how crazy these far far right Republicans are, even when Obama does the right thing they still refuse to give him credit for it.

Even O'Reilly said he should get credit for doing the right thing. This far right nut Gallagher also said Obama does not care about keeping the troops safe, which is just insanity, and total right-wing garbage. This idiot is saying the president of the United States does not care about keeping the troops safe, which is an outrage. And O'Reilly also disagreed with Gallagher on that, he said to Gallagher "I do not believe that." This Gallagher is off his rocker, and it shows just how crazy some of these far right Republicans are.

Then O'Reilly did another attack pelosi segment, with the right-wing Bill Sammon. And of course no Democrat guest to defend pelosi. O'Reilly and the Republicans hate Pelosi, so they can not be objective, yet O'Reilly does a biased one sided segment with only a Republican to discuss it. O'Reilly called her a liar, and actually used the word lied. When he has no proof she lied, and she denies they told her they were using waterboarding. Not to mention Bob Graham also said they lied to him, so she might be right, nobody knows for sure yet.

And yet O'Reilly has already found her guilty, before all the facts are out, she is guilty and a liar because he said so. But when a liberal says Bush lied, and proves it, O'Reilly still denies it, and calls them a liar, he calls them Bush hating liars. This moron Sammon even said Pelosi is the issue and the torture story, which is just nonsense. The issue is the Bush torture, and the story is how Bush approved the use of torture. And only crazy right-wing idiots like O'Reilly and sammon claim Pelosi is the issue and the story. They are using her as a distraction, and nothing more.

I will say this though, once all the facts come out, if it is proven Pelosi lied about being briefed on waterboarding, the Democrats should remove her as the leader, and she should be voted out of office in the next election. But only if it is proven she lied about the briefing, she should be removed for lying about it, not for the briefing. The segment was a biased one sided joke, and O'Reilly should be ashamed for doing it with no Democrat guest to defend Pelosi.

And btw, O'Reilly said the media was great at her press conference, that they hammered her and did a good job. This is the same media O'Reilly claims all have a liberal bias, but if that was true they would have took it easy on her and laid down, which they did not do. So it pretty much destroys the O'Reilly spin that they are all liberals who always take it easy on Democrats.

Then O'Reilly had two doctors on to talk about Farrah Fawcett and her cancer. And a pot segment about Gov. Schwarzenegger calling for a debate on making pot legal. And of course O'Reilly had 1 Republican on to discuss it, who is opposed to making it legal, just as O'Reilly is. This moron even said pot is addictive, and worse than alcohol, which is crazy.

I am 49 years old, and I smoked pot for about 15 years, from 1980 to 1995, I quit one day with no problem, it is not addictive, and I had no problem quitting, none. I also have a mixed drink once in a while, like a rum and coke, but I do not drink beer. And I can tell you that alcohol is far worse than pot, people actually do get addicted to alcohol, and the more you drink the drunker you get, until you can be out of control drunk and crash your car, etc. so it is far worse.

With pot you only get so high, and once you get to that high you can smoke more, but you do not get any higher, you just waste your pot. You can be as high as a kite on pot and still drive a car just fine, unlike alcohol, where you can get so drunk you can not drive. Not to mention, legal or not, anyone who wants to smoke pot is already doing it, I never met one person in my life who refused to smoke pot because it's illegal, it just don't happen. Think about prohibition, it never worked, and it's not working for pot either. The best thing to do would be to make it legal and tax it just like cigarettes. Because, believe me, the fact that pot is illegal does not stop anyone from smoking it if they want to.

Then O'Reilly had Megyn Kelly on, they talked about the craigslist sex page crap, then they attacked Democrats John Murtha and Charlie Rangel. It was a biased and partisan attack with 2 Republicans, and yet right after the 2 partisan attacks, O'Reilly said we are not partisan here, yes he actually said that. Ummmmm, yes you are, it was 2 partisan Republicans attacking 2 Democrats, so how in the hell is that not a partisan attack Billy? Wow!

Then the stupid and worthless no reality Reality Check segment. I will not report tham all, but I will say O'Reilly used one to do a correction, which is very rare. He corrected Dick Morris, who last night said Obama let a gitmo prisoner go, and he might be in America. That was a total lie, and O'Reilly corrected the record. Which just goes to show everyone that nothing Dick Morris ever says can be believed, because you do not report a lie like that by accident. It was done on purpose to make Obama look bad, and he hoped nobody would notice, but he got caught.

And one last thing, O'Reilly has still not said one word about the Senate Torture hearing with Ali Soufan, the FBI interrogator that said he got more info not using torture, then Bush and the CIA did using it, and he got it faster. O'Reilly ignored it all, because it destroys his right-wing spin on the issue. Even though it was the biggest news story in America for the last 2 days.

O'Reilly Insanity on The Dick Cheney PR War
By: Steve - May 14, 2009 - 2:50pm

Crazy O'Reilly wrote this right-wing nonsense today:

O'REILLY: Dick Cheney is unleashed! After eight years of being nearly invisible to the media, the former vice president has come forth bearing wrath. He is now a man on a mission, an angry messenger. Very simply, Dick Cheney believes the Obama administration is putting the United States in danger by dismantling the Bush anti-terror programs.

And Mr. Cheney has one very large point. After the sneak attack on September 11, 2001, America has not suffered another violent terrorism episode on its soil. That is not in dispute and the former vice president believes tough interrogations and aggressive anti-terror moves were the cornerstones of the shield.
And I have one very large point, Cheney can not prove that Obama has made us less safe, because there has not been a terrorist attack on Obama's watch, and until there is, nobody in their right mind can claim we are less safe. Not to mention, many national security experts claim we are more safe now under the Obama policies, and only partisan Republicans are parroting the Cheney propaganda.
O'REILLY: There is no doubt that Democrats like Nancy Pelosi knew all about water boarding and went along with the interrogation program because the CIA told them it was vitally important for national security.
There is no doubt O'Reilly is a lying biased right-wing hack. Because Pelosi has denied what O'Reilly claims is a fact. Just today she said she was briefed one time in 2002, and not once did they tell her they were going to use waterboarding. And the whole Pelosi story is just a distraction from the real issue, that Bush approved torture, and then they used it.
O'REILLY: So, believing the truth is on his side, Mr. Cheney has launched a one-man jihad against the Obama administration for canceling what he believes are life-protecting anti-terror strategies.

The reaction on the left has been just short of hysterical, with personal attacks on Cheney all day long. At the White House correspondents' dinner last week, comedian Wanda Sykes said she advised her kids to get in a car with strangers rather than with Cheney.

Writing in the New York Times, Maureen Dowd spoke for many liberals when she called Cheney, among other things, "batty" and "jejune" (lacking value). Ms. Dowd's disdain poured out as she described the former vice president's "Genghis Khan side," his "numbskull ideas," and his "nasty campaign of fear and loathing."

As best I can tell, the left is growing desperate because they are losing.
Yeah Bill, the left is losing. That is why they hold the Presidency, the Senate, and the House, if you call that losing you are dumber than I thought. The left is not only winning, they are winning big. Did you miss the election last November, where Obama crushed your boy McCain, 365 to 170, did you miss that Billy? The right is a joke, and Cheney is a lying idiot, yet you defend him and call him a truth teller. Which shows what a biased right-wing fool you are.
O'REILLY: So the vengeance-minded far left is bereft. They so want to "get" Bush and Cheney, but now their dreams of revenge show trials are vanishing quicker than MSNBC's ratings.

And to make matters even worse—Dick Cheney may be the one getting revenge.
The only thing Dick Cheney should get is an award for being a crazy right-wing idiot who will not go away. He is making a fool of himself, and even most Republicans want him to shut up and go back to his undisclosed location. Just read this you moron.
During his weeks-long media tour defending torture, Vice President Dick Cheney has repeatedly pointed to two CIA memos that he says “showed the success of the effort.” During a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing yesterday, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) declared that nothing in those memos suggests that torture was the most effective way to gain information:

FEINGOLD: Nothing I have seen — including the two documents to which former Vice President Cheney has repeatedly referred — indicates that the torture techniques authorized by the last administration were necessary, or that they were the best way to get information out of detainees. The former vice president is misleading the American people when he says otherwise.

Congressional Republicans are telling Dick Cheney to go back to his undisclosed location and leave them alone to rebuild the Republican Party without his input. Displeased with the former vice-president's recent media appearances, Republican lawmakers say he's hurting GOP efforts to reinvent itself after back-to-back electoral drubbings.

Rep. John Duncan Jr. (R-Tenn.) said, “He became so unpopular while he was in the White House that it would probably be better for us politically if he wouldn’t be so public...But he has the right to speak out since he’s a private citizen.”

Another House Republican lawmaker who requested anonymity said he wasn’t surprised that Cheney has strongly criticized Obama early in his term, but argued that it’s not helping the GOP cause. The legislator said Cheney, whose approval ratings were lower than President Bush’s during the last Congress, didn’t think through the political implications of going after Obama.

GOP Whip Eric Cantor is even more insistent that Cheney keep a low profile, for the sake of the party. Cantor, "said he wasn’t surprised that Cheney has strongly criticized Obama early in his term, but argued that it’s not helping the GOP cause and pointed out that his approval ratings were even lower than Bush’s during the last Congress."

He implied that Cheney is a hothead who "didn’t think through the political implications of going after Obama. He did "House Republicans no favors.” I wonder how they'll feel about the nation being reminded of all the Bush's Regime's catastrophic foreign policy errors.

While Democrats are not as eager for Cheney to vanish. He's so thoroughly loathed and his opinions so completely dismissed as partisan spin that a Cheney sighting is always a big turn-off to mainstream voters. The Democrats are glad Cheney will not go away, because almost all of what he has said was proven to be a lie, and he reminds people of the Bush administration.

Which is the last thing Republicans want, they want Cheney to go away and stop reminding people of the Bush administration. They want to move on and go forward, not have Cheney remind the American people how the Bush administration ruined the economy and almost bankrupted the country.

“Bring it on!” quipped a White House official yesterday when asked about Vice President Cheney’s recent re-emergence. A “dismayed” Republican remarked: “We’re trying to turn the page and he’s climbing out of the grave to haunt us.”

And yet O'Reilly claims Cheney is winning the PR battle between the White House, the Democrats, and Cheney. What planet is he on, Cheney is making a fool of himself, and nobody believes a word he says, except O'Reilly and his insane right-wing friends. To even claim Cheney is winning the PR battle you have to be a total right-wing idiot, which is exactly what O'Reilly did.

O'Reilly Ignores Senate Torture Hearing & The Facts
By: Steve - May 14, 2009 - 10:30am

A couple weeks ago O'Reilly said ONLY Robert Mueller at the FBI said torture did not get any info that saved thousands of live. O'Reilly even said his 15 person staff investigated it and they could not find anyone but Mueller who said that. When the actual guy who interrogated Abu Zubaydah testified that he was getting info without using torture. And he also said that once the torture started the guy shut up, and it actually delayed getting the info they claim they got, and only after they waterboarded him 83 times.

Yesterday the Senate held a hearing on Torture, and O'Reilly ignored it all, he never said a word about it, when it was the biggest news story of the day, all day long. In 2006, President Bush proudly described the “alternative set of procedures” used on detainee Abu Zubaydah to extract “information that could save innocent lives.” “I can say the procedures were tough, and they were safe, and lawful, and necessary,” Bush said.

During the subcommittee hearing on torture, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) questioned former FBI interrogator Ali Soufan, who led a successful interrogation of Abu Zubaydah. Whitehouse read a portion of Bush’s speech describing Zubaydah’s interrogation, and asked Soufan whether it was an “accurate” depiction. Soufan said it appeared Bush had been told “half-truths,” and agreed with Whitehouse that he then repeated these half-truths.

Whitehouse also read a portion of the May, 2005 OLC memo that claimed that Zubaydah “identified Khalid Sheikh Mohammed as the mastermind of the Sep. 11 attacks” only “once enhanced techniques were employed.” Whitehouse asked Soufan if this was accurate:
WHITEHOUSE: From your position at the actual interrogation of Abu Zubaydah you know that statement not to be true?

SOUFAN: Yes sir.
Indeed, Soufan and his team nursed and extracted valuable information from Zubaydah — including, most importantly, the identify of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. “We were able to get the information about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in a couple of days,” Soufan told Newsweek. “We didn’t have to do any of this torture. We could have done this the right way.”

Ali Soufan, the former FBI interrogator also wrote a riveting op-ed against the use of torture -- and he should know, since he was interrogating Abu Zubaydah himself -- testified under oath that he got information out of Zubaydah quickly using basic FBI methods; and that information was then used successfully to capture "the bad guys."

Which knocks Dick Cheney's talking points all to hell. Cheney has been saying that waterboarding uncovered crucial information, but Soufan refutes that as well. Soufan also got more information by using his own techniques later on and was thrown off the interrogation detail. Soufan said torture is too slow and unreliable, as evidenced by the 83 times Zubaydah was waterboarded.
Soufan: It's merely an exercise in trying to force compliance rather than elicit cooperation. A major problem is that it is ineffective. Waterboarding itself had to be used 83 times, an indication that Abu-Zubayda had already called his interrogators' bluff.
Soufan also presented an interesting challenge to the Ticking Time Bomb Scenario O'Reilly and the Republicans like to bring up. Noting that it took 83 waterboardings to force Khalid Shake Mohammed to cough up information, he describes that technique as "slow" and therefore unreliable when information needs to be obtained quickly. Soufan also provides an unclassified chronology of the joint FBI-CIA efforts to question Abu Zubaydah.

He says that his early efforts to coax information out of the Al Qaeda operate were successful, and CIA director George Tenet prepared a congratulatory telegram. As soon as Tenet learned that FBI agents -- not his CIA team -- had taken the lead role in the interrogation, he withdrew the congratulations and sent a team from the CIA's counterterrorism center to the interrogation site.

That team was assisted by a contractor who "instructed" the new CIA operatives in tougher interrogation techniques. According to Soufan, the new team began to use the EITs. Then Zubaydah stopped cooperating. Soon, the FBI was brought back in, and Zubaydah opened up like a book. Which disputes everything Cheney is saying. And it also disputes O'Reilly, who said only the FBI director Mueller is saying the torture was the only way to get the information.

And we also have this:

Feingold says Cheney is wrong: ‘Nothing I have seen in the CIA memos proves torture was necessary.

During his weeks-long media tour defending torture, Vice President Dick Cheney has repeatedly pointed to two CIA memos that he says “showed the success of the effort.” During a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing today, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) declared that nothing in those memos suggests that torture was the most effective way to gain information:
Nothing I have seen -- including the two documents to which former Vice President Cheney has repeatedly referred -- indicates that the torture techniques authorized by the last administration were necessary, or that they were the best way to get information out of detainees. The former vice president is misleading the American people when he says otherwise.
And O'Reilly has ignored all of that, he does not report a word of it. Because then his braindead and brainwashed right-wing viewers would see the truth, and see that O'Reilly is just a right-wing con man who hides real news and reports right-wing propaganda. O'Reilly claims to be a journalist, but the rules of journalism say you must report both sides of a story. They also say you should not lie, and O'Reilly did both. He lied that only Mueller said they did not get info that saved thousands of lives from torture, and he is ignoring all the evidene that he was wrong, and that Cheney is wrong.

O'Reilly is only reporting one side of the story, the Republican side, the Cheney side, the Hannity side, and the Rush Limbaugh side. While ignoring everything the Democrats, the FBI, and their interrogators are saying, he was there, he interrogated Abu Zubaydah, so he knows, yet O'Reilly will not even mention his name, or mention the Senate torture hearings. Instead he ignores it all to spin out the GOP talking points, then he claims he is a fair and balanced journalist with a no spin zone. When it's total one sided bias in the all right-wing spin zone.

The Wednesday 5-13-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 14, 2009 - 9:30am

The TPM was called Politics of Ridicule. And this might be the most insane talking points memo O'Reilly has ever spewed out. Billy cried about ridicule in the media, but he never said a word about the ridicule he does, or the ridicule FOX News does, somehow in his world everyone else does it but the people at FOX News. O'Reilly mentioned some book by Saul Alinsky called Rules For Radicals. And guess who else has been talking about Alinsky recently, Rush Limbaugh.

Billy said Obama and the far left media are using the Alinsky book as a blueprint. Which is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard in my life. I am a well informed and smart liberal, and I have never even heard of Saul Alinksy, or his book, and I bet 99% of Americans have never heard of it either. A google search says the man died in 1972, which is 37 years ago. What happened is Rush Limbaugh talked about Alinsky and his 40 year old book, then O'Reilly and a few other right-wing nuts picked it up and spewed that garbage out. Limbaugh claims Obama and the media are using the Alinsky rules against him. And now crazy O'Reilly does too, because his hero Rush talked about it.

Earth to O'Reilly, you are insane, because hardly anyone even knows who Alinsky is, let alone know about his 40 year old book. O'Reilly then had a full segment on this garbage with Michael Smerconish and John Gibson. Smerconish said O'Reilly was right about one thing, Obama and the media are doing a couple things Alinsky talks about in his book, but that they do not even know it, and it's just a coincidence. Of course Gibson bought the O'Reilly lies, hook line and sinker. And agreed with every crazy word he said.

Smerconish also pointed out that both sides do things that Alinsky writes about, that Republicans do it too. Yet O'Reilly and the nut job Gibson claim only Obama and the far left media are doing it. These right-wing nuts claim it's a big plan to ridicule everyone and use the rules for radicals from the Alinsky book. WOW! It was like watching an episode of the Twilight Zone, it's insanity, and nothing but crazy Rush Limbaugh/GOP conspiracy garbage. If you believe any of that nonsense you need to be locked away in a padded room.

Then O'Reilly continued the insanity, he had Bernie Goldberg on to speculate about Ted Kopple. What happened is Ted Kopple went on the BBC and said Bush used torture, and that waterboarding is torture, which is 100% true and accurate. So Billy claims that means Kopple is a far left liberal, huh? These two morons implied that just because Kopple said that, it means he is a liberal, but John McCain said the same thing, and many other Republicans also believe waterboarding is torture. They have no proof he is a liberal, it was all speculation based on what he said to the BBC. The whole segment was just ridiculous, how is this news, and why should anyone care?

Goldberg even said everyone in the media is a liberal, all of them. O'Reilly even said hold on, that is not true, that maybe 75% of them are. So Billy finally shut down part of the lies, but he still claimed Kopple is a liberal, when they had no proof, except what he said on the BBC. This whole segment was nothing but 2 right-wing nuts speculating about Kopple being a liberal, based on one thing he said, that is true btw, and many Republicans have said the very same thing.

Then O'Reilly had a worthless segment with the former Miss Nevada, Katie Rees. She was on to cry about double standards from Trump etc. What happened is O'Reilly could not get Miss California to do the Factor, so he dug up this bimbo and put her on, hey O'Reilly, no-body cares. And btw, O'Reilly showed the pics that got her fired by Trump, it was her drunk and kissing girls on the lips. Shocking, NOT!

Next it was the biased right-wing Amanda Carpenter and policing the net. They trashed the left and cried about Wanda Sykes some more. They also talked about a yahoo story about a guy putting his girlfriends pics on their site and she sued them. Then O'Dummy cried about privacy rights, which is so funny, because he does those privacy rights violations called ambush interviews of people who do not want to be interviewed. Shut up about privacy rights you crazy hypocrite, you violate the privacy of every single person you ambush with your punk producers.

Then O'Reilly had the insane right-wing Dick Morris on, and he was as crazy as ever. He said the Obama joke about Hillary proves they hate each other and there is a lot of tension there. What an idiot, it was a joke you dumbass. Morris hates Obama and Hillary, so how can this nimrod possibly do an objective analysis of anything they say or do, answer, he can't. Morris also said the Obama job approval ratings will crash one day, which he has been saying for 3 months, but it has not happened yet. It's wishful thinking, and total right-wing propaganda.

O'Reilly added to the insanity when he asked Morris about Cheney. Billy told Morris that Cheney is winning the PR war between him and the White House, and crazy Morris agreed, which proves they are both clueless right-wing idiots. Cheney is getting killed, he is making a fool of himself, and even Republicans are telling Cheney to shut up and go back to his undisclosed location. Yet O'Reilly and Morris claim Cheney is winning, which is just laughable. And I will have more on this insanity later today.

Then Billy had the stupid Barack & a Hard Place segment with Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes. This segment is just dumb, for one thing it's billed as the best and worst thing Obama did this week, but they do it on a Wednesday, before the week is over. So it's stupid, because it should be done on a friday, when the actual week is over. It's basically another forum for Crowley and O'Reilly to criticize Obama every Wednesday. While Colmes is just there for O'Reilly and Crowley to make fun of, which is the same thing he did when he was on with Hannity. O'Reilly and Crowley get all the time, and Colmes barely gets a word in, when he does, the two of them just ridicule him and make fun of everything he says.

And btw, Colmes was the only Democrat on the whole show, and the big story of the day was the Senate Torture hearing with the FBI interrogator Ali Soufan, yet O'Reilly totally ignored it and never said one word about any of it. It was the biggest news story of the day on all the cable news networks all day long, and O'Reilly did not even mention it, not a word, nothing, as in zero.

The Tuesday 5-12-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 13, 2009 - 9:30am

The TPM was called Insulting Presidents. O'Reilly did an entire talking points memo on the comedians that do jokes at the yearly White House media dinner. He said it was insulting and asked why they even do it. Get a sense of humor man, it's a comedy dinner, so shut up already. O'Reilly said Wanda Sykes was funny most of the time, then she got mean. The mean part is when she did the jokes about Republicans, and FOX News. And with all the news out there this is what he writes a TPM on, I mean, who cares.

Then O'Reilly had Karl Rove on to talk more about that garbage. O'Reilly even said this kind of comedy makes America look bad, huh? Earth to O'Reilly, it's comedy, get a life man. And of course Rove agreed and said it was mean and nasty stuff, just shut up already, both of you stuffed shirts need to go buy a sense of humor. It was a dinner and a comedy show, c-o-m-e-d-y, look it up, they tell jokes and you laugh.

Unless you are 2 right-wing idiots, then you claim it hurts America, and you waste time on a national tv news show crying about it. The only person it hurt was maybe Rush Limbaugh, but making jokes about Rush does not hurt America, or make us look bad, except to right-wing morons that did not like the jokes about their hero Rush.

Then is it legal with Lis Wiehl and Megyn Kelly. They talked about some trolley car crash, and the Miss California garbage again. Billy loves the anti-gay marriage blonde bimbo, and he just can not stop reporting on her. It's getting him big ratings with his right-wing viewers so he keeps reporting it every damn night. Then he complains about the media doing too many tabloid news stories for ratings, pot meet kettle, look in the mirror sparky.

Then O'Reilly had a segment on Farah Fawcett having cancer. He had Dr. Cynara Coomer on to talk about cancer, how to prevent it, and what to do if you get it. For once, O'Reilly did an actual news segment, I was shocked when I saw it because I rarely ever see real news on the Factor. But that did not last long, because the very next segment was the tabloid garbage body language crap with the blonde hocus pocus bimbo. All I will say is that it's a total waste of tv time, and has no news value at all, it's basically garbage to get ratings.

Before the commercial Billy asked people to go vote in his (unscientific and worthless) personal website poll about what you think of his media reporting. Ummmm, no thanks, it's a waste of time and a meaningless poll. 1) It's unscientific, and 2) It's a worthless poll on a personal website that is biased and has no value to anyone.

Then O'Reilly had Dennis Miller on to give everyone his great (as in meaningless) commentary on politics and current events. They talked about the media dinner and Miller said wanda could care less if people did not like her Limbaugh joke, that she was just there to make Obama laugh, and that is all she cared about. O'Reilly said it hurt Obama, haha, what an idiot, how? Sykes made a joke about rush Limbaugh, so how does that hurt Obama, he never said it, so your analysis is garbage. they also talked about Miss California, duh, and of course Miller loves her, as all right-wing nuts do.

What they never report is the crazy stuff she said, she was on with James Dobson (doing his radio show) and she said when Perez Hilton asked her the gay marriage question, Satan tried to get her to say she supports gay marriage, then God told her to say what she believes and say she is opposed to it. Boys, reserve that padded room, because the blonde bimbo is crazy. But Miller and O'Reilly love her anyway, because she is a hot young blonde that is anti-gay marriage, and a religious nut.

Then the total waste of tv time culture quiz, with Steve Doocy and Martha MacCallum from FOX News. If you have trouble sleeping, watch this segment and you will be out like a light in no time, it's a snoozefest. It's just more nonsense that O'Reilly puts on his so-called news show. It's crap to get ratings from his 70 year old right-wing viewers, the same viewers that voted the 50 year old black and white I Love Lucy show the best comedy show ever.

Then pinheads and patriots, and the hand picked highly edited Factor viewer e-mails. Which if the culture quiz don't put you to sleep the Factor e-mails will. And another Tabloid Factor, oops I mean O'Reilly Factor was over. This show was actually terrible, even for O'Reilly, with all the real news out there this is what we get, it was just bad.

Jesse Ventura Puts The Smackdown on Dick Cheney
By: Steve - May 12, 2009 - 4:30pm

First, let me say that Dick Cheney left office 3 months ago with a 19% job approval, after driving the economy into the ground, and approving the use of torture. So why should anyone listen to this right-wing neo-con clown, that screwed up everything he was involved in. Bush and Cheney did nothing right, from Iraq to CIA Leakgate, to Prosecutorgate, to torture, to the financial system disaster, to the housing crisis, and on and on.

These two idiots almost ruined America in 8 short years, then they left it all to Obama to fix for them. So nobody should ever listen to one word Cheney says about anything. And while I did not like George W. Bush, at least he has the dignity and the respect to go away and keep his mouth shut. It's pretty clear now that Cheney was running the country, and Bush just gave the speeches and signed the papers Cheney told him to. So in reality, all the blame should be on Cheney, Bush was just the dope with a name to get elected, then Cheney took over and made Bush his puppet.

Now let's get to the great things Jesse Ventura said about Cheney, all of it 100% true btw.

Ventura: Powell's a war hero while Cheney ran and hid

Former Minnesota governor Jesse Ventura laid into Dick Cheney on CNN Monday night for, among other things, supporting waterboarding and maligning a "war hero" during an interview on Sunday.

"I was water boarded, so I know -- at SERE School, Survival Escape Resistance Evasion," the former wrestler who gained his first mainstream fame playing a role in the sci-fi actioner Predator told CNN's Larry King.

"It was a required school you had to go to prior to going into the combat zone, which in my era was Vietnam. All of us had to go there. We were all, in essence -- every one of us was water boarded. It is torture."

King asked, "What was it like?"

"It's drowning," Ventura responded. "It gives you the complete sensation that you are drowning. It is no good, because you -- I'll put it to you this way, you give me a water board, Dick Cheney and one hour, and I'll have him confess to the Sharon Tate murders."

"I don't have a lot of respect for Dick Cheney," Ventura said. "Here's a guy who got five deferments from the Vietnam War. Clearly, he's a coward. He wouldn't go when it was his time to go. And now he is a chicken hawk. Now he is this big tough guy who wants this hardcore policy. And he's the guy that sanctioned all this torture by calling it enhanced interrogation."

King asked, "Do you think Rush Limbaugh's a better Republican than Colin Powell?"

"No, not at all," Ventura said. "In fact, if you compare the two, let's look at Colin Powell, who's a war hero, who strapped it on for his country, and didn't run and hide."

"And then you look at Dick Cheney who ran and hid," Ventura said. "I have no respect for Dick Cheney. I have tremendous respect for General Powell."

And btw, notice you do not hear none of this stuff about Cheney on the Factor. That's because O'Reilly loves Cheney, and defends him. So you will never see anyone like Jesse Ventura on the Factor telling the truth about Cheney, because O'Reilly will not let people like him on his biased right-wing show. He only has Republican stooges like Rove, Gingrich, Ingraham, Morris, Miller, etc. on to discuss torture and Cheney.

In the rare case when O'Reilly does let a Democrat on the show it's always a FOX News Democrat, who kisses his ass and do not tell the full truth. And one last important thing, remember that O'Reilly has not had one Republican on the Factor that says waterboarding is torture, even though there are many of them, including John McCain. Because it would ruin his right-wing spin that only Democrats say waterboarding is torture, so they are never allowed on the Factor.

Bill (Man on Turtle) O'Reilly Strikes Again
By: Steve - May 12, 2009 - 1:30pm

I told you guys O'Reilly has lost him mind and turned into a senile old man, here are the details of the O'Reilly soon you will be able to marry a turtle segment. Last night O'Reilly theorized that the legalization of gay marriage could lead to interspecies marriages, stating to Margaret Hoover, "You would let everybody get married who want to get married. You want to marry a turtle, you can."

O'Reilly has previously suggested that gay marriage could allow for a person to marry a goat, or a duck.

From the March 29, 2005 Radio Factor:
O'REILLY: And 10 years, this is gonna be a totally different country than it is right now. Laws that you think are in stone -- they're gonna evaporate, man. You'll be able to marry a goat -- you mark my words!
From the September 14, 2005 Radio Factor:
O'REILLY: The secular progressive movement would like to have marriage abolished, in my opinion. They don't want it, because it is not diverse enough. You know, that's what this gay marriage thing is all about. But now, you know, the poly-amorphous marriage, whatever they call it, you can marry 18 people, you can marry a duck, I mean --

LIS WIEHL: A duck? Quack, quack.

O'REILLY: Well, why, you know, if you're in love with the duck, who is the society to tell you you can't do that? !
During the May 11, 2009 segment, O'Reilly also claimed gay marriage would lead to polygamous marriage, saying, "If you OK gay marriage, then you have to do plural marriage, which is now -- has a name, triads. Three people getting married."
O'REILLY: All right, Hoover. I did not know this, but I had said from the jump if you OK gay marriage, then you have to do plural marriage, which is now -- has a name, triads. Three people getting married. There is a group in Maui, Hawaii, called the Lessin's adversary group -- advocacy group, and it's the World Polygamy Association.

HOOVER: No, no. Here's what I think. First of all, I think it is extremely disingenuous for you to suggest that, if you allow gay people to get married, they're going to have to allow -- that polygamy is then going to run rampant across the United States. Before the camera went on you said to me two things: due process.

O'REILLY: Right.

HOOVER: You know what due process is? Due process is when we have laws, we then enforce them. We don't even -- we barely in five states have laws that gay people can be married. We have states -- laws in zero states that polygamy can happen.

O'REILLY: If I walk in to the Massachusetts state house and say, "Hey, Governor Deval Patrick, you've got to marry me and Lenny." All right? Because --

HOOVER: I would love to see that, by the way.

O'REILLY: Not only Lenny, but Squiggy too. All right? Or I walk in with the O'Brien twins from South Boston and say, "Hey, you've got to marry me, because you're allowing gays to get married, and I'm in the Lessin's group, the World Polygamy Association."

HOOVER: You've got to change the law, then. Because the law says it's between two people.

O'REILLY: OK, but --

HOOVER: Not multiple people. By the way, the last time polygamy was on the rise? 1896, when Utah became the 45th state in the union. Not a massive movement going mainstream.

O'REILLY: All right. So you disagree?

HOOVER: I don't buy into the slippery slope argument at all.

O'REILLY: You'd let everybody do whatever they want?

HOOVER: That's the slippery slope argument. That's if you allow one thing to happen, then another thing, and another thing.

O'REILLY: Hoover, you would let everybody get married who want to get married. You want to marry a turtle, you can.

HOOVER: Due process. I want to abide by the law. If the law says I can marry a turtle, I'll marry a turtle. Last time I checked, we're a Judeo-Christian culture that doesn't allow me to marry turtles.
Earth to Bill O'Reilly, you are a total idiot. Marriage is between two people, two humans, not animals, or three or four or twenty people. The law says two people, the slippery slope argument is ridiculous right-wing insanity. Not one State will ever pass a law that would allow more than two people to be married, and not one State will ever pass a law that allows anyone to marry a goat, a duck, or a turtle.

The Monday 5-11-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 12, 2009 - 11:30am

The TPM was called How to Wage war. Crazy O'Reilly, who was never in the military, now has doubts that Obama knows how to wage a war. When Obama does not wage war, he has Generals to do that for him, so the whole premise from O'Reilly is just insane. O'Reilly implied that Obama and Hillary admitted we caused civilian deaths in Afghanistan and also said Hillary said we were sorry for it. When none of that ever happened, and O'Reilly just made it up.

What Obama and Hillary said is they will order an investigation, and see if Karzai is right, and that it was mostly civilians who were killed in the rocket attack in Afghanistan. Nobody said they were sorry, because the investigation has not even been done yet. Crazy O'Reilly said Obama needs to get tougher, that war is hell, and that neither one of them should ever say they are sorry for civilian deaths. Even if they did accidently kill civilians, which shows just how far right crazy O'Reilly is.

Then he had the right-wing Obama hating Col. Ralph Peters on to smear and lie about Obama and Hillary, with no Democrat to counter anything he said. They both trashed Obama, Hillary, and Karzai. O'Reilly told the Col. what he would have done if Karzai cried about civilian deaths. Billy said he would say war is hell, too bad, so shut up because you are lucky we are even there to protect you. Who cares what O'Reilly would have done, he's the same guy who wanted to bomb everything in Libya, even civilian targets, and let the people eat sand and die.

This total fool Col. Peters said Obama and Hillary criticized the troops and blamed them, when that is a total lie and nothing but right-wing bullshit. Even O'Reilly knew that was a lie, so he stopped Col. Jackass and told him they never blamed the troops. All she said was they will do an investigation, and that she deeply regrets the deaths. She did not blame the troops, or anyone, which makes Col. Peters a dumbass right-wing liar.
WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States deeply regrets the deaths of civilians in Afghanistan, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday after reports that US-led air strikes against insurgents had killed 100 people.

"I wish to express my personal regret and certainly the sympathy of our administration on the loss of civilian life in Afghanistan," Clinton told a joint meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari.

"We deeply regret it. We don't know all of the circumstances or causes. And there will be a joint investigation by your government and ours," Clinton said. Police in Afghanistan said US-led air strikes against insurgents had killed 100 people including civilians, in one of the deadliest attacks in nearly eight years.
That is what she said, and this low life Col. Peters twisted that into Hillary blamed the troops, and said she was sorry for what the troops did. When she never said any of that, and it was total right-wing garbage from Peters.

Then O'Reilly had a tabloid garbage segment on the media dinner with Obama and Wanda Sykes. Billy had Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on, it's tabloid garbage and I will not report on it. Except to say I think Wanda Sykes went over the line with the 9-11 Limbaugh is the 20th hijacker joke, and wishing his kidneys would fail. I oppose any jokes about 9-11, or wishing someone would die, even Rush Limbaugh.

Then the crazy segment on why the ACLU is not defending Miss California, when there is no lawsuit to defend, and her free speech rights have not been violated. O'Reilly said no gay person (or group) has said they support her right to free speech, but that they just disagree with her. A gay guest, Cathy Renna told him that was crazy, and that a lot of gay people did say that. Then Billy said if she can prove that (and send him the info) he will report it tonight. Yeah right, and the sky is purple too, even if she does prove it he will never report it.

During the segment O'Reilly got crazy mad and started screaming at the 2 liberal guests, because they would not agree with him and his right-wing spin and lies about Miss California. Which shows what a right-wing nut he is, because it's nothing to get mad about, and only right-wing idiots even care about the anti-gay marriage blonde bimbo.

Then O'Reilly trashed Obama some more with 2 Republican guests. Andrew Napolitano, and Jamie Colby. O'Reilly called Obama a left-wing radical liberal, and told the guests that Obama would pick a liberal to replace Souter, he even called Souter a left-wing nut. Then he said, with all due respect. Now just imagine what O'Reilly would say if Keith Olbermann called Scalia a right-wing nut, he would go nuts and call for Olbermann to be fired. That's very disrespectful to call a Supreme Court judge a left-wing nut, which just shows what a right-wing idiot O'Reilly is.

O'Reilly also said Obama was a radical for his position on abortion, when he is in the majority, because most of America is pro-choice. The radicals are idiots like O'Reilly who are pro-life no matter what, even if the woman is raped, or might die if she has the child. The 3 of them sat there and trashed Obama, with nobody to provide any balance or the counterpoint.

Then O'Reilly had the 2 Republicans, Hoover and Carlson on to do the stupid culture warriors segment. They spent the whole segment talking about some crazy fringe group in Hawaii that wants to have a marriage with more than one person. O'Reilly said, I told you it was a slippery slope, and that if you let gays marry then you will go to marrying a turtle. Which is just insane, and the Santorum man on dog garbage that made him look like a nut, just as O'Reilly is now. Hoover even disagreed with O'Reilly, and told him that was nonsense, because a marriage is between two humans, not three, and not a turtle.

Carlson agreed with O'Reilly, which shows that she is as nuts as O'Reilly and man on dog Rick Santorum. The whole segment was insanity, just as the ACLU and Miss California segment was, and even dumber. Earth to O'Reilly, if you let a gay person get married it will not lead to three people getting married, the law says two people, not three, jackass. And the turtle argument is total nonsense, it will never be legal to marry an animal, you idiot.

Then O'Reilly had 3 reality checks, they were all garbage with no check, and not even worth reporting. In pinheads and patriots Billy showed a video of a cat that played the piano, and the cat was named a patriot, ummmmm, huh? My God man stop that segment now, you have nothing, and it's just stupid. Janeane Garofalo was named the pinhead, for simply refusing to say she is sorry for saying there was racism at the tea party protests, when she was right.

Billy sent Griff Jenkins to ambush her, she told him there was racism, and mentioned one of the many racist signs she saw, Griff said nothing, and refused to answer her question, then he asked her to apologize to O'Reilly. She said F--k O'Reilly, and told him he should apologize for all the garbage he says every night, and she was right once again.

And another insane O'Reilly Factor was over, almost the whole show was crazy right-wing lies and propaganda. And O'Reilly should be embarrassed to even call that a news show. It was more like a commerical for the Republican party, with nothing but right-wing spin and lies, and pretty much no real news.

Bill O'Reilly Has Officially Gone Insane Over Miss California
By: Steve - May 11, 2009 - 9:50pm

Tonight he did a segment on the Factor that was ridiculous and insane. Actually two segments were insane, but for now I will only talk about one of them. Billy had two liberal guests on to talk about Miss California, again. Billy loves her because she is a hot young blonde, and anti-gay marriage. And he can not let this story go, because he is a right-wing nut just like she is.

O'Reilly had Cathy Renna, who is gay, and Meghan Daum on to talk about why the ACLU is not defending Miss California. Billy asked why the ACLU is not defending her, and said don't they believe in free speech. Which is the dumbest thing I have heard in a long time. It's so insane, I wonder how in the hell O'Reilly got that masters degree, he must have cheated.

Let me explain this so even the right-wing dumbass O'Reilly can understand it. The ACLU is a group of lawyers, they join in on (or start) lawsuits when a persons rights have been violated.
1) Miss California does not have a lawsuit, there is no lawsuit, and the ACLU would not get involved until there is one. Read my lips moron, there is no lawsuit, so there is no case for the ACLU to get involved in. How hard is that to understand?

2) Nobody is stopping her from saying anything, in fact, it's just the opposite. She said what she wanted to, then a few people called her a right-wing idiot, but nobody has stopped her from saying whatever she wanted to say. So her free speech rights have not been violated.
That means the entire segment O'Reilly had was garbage, over a non-issue. There is no lawsuit, and her free speech rights have not been violated. And yet, dumbass O'Reilly did a whole segment on it, and even said the ACLU were hypocrites. The whole thing was just right-wing insanity, it did not even make sense.

Not to mention O'Reilly claims to support gay rights, then he does crazy segments like this, and supports every anti-gay right-wing nut in America. The whole thing is a lie, O'Reilly says he supports gay rights, but he is opposed to gay marriage. Then he tries to make a hero out of this blonde bimbo for being anti-gay marriage.

I hate to say it but I think O'Reilly should see a doctor and get checked out, I think Billy has Dementia, or maybe Alzheimers, because he is losing his mind. When you call for the ACLU to defend someone who has no lawsuit, and her free speech rights have not been violated, you are losing touch with reality.

O'Reilly Busted For GE Bias & Hypocrisy
By: Steve - May 10, 2009 - 11:50am

On the 4-20-09 O'Reilly Factor Billy said this:
O'REILLY: If our capitalistic system weren't so corrupted Immelt and Zucker would have been fired a long time ago, but the fix is in, here's how the uber-liberal New York Times headlined GE's trouble: 'GE's First Quarter Net Tops Analysts' Estimates'.
Umm, Billy, that's how reported it too, and they are owned by the Wall Street Journal, which is owned by News Corp, the same company that owns FOX News and you. That's how it gets reported, when an income report is better than the estimate they always say it did better than analysts estimates. They do not just do that for GE, they do it for everyone.

Then on the 3-2-09 O'Reilly Factor Billy said this:
O'REILLY: Now my question: Why would anyone believe anything Immelt says? Since Immelt took over GE in 2001, the stock has fallen 81 percent, to its lowest level since 1993. Monday was another disaster. GE stock closed at $7.60. Hard to believe.

So let's do the math. General Electric is being mismanaged. The mismanager apparently has trouble telling the truth, yet he keeps his $20 million job. $20 million a year. That adds up to corruption to me, ladies and gentlemen. Perhaps I'm wrong.

It is very likely that Immelt will finally be fired, but he'll walk away with tens of millions of bucks. Mark my words. And while GE may be an extreme case, it does reflect an abuse of stockholders that is not uncommon among publicly traded companies.
It's now Sunday May 10th, and Immelt has not been fired as O'Reilly predicted. Not to mention O'Reilly went back 8 years to get that 81 percent drop, then reported it when their stock was at it lowest point in 2009. When you go to and look up a stock it goes back 1 year, 2 years, and 5 years. Okay, I got it, Billy said GE stock has had a big drop so the CEO should be fired for mismanaging the company.

But let's look at reality, we are in a recession, one of the worst in 50 years, O'Reilly's boss Rupert Murdoch even said so. Rupert Murdoch told analysts the results were "a direct reflection of the recession that is deeper than anyone predicted" and called it the worst global economic crisis News Corp. had seen since its founding more than 50 years ago.

And btw, News Corp stock is down about 55 percent in the last 2 years. News Corp lost $6.4 billion in the 4th quarter of 2008 alone.

The New York-based company, which owns The Wall Street Journal and the Fox broadcast network, also forecast a 30 percent drop in operating profits for the fiscal year to June from a year ago. Revenue from the television division, which includes the Fox TV stations and Fox network, fell 17 percent to $1.27 billion as local ad revenues shrank despite higher political ad sales.

Operating profits plunged 93 percent to $18 million, from $245 million a year ago. Cable network programming revenue grew 10 percent to $1.36 billion, led by Fox News Channel's coverage of the U.S. presidential race.

So pretty much every company in America is down in value and it's stock price is way down, 50% to 80%, especially if you go back to 2001 and compare it to their stock price now. Because we are in the middle of the worst recession in 50 years. But according to O'Reilly Jeffrey Immelt at GE is the only CEO in America who should be fired because their stock price is down. When News Corp stock price is down about 55 percent, and their operating profits have dropped 93 percent.

Just look at the 2 year charts, News Corp was $25.00 a share, now it's $11.00 a share. That is about a 55% drop in 2 years. GE was $42.00 a share, now it's $15.00 a share. That is a about a 65% drop in 2 years, which is almost the same as the News Corp stock price drop. Which is a reflection of the current economic crisis, it has nothing to do with the CEO of either company, their stock price has dropped because of the economy and the financial crisis that hit wall street and the housing market.

So here we have Bill O'Reilly calling for the CEO of GE to be fired, because their stock price dropped 65% in the middle of the worst recession in 50 years. Yet he does not call for any other CEO in America to be fired, when their stock prices have dropped 55% or more, including the company he works for, News Corp.

Notice that O'Reilly has not called for Murdoch to be fired because his company lost 55% of their stock price in the last 2 years. And btw, the recession started 2 years ago in 2007, which is when all stock prices started dropping. Just look at the 2 year charts, they show it. It's almost a mirror image between News Corp and GE, and it all started about 2 years ago, the same time the recession started.

O'Reilly called it corruption by Immelt at GE, but how is it corruption when a stock price drops 65% in 2 years during the worst recession in 50 years. Especially when the stock price at the parent company that owns FOX News, also had a 55% drop in stock price during the very same time.

The only corruption in this is from O'Reilly, he is a biased and corrupt fraud of a journalist. The way O'Reilly is reporting the GE stock price drop, while ignoring almost the same News Corp stock price drop, and many other similar stock price drops in America during the recession proves it.

The cold hard truth is this, O'Reilly only attacks GE because Keith Olbermann works for MSNBC, and they are owned by GE, so Billy is trying to smear them as revenge against Olbermann who names him worst person in the world every other night, and that is the real truth.

And btw, O'Reilly never disputes anything Olbermann says about him, because Keith usually reads what O'Reilly said (word for word) in his Ted Baxter voice, then he debunks the lie from O'Reilly. So there is nothing for O'Reilly to dispute, because Olbermann is telling the truth about him, and he simply uses Billy's own words to show what a biased right-wing liar he is.

Instead of being a man and going after Olbermann directly, O'Reilly uses dishonest smear tactics to attack his parent company GE, which shows O'Reilly is not only a biased fraud, he is a coward too. In fact, O'Reilly will not even say the name Olbermann, he just says the guy at MSNBC said this, or over there at MSNBC they said this, he is afraid to even say his name.

The Friday 5-8-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 9, 2009 - 10:10am

The TPM was called Rewriting History. Once again O'Reilly attacked Obama for what he claims is rewriting history. Billy claims he investigated Churchill and said Obama was wrong to say he would not have used torture. Which is his opinion, and nobody can prove if he would have or not, because he is dead. So for O'Reilly to claim Obama was wrong, is just speculation. And yet O'Reilly did it anyway, even after he said he never speculates and that he only deals with the facts.

It was a ridiculous TPM, and nothing but spin on what Obama said, which is something O'Reilly would never do with a Republican president. Nobody can prove if Churchill would have used torture or not, since you can not ask him when he is dead, yet O'Reilly did it, and then claimed Obama was wrong. When he does not know if Obama was wrong or not, nobody does. Which just goes to show that O'Reilly will use every dirty trick in the book to try and smear Obama, and to justify the torture his hero Bush used.

I have to tell people the real truth here, this whole right-wing spin story from O'Reilly and all the right-wingers, is about protecting the legacy of Geroge W. Bush. They do not want him to go down in history as the torture president, so they are spinning out this story that waterboarding is not torture, so Bush did not torture anyone. Talk about rewriting history, that is it, O'Reilly and his Republican friends are the people trying to rewrite history. They made up this story that waterboarding is not torture, to tray and save their hero Bush from being known as the torture president.

And if you notice, Republicans are the only people trying to spin that garbage out. O'Reilly had 2 Democrats on to discuss his Churchill spin story, Nancy Skinner and Marj Halperin. Both of them disagreed with O'Reilly, and they said you can not prove Churchill would have used torture, just as Obama can not prove he might not have. They told O'Reilly some other realities about torture and what Bush did, and then he got mad at them because they exposed his spin, and he told them all of what they said was left-wing spin.

Which is something O'Reilly never ever does with Republican guests. Not once has O'Reilly ever told a Republican guest that what they just said was nothing but right-wing spin. In fact, Billy puts Karl Rove, Dick Morris, Newt Gingrich, Laura Ingraham, etc. on the show every week, they spew out tons of right-wing spin, and not once has O'Reilly ever said to any of them that what they said was nothing but right-wing spin, never, not one time. So in O'Reilly world only Democrats put out spin, which is ridiculous, and shows that he is a biased right-wing fraud of a journalist.

Then O'Reilly attacked Pelosi again over what she knew, or did not know about the Bush torture. Which is a red herring, and just a distraction from the real issue, that Bush used torture. Billy had 2 Republicans on, Jim Angle and Dana Perino. And of course the 3 of them beat up on Pelosi with nobody there to give the other side, which is a violation of journalistic standards. It was a one sided biased segment with 3 Republicans attacking Pelosi. And standard tactics from O'Reilly, he just had 2 Democrats on and he never asked them anything about Pelosi. He waited until he got the 2 Republicans on so they could smear her with nobody to question anything he said, it's total bias, and a total hit job on Pelosi.

What O'Reilly and his right-wing stooges fail to mention is that even if Pelosi knew what Bush was doing, which she claims she did not, she could not have said anything because it was classified info and top secret. O'Reilly claims she should have spoke out if she knew, at the time, but if she did he would have hammered her for telling the terrorists what Bush was doing, and he would have called for her to be tried for treason. Now he is hammering her for not speaking out, so she was damned if she did, and damned if she didn't. Billy fails to mention any of that. Not to mention it's meaningless what Pelosi knew, or not, Bush did the torture, and that is the story, not Pelosi.

Then Geraldo was on to talk tabloid news, so I just ignored that garbage. Then O'Reilly had a crazy segment on comedians still doing jokes about his hero Bush. He had a former writer for Jay Leno on, Buddy Winston. Billy claims they are all left-wing Bush haters who do too many Bush jokes, and he cried about the late night comedians doing Bush jokes, when nobody cares but him. And they are also doing Obama jokes, but he never says a word about that. Not to mention when Clinton was president these same guys ripped him to pieces, yet O'Reilly never had a problem with them then.

The Leno writer explained to O'Reilly that Bush was comedy gold because he was an idiot, and that is why they do all the Bush jokes. He even said that if Bush had been a Democrat they would have hammered him to, just as they did to Clinton. But dumbass O'Reilly was not buying any of it. Even though it's all true, Bush was an idiot and he was comedy gold. Obama is a smart guy and it's hard to make jokes about him, O'Reilly even denied that and told Winston that he could think of a million Obama jokes. Really, then you are the only one because Obama does not give them much material to work with.

The whole segment was garbage, and a total waste of time with no news value at all, none. They made fun of Clinton, as much, or more than Bush, so shut the hell up dumbass, and stop crying about the Bush jokes. They are comedians and they do whatever it takes to get laughs, they do not care if it's a Republican or a Democrat, they just do what gets a laugh. Leno, Letterman, and Conan, all ripped Clinton to pieces, Bill and Hillary, so they go after everyone, moron.

Then O'Reilly had crazy Glenn Beck on, they talked about a segment Beck did with a guy from ACORN. And what a spin job this was, O'Reilly claimed Beck beat the guy up and handed him his ass. When the video of Beck and the ACORN guy is on the internet, you can watch it yourself. And the ACORN guy destroyed Beck, he killed Beck so bad he had the guys mic turned off.

Billy never showed any of that, he played partial cherry picked clips of the interview to make Beck look good. But if you watch the whole thing, Beck got killed, and Beck looked like a fool. He had no answer to anything the guy said, and refused to answer any of his questions. Beck spewed out all his spin on ACORN and the guy shot it all down, every word of it, then Billy claimed Beck beat the guy up, which is just ridiculous. I say go watch the video, the whole thing, then decide for yourself, Beck got killed with facts, all he had was right-wing spin and the guy had an answer for all of it. But you would never know that if you only saw the edit job O'Reilly did on the interview.

Then Billy had some stupid vote on the best ever comedy show, and the Factor viewers said I Love Lucy was the best ever. Huh? I Love Lucy? It's a 30 year old barely funny show that was in black and white. And only a 65 year old (or older) would vote that the best, Seinfeld got #2, when it should have been the winner, and I Love Lucy should not even be in the top five. The whole segment was garbage, and it's not news.

It's shows how old the Factor viewers are, because nobody under 65 would say I Love Lucy was the best comedy show ever. In most polls Seinfeld is voted the best comedy show ever. And I Love Lucy usually does not even make the top five. Then the pinheads and patriots crap, and the highly edited cherry picked e-mails.

FOX News Hits The Trifecta in Worlds Worst
By: Steve - May 8, 2009 - 12:10pm

From the Wednesday Countdown with Keith Olbermann:

OLBERMANN: That‘s next, but first time for COUNTDOWN‘s number two story, tonight‘s worst persons in the world.

The bronze to Karl Rove. Reality‘s one fellow that Karl never had the pleasure of meeting. Warning the president that he better not screw up on the vetting of his nominee to succeed Justice David Souter.

ROVE: “I was part of a five party committee that spent years at the White House under President Bush preparing for the moment of a Supreme Court vacancy. We had thick note books on all prospects. We had everything from all their writings and opinions to college transcripts, to tax returns, to, you know, charity dinner speeches.

You know it, we had it. We studied those. It was why it was possible, after three months after a vacancy occurred, to have Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed to the Supreme Court.

“Obama can‘t offer up somebody they‘ve not fully and completely vetted, and that takes time.”

OLBERMANN: Karl, two months after you guys nominated Roberts, you nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. Harriet Miers! You had to withdraw her nomination after just three weeks. Only the seventh outright DOA nomination in court history. So what happened to that big golden book of Supreme Court nominees, Karl? Did you eat it?

The runner up, Bill-O, trashing Bruce Springsteen for celebrating Pete Seger on his 90th birthday, by noting how Pete has always sung all the verses, even the one this country would like to forget, our false allusions about ourselves.

O'REILLY: “That‘s right, Bruce. We all have false illusions and America is a noble nation, a country that has freed billions of people all over the world at great cost. Now, Bruce Springsteen is not exactly a PHD in political science, obviously. But his snide reference to America defines how the far left sees this country. You know what, most liberal and conservative Americans disagree with him.”

OLBERMANN: No statistics or polls to back that up. Bill just knows because he‘s Bill O‘Reilly, super genius. The same Bill-O, speaking of illusions, said the other night that “Jack Bauer reminds me of me.”

Yes, you‘re both one dimensional fictional characters. And by the way, the far left believes we are indeed a noble nation, but we would be nobler still if we stopped pretending, as Bill-O does, that we are perfect, or that our stink doesn‘t stink, or that if we don‘t like what another country has done we should bomb it or let Bill boycott it.

Nice implication by Bill-O there that he has a political science PH.D, which he does not, nor a Peabody Award.

But the winner, Rupert Murdoch. His profit reports for News Corp are out today. For the first quarter of 2009, the cable outlet‘s did very well, but the rest of it disaster. I didn‘t get where I am today without recognizing a disaster for Rupert Murdoch. Total operating income down 47 percent. Total newspaper operating income down 97 percent. Total television operating income down 99 percent.

So News Corps boss Rupert Murdoch and his henchman Fox Station chairman Roger Ailes have encouraged personal attacks and hate speech on the air for years, trying to boost sagging ratings at Fox. But that strategy has been an enormous failure. Today, News Corp announced another dismal quarter, with Fox reporting a 99 percent drop in profits. Murdoch even lost money on “American Idol.”

In other words, he will not be turning things around anytime soon. If our capitalistic system were not so corrupted, Murdoch and Ailes would have been fired a long time ago. But the fix is in, ladies and gentlemen.

Rupert, arise News Corp stockholders and reclaim the investments, Murdoch, today‘s worst person in the world.

Factor Pollster Caught Writing GOP Policy Memo
By: Steve - May 8, 2009 - 9:20am

The Factor pollster is Frank Luntz, O'Reilly even calls him Dr. Luntz, and puts him on the show as a non-partisan objective pollster, but he never discloses the fact that Frank Luntz is a biased and partisan Republican. I have reported in this blog (many times) that Frank Luntz is a biased partisan pollster who basically works for the Republican party.

This Frank Luntz is no different than Newt Gingrich or Karl Rove, except that he pretends to be an honest and objective pollster, and they do not. He basically works for the Republican party, writing talking points for them, and sending out policy memos etc. and he has done this for at least 20 years. Which would be ok, except he goes on all these FOX News shows and they bill him as a non-partisan objective pollster, including O'Reilly.

He is the official Factor pollster, O'Reilly uses him all the time, and he never discloses the fact that Luntz is a biased partisan who works for the Republican party. Which, as O'Reilly himself would say if MSNBC or CNN did it, is a violation of journalistic standards. It's against the rules of journalism to put a partisan pollster on the air and sell him as a non-partisan objective pollster, without disclosing the fact he is working for the GOP.

Earlier this week, a memo written by the right-wing Frank Luntz was leaked instructing the Republican Party on how to frame the health care debate in order to defeat progressive reform. Since his pivotal role in helping craft Newt Gingrich’s Contract with America, Luntz has had an impressive record of cloaking regressive and conservative policies with carefully poll-tested language.

For instance, Luntz is credited with persuading Republicans to use the intentionally misleading term “death tax” to describe the estate tax.

According to CQ, Republicans are enthusiastically embracing Luntz and his health care memo. At a private workshop organized by the House leadership, Luntz was welcomed with applause and cries of “Welcome home!” Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) gushed, “We look to him for how do we express the things that we believe in ways that are effective.”

Luntz’s health care memo urges Republicans to denounce progressive reforms as ideas based upon a “committee of Washington bureaucrats.” The memo then calls for Republicans to strongly emphasize the “protection of the personalized doctor-patient relationship” because this approach allows Americans to believe that the GOP is doing something to “protect and improve something good.“

ThinkProgress compiled a video featuring Rep. Phil Gingrich (R-GA), Rep. Michael Burgess (R-TX), Rep. Tom Price (R-GA), Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), and Rep. Peter Roskam (R-IL) all embracing the vapid “patient-doctor” talking point in the past 48 hours.

You can watch that video here:

Luntz’s strategy is to “obstruct health reform by ignoring what Obama is actually offering.” Since Republicans currently have absolutely no plan for reforming health care, Luntz tells them to avoid projecting a policy plan and instead focus on language that “captures not just what Americans want to see but exactly what they want to hear.”

So now you know the truth about Frank Luntz, and the next time you see him on the Factor, remember that O'Reilly puts this biased fraud on his show and bills him as a non-partisan objective pollster. He even calls him Dr. Luntz, as if he has any credibility, which he does not. The fact that O'Reilly does that, and that he is the only Factor pollster, is just more proof that O'Reilly himself is a biased and partisan Republican.

Not only does O'Reilly have this con man as his official pollster, he does not disclose his partisan bias, or the fact that he writes those policy memos for the Republican party. All of that is a massive violation of journalistic standards, and yet O'Reilly does it anyway, and then he has the nerve to criticize other people in the media for bias and violating journalistic standards.

It's the pot calling the kettle black, and massive hypocrisy from O'Reilly. He does not even go by his own rules that he calls for other journalists to go by. It's like telling someone you should not rob banks, then you go rob a bank. O'Reilly has rules for journalists to go by, then he violates those same rules. Which makes O'Reilly the biggest hypocrite in the media.

The Thursday 5-7-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 8, 2009 - 9:00am

The TPM was called Hate Speech. Billy claims hate speech is on the rise, but he never said a word about any hate on the right. And the stuff from the left he showed was not even hate speech, so the whole TPM was just ridiculous right-wing garbage. Billy also mentioned the hate list from England, and if you notice all the American who are banned from England are right-wingers, like Michael Savage, the KKK, the neo-Nazis, the white power people, all Republicans.

O'Reilly had a reporter from England on to discuss it. My question is, why should I care about some list they have in England. The answer, I don't. And I would guess 99% of Americans do not care either. The only reason O'Reilly even reported it is because the Republican Michael Savage was on it. The whole topic was a waste of time and had no news value to anyone in America. Earth to O'Jackass, nobody cares about what happens in England, this is America, report on what happens here moron.

Then O'Reilly put the dishonest right-wing fraud Laura Ingraham on to put her two cents in. And of course O'Dummy never said a word about her dishonest right-wing hit piece she did on Al Gore, the one where she edited out his statements that said all his Global Warming money goes to a non-profit company. It was the most dishonest piece of journalism I have seen in a long time, and O'Reilly not only let it happen on his show, he let her host it.

They talked about hate speech and the England list. But Ingraham is a corrupt right-wing fraud, so why should anyone listen to anything she has to say. What's really funny is how O'Reilly and Nasal Nose criticized MSBNC for having people on who made jokes about Miss California. When O'Reilly and Miller make jokes about every liberal in America on a nightly basis. They call people names, like Helen Thomas, Leahy, Springsteen, and they even make jokes about using torture on liberals. Then they have the nerve to criticize people on MSNBC who made a joke about Miss California. The hypocrisy and double standards from O'Dummy and Nasal Nose is off the charts.

Then the right-wing moron John Stossel was on to talk about some politically correct waste of time tv show he is doing. O'Reilly only had him on because he is a Republican, and he want's to help him promote his stupid show. It was basically 2 right-wing morons sitting around agreeing with each other. Then Bernie Goldberg was on to give out more one sided right-wing propaganda with no Democrat to give the counterpoint, or provide the balance.

Goldberg said he does not really like Savage but he thinks it is wrong to put him on the British ban list. Which shows what a right-winger Goldberg is, because Savage is a hate speech spewing right-wing idiot. And what a shocker, Goldberg is also opposed to the Obama hate crimes bill, just as O'Reilly and most of the Republicans are. Because it makes it a hate crime to attack gay people, and they want to protect the Republicans who do those hate crimes. They also cried some more about Miss California, and then Goldberg insulted all Americans by saying they know nothing and do not have a clue what's going on in America.

But he said not your viewers Billy, and that the smartest people watch him. Hey Bernie, you ever read my hate mail, you may want to retract that statement. I would say 99% of it is from totally misinformed clueless right-wing idiots who spell every other word wrong. The whole segment was just more one sided right-wing propaganda with no Democrats for the balance.

Then the corrupt right-wing fraud Megyn kelly was on to talk legal issues, and of course no Democrat guest to go on with her. And O'Reilly did not say a word about Kelly getting caught lying about the hate crimes bill protecting pedophiles, Billy totally ignored it and never said a word about her dishonesty. Because he did the exact same thing, so did Hannity and Hemmer and almsot everyone at FOX. They called it journalism, haha, it was nothing but partisan dishonesty.

They cried about an ACLU lawsuit, and some right-wing student lawsuit who did not like his liberal teacher. Billy said the ACLU is putting all out lives in danger, yeah just like he said reporting there was racism at the tea party protests was hate speech. And Kelly is just as nuts as O'Dummy, she said the ACLU only helps liberals, which is a total lie, they even helped Rush Limbaugh in his privacy rights case, so she is a proven liar, again.

The right-wing student filed a lawsuit, and O'Reilly even had him on as a guest a couple months ago. Billy told him he had a good lawsuit and that he will win it, ummmm, wrong. The judge tossed out 19 of the 20 counts (all the important ones) but Kelly and O'Jerky called it a win for the student, which is insane. And the two of them praised the kid for basically filing a frivolous lawsuit that had 99% of it thrown out of court. In O'Reilly world getting 19 of 20 counts tossed is a good lawsuit, yeah if a Republican files it.

Then the Bill O'Reilly reality check segmentt, I usually do not report his crap because it's total garbage with no reality check, but just for fun I will tonight, to show everyone how ridiculous this reality check nonsense is.

1) Billy reported that Tony Bennett supports Obama 100 percent, and that was it, no check, just the report that Tony Bennet supports Obama. Which is not a reality check, and not even close.

2) Billy reported that James Carville has a book out, he said it was filled with hate, no check, he just reported that he thinks the Carville book has a lot of hate in it. Yeah the same way he calls any criticism of Bristol Palin or Miss California hate speech, which is just insane.

3) Billy reported that Keifer Sutherland was arressted for head-butting someone, no check, just the report that he was arrested. Does O'Reilly even know what a reality check is, I doubt it.

4) Billy reported that Maine passed a gay marriage law, no check, just the report of the new law. Earth to O'Reilly, that is not a reality check, you dumbass.

5) Billy reported that Hawaii approved an Islam day, ummmmm, who freaking cares, and how in the hell is that a reality check on anything.

6) Billy reported that Dan Rather did a comedy bit for Jon Stewart, it was a spoof on the media's coverage of Obama and Biden getting a hamburger. There was no check, just video of Rather in a wig, which is not a reality check on anything.

7) Billy showed video of Kathy Lee Gifford beating a Mexican pinata with a stick, no check, just video of her hitting the pinata with a stick. How is that a reality check on anything, and even if it is, who in the hell cares, and how is this news. Dear O'Reilly, you have a news show, report the damn news idiot.

8) Billy said go buy the lame ass Lis Wiehl book, or the lame ass Factor book, for mothers day. How is that a reality check, and most of the mothers I know would be mad to get a book for mothers day. Especially a lame right-wing book that should only be used to keep a fire burning.

And that was the great Bill O'Reilly reality check, now you know why I normally do not report what Billy says in the reality check segment, because it's nonsense, and most of it does not even have a check. then the pinheads and patriots and the highly edited cherry picked e-mails.

Billy named some unknown model in Germany (or some foreign country) the pinhead, why, because she fell down two times while working the runway during a fashion show. If that's the best you can do just cancel the whole segment, because that is garbage that nobody in America even cares about.

If you are just gonna mail it in, cancel the whole damn thing. And I could name a republican pinhead every day, yet no Republican is ever named a pinhead. Which is just more proof that Billy is a biased right-wing stooge, that and everything else he does. And btw, the fair and balanced Factor had 5 Republican guests, and no Democrats, as in zero. That's 11 Republicans to 1 Democrat in just the last two nights.

O'Reilly let Rove Lie His Ass Off on The Factor
By: Steve - May 7, 2009 - 12:30pm

On the Tuesday May 5th O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly let Karl Rove lie his right-wing ass off about US Supreme court nominations under Bush. Rove talked about how prepared Bush administration officials were when they nominated their two justices and counseled the Obama administration to follow their example. He warned that “they cannot afford to have a vetting mistake after having five cabinet nominations with tax problems.”
ROVE: I was part of a five party committee that spent years at the White House under President Bush preparing for the moment of the Supreme Court vacancy. We had thick notebooks on all prospects. We had everything from all of their writings and opinions to college transcripts to tax returns to, charity dinner speeches, you name it.

We had it. We studied those. It was why it was possible three months after a vacancy occurred to have Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed to the Supreme Court.

So I thought it was smart when President Obama said, this is going to take at least six months. Because they cannot afford to have a vetting mistake. They can’t offer up somebody they’ve not fully and completely vetted. And that takes time.
But Rove seems to have just accidently forgot one thing, Harriet Miers. Justice Samuel Alito wasn’t Bush’s first choice to fill the vacancy left by Sandra Day O’Connor. Bush chose Miers, saying that her “talent, experience and judicial philosophy make her a superb choice to safeguard the constitutional liberties and equality of all Americans.”

Miers’s thin resume beyond being Bush’s loyal friend (she was head of the Texas lottery and a member of the Dallas City Council) generated opposition not only from liberals, but also from conservatives who were embarrassed by the pick. Less than a month after she was nominated, Miers was forced to withdraw her name from consideration.

And yet Rove never said a word about any of that, and how his great 5 person vetting team blew it on her nomination, he just ignored the whole thing. And O'Reilly let him get away with it without saying a word, when he knew all about the failed Miers nomination, because he reported it and talked about it for a month. As soon as Rove said it the first thing I thought of was what about Harriet Miers.

I guess this is more of that truthful reporting O'Reilly said FOX News does, when it was all lies, one lies and the other one swears to it. Rove makes it up and O'Reilly sits there like a stump on a log and never says a word about Miers. This is called honest journalism by O'Reilly, but the facts show it's biased partisan garbage, from Rove and O'Reilly.

And btw, Obama was elected by the people with a huge mandate, so the last person he has to listen to is Karl Rove, or Bill O'Reilly. Especially when they are both dishonest right-wing idiots, that do nothing but try to make Obama and the Democrats look bad.

The Wednesday 5-6-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 7, 2009 - 10:30am

The TPM was called Open Season on The GOP. Billy said the GOP is under attack and they must fight back against the far left attack machine. Then he played the DNC survivor spoof ad about the Republicans. Billy mentioned Colin Powell saying Limbaugh and Coulter are ruining the Republican party, and he also said the Democrats and the media are doing some vicious attacks on the GOP. When that is all right-wing spin, because the ads are valid, and truthful. It's politics, and I have seen nothing vicious, and of course O'Reilly had no examples of what he called vicious attacks.

Then O'Reilly had his good friend Ann Coulter on. Billy asked her if the GOP is in a weak position, and she said of course not, and she acted like O'Reilly was crazy to even ask that. Coulter said the GOP is doing fine and the stories of their demise are just lies, put out by Democrats and the corrupt liberal media. I guess she forgot already what happened in the last two elections. Coulter is insane, and her answer to that question proves it.

Then O'Reilly and Coulter said the media got Obama elected, which is just insane. George W. Bush and the Republican party got Obama elected. Did you two right-wing idiots forget that Bush and the Republicans in Congress run the country into the ground over the last 8 years, did you morons forget that already. The people put Obama in the white house, gave the Democrats a majority in the House and the Senate, because Bush screwed the country up, and the media had nothing to do with it.

Coulter also trashed everyone, especially Powell, for saying the GOP needs to move to the center, she said no, they do not need to move to the center. And the crazy Coulter went on a rant about how the GOP needs to move to the right and stop running moderates like McCain. She said her candidate was Palin, and that she voted for her, not McCain. Then she said a real conservative could have beat Obama, which proves she is nuts, because no Republican could have beat Obama, not after what Bush did to the country.

And if you notice O'Reilly had Coulter on to discuss the Powell statements, but nobody to defend him, or what he said. It was the usual one sided biased Factor interview, with a Republican and nobody to give the counterpoint. And Powell was right, yet O'Reilly only had Coulter on to give her side of it. Billy also asked Coulter to name one person in the GOP who can beat Obama in 2012, and she could not name anyone.

Then the right-wing moron Dick Morris was on to talk about Bristol Palin and the state of the GOP. And of course Morris said Bristol is great and a good girl, even though she got pregnant at 16 when her mom is a big abstinence believer. Earth to Sarah Palin, abstinence does not work, and your own fricking daughter is proof. Then Morris talked about Sarah Palin, and he said something totally ridiculous. Morris said Sarah Palin is just a normal woman, and that is why the media attacked her so much.

Which may be the most ridiculous thing Morris has ever said, and that's saying a lot. Palin was attacked because she is a far right, pro-life, witch doctor worshipping idiot, who could not even answer a question about what newspapers she reads. Palin was exposed as a dummy, a dope, and a far right extremist, in the Katie Couric interviews. And the McCain campaign even tried to hide her from the media, which shows they knew she was an unqualified idiot. I guess Morris just forgot all that, yeah right. Billy also asked Morris to name one person in the GOP who can beat Obama in 2012, and he could not name anyone.

Morris also said Obama might do well, but he thinks Obama is going to fail, and he said the economy will crash because of his policies. Earth to Morris, the economy already crashed, under Bush. Obama is just trying to fix it, and you are a clueless right-wing idiot who just says what Billy's braindead viewers want to hear. Even O'Reilly thinks the economy will turn around under Obama, so you are clueless pal. Morris said Obama will fail and the GOP will be there to take advantage of it. Which is insanity, the GOP is a train wreck, and going downhill, in 2010 the Democrats will gain more seats, and in 2012 Obama will crush whoever they run against him.

Then the policing the net segment with the biased Republican Amanda Carpenter. There is no Democrat internet cop, just Carpenter. Billy asked her if she found any nasty remarks about Bristol Palin on the liberal blogs. And she said yes, at the HuffingtonPost. She found one sort of mean remark, in the free speech comments section of the website. It was not made by a writer at the HuffPost, it was said by an anonymous poster who left a comment on an article written there. For all we know it was made by a Republican to make them look bad, nobody knows, because it was an anonymous comment.

It was one comment, out of thousands, and yet O'Reilly trashed the HuffPost over it. When they ignore all the right-wing hate, and it was a one sided biased right-wing smear job, with no balance and no Democrat to give the counterpoint. Notice that O'Reilly only has a Republican internet cop, that alone proves he is a biased right-wing hack. Because a real journalist would have a Democrat internet cop too, not just a Republican. That would actually be fair and balanced journalism, and O'Reilly does not do that. Not to mention it's ridiculous to blame the entire website for a comment left by one anonymous person, yet O'Reilly did just that.

Then the woman shot in the face story, Billy had a Republican on to discuss it. Then the stupid waste of tv time Dennis Miller segment. O'Reilly calls him the sultan of swat, which is just sad. Miller is the sultan of bad unfunny jokes, and he is a has been that never was, who turned Republican, but only after his comedy/acting career failed. O'Reilly has him on to give analysis of politics etc. When nobody cares what this has been moron says, except O'Reilly.

Miller said he likes Newt Gingrich for president and Sarah Palin for vice president. Now that's funny, and I hope that is the GOP ticket for 2012 because Obama and Biden will crush them. Remember that Miller liked Giuliani in 2008, and he could not even win the primary, in fact, he got killed because all he did was say he was Mayor during the 9-11 attacks, and that was his whole campaign, so that shows what Miller knows, not much. And btw, O'Reilly also likes Gingrich and Palin, they both do. And Miller also trashed Powell, because that's what right-wing idiots do to moderate Republicans who tell the truth about the GOP.

Then the Barack & a Hard Place segment with Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes. This segment is garbage, and a total waste of tv time with no news value. Colmes said the best thing Obama did this week is not bow down to the religious right on prayer day. Crowley said the worst thing he did is ask for $80 million to close Gitmo without a plan. It's a ridiculous segment that is only done to give Crowley a forum to trash Obama, and they let Colmes on to make it look like they have a balanced segment.

But he barely gets a word in, and they just make fun of everything he says. At the end of the segment Crowley said Obama is weak and confused, when the guy has a 67% job approval and everyone thinks he is doing well, except Republican idiots like her. Notice that Alan Colmes was the only Democrat on the whole show, and he had to split his time with Crowley. So not one Democrat was on the show alone, while 5 Republicans were.

Then the pinheads and patriots and the edited cherry picked bogus e-mails. In answer to one e-mail O'Reilly said the Bold Fresh t-shirts are not made in America. Then O'Reilly said they are not made in America because no American company can keep up with the demand, and if you believe that total BS I have some land to sell you.

More Proof O'Reilly & FOX News Do Not Tell The Truth
By: Steve - May 6, 2009 - 9:30pm

On the Monday Factor O'Reilly did an entire talking points memo that basically said everyone in the media is corrupt and they lie to you, except of course for him and FOX News. Billy said you should only watch FOX because they tell the truth. And here is some of that truthful reporting O'Reilly claims he does.

On the Tuesday May 5th O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly falsely claimed that pedophiles could be protected under the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act -- which defines as a crime acts of attempted violence "motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim."

O'Reilly said: "You could make an argument that a pedophile has a disease, and because the disease is there, he's a target or she's a target." O'Reilly later added that pedophiles could be protected by the bill because "disability is included. They have a mental disability."

However, pedophilia is not considered a "disability" under federal law. And the Americans with Disabilities Act specifically excludes pedophilia, thereby precluding protection for pedophiles from the hate crimes bill.

While discussing the Democrats opposition to King's amendment, O'Reilly suggested that by defining as crimes acts of attempted violence "motivated by prejudice based on the actual or perceived ... disability of the victim," the underlying bill could protect pedophiles because "a psychiatrist would make an argument ... they have a disease. They can't control themselves."

O'Reilly also stated that "you could make an argument that a pedophile has a disease, and because the disease is there, he's a target or she's a target." After Dr. Marc Lamont Hill stated, "when we talk about sexual orientation, you're not talking about ... pedophilia," O'Reilly replied, "Disability is included. They have a mental disability."

Contrary to O'Reilly's claim that pedophiles could be covered under the hate crimes bill because "they have a mental disability," the bill specifically states: "the term 'disability' shall not include pedophilia."

So O'Reilly was caught red handed lying about the bill. And he was not the only right-wing idiot from FOX to get caught lying about the bill. Billy's good friend and Factor regular in the is it legal segment Megyn Kelly was also caught lying about the bill.

On America's Newsroom, teasing an interview with Rep. Steve King (R-IA), Kelly claimed that "the Democrats on this committee voted -- essentially -- to protect pedophiles. During her interview with King, Kelly repeated the false charge, saying: "You thought it would be a good idea to make sure -- since they're adding sexual orientation to the bill -- to make sure that pedophilia doesn't get swept up into a special protection.

On the screen it said House Dems vote to protect pedophiles, but not veterans. Which is the lowest form of dishonest journalism you can do, she lied to claim Democrats voted for pedophiles and against veterans, and here is a screen capture to prove it.

Democrats did not "vote to protect pedophiles" by voting down King's amendment to define "sexual orientation" because pedophiles are not protected by the bill. So we have O'Reilly and Kelly lying about the bill to smear Democrats, Bill Hemmer and Sean Hannity were also caught doing the very same thing. And remember this, O'Reilly said FOX Tells you the truth, then they get caught lying about this, multiple times by numerous anchors at FOX.

Discussing the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, Sean Hannity and Bill Hemmer also advanced the false claim that House Democrats voted to "protect" pedophiles by voting against an amendment to the bill by Rep. Steve King (R-IA) stating that "the term 'sexual orientation' shall not include pedophilia."

In fact, as Rep. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) noted during an April 23 House Judiciary Committee hearing, the term "sexual orientation" is already defined by federal statute as applying only to "consensual homosexuality or heterosexuality," thereby excluding pedophiles who engage in nonconsensual sexual relationships with children. In providing her reasons for opposing King's amendment, Baldwin said that it "is unnecessary and, I would add, inflammatory in terms of insinuations."

What happened is, this corrupt and 100% dishonest Republican Congressman Steve King, tried to pass that insane amendment just so he could go on FOX News and claim the Democrats voted to protect pedophiles, but not veterans. Then O'Reilly, Kelly, Hemmer, and Hannity all helped this scum Congressman put his plan in place by giving him time on the FOX News Network to spew out this ridiculous right-wing propaganda. And that is how dishonest Bill O'Reilly is, it was all right-wing propaganda, and O'Reilly helped them promote every word of it.

O'Reilly calls that the truth, when in reality it's planned partisan dishonesty, from all right-wing idiots who work for FOX News. They spew out this garbage that smears and lies about the Democrats and what is in the hate crimes bill, then they claim to be the fair and balanced News Network that tells you the truth. They are dishonest and biased scum, all of them, and to even call what they do journalism is an insult to every real journalist in America.

O'Reilly Called Bruce Springsteen Un-American & Un-Patriotic
By: Steve - May 6, 2009 - 10:30am

Remember when O'Reilly said he respects dissent and that he was not arrogant or mean to anyone on the left for anything they said, or any protests they had. That was all O'Reilly spin, it's all lies. Last night he attacked the Boss Bruce Springsteen, he called him un-American and said he is not a patriot.
O'REILLY: Caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone. "The Factor" begins right now.

Hi, I'm Bill O'Reilly, thanks for watching us tonight. How the Republican party can make a comeback. That is the subject of this evening's "Talking Points Memo".

Right now, the Democratic party holds almost all the cards as you know. If President Obama is successful turning the economy around, the Dems may even become more dominant in the years to come. That scenario is not really healthy for the USA as a vibrant two-party system is needed in order to solve complex problems and prevent the arrogance and corruption of entrenched ideology.

The loudest voices for the Dems are now far left zealots who believe America is a flawed nation. Here's a good example. The other day a birthday party concert was held for left wing singer Pete Seeger, who's 90 years old. Bruce Springsteen, among others, performed at the concert. And then Bruce popped off as he often does.


BRUCE SPRINSTEEN, SINGER: At 90, he remains a stealth dagger through the heart of our country's illusions. He sings all the verses, all the time. Especially the ones that we'd like to leave out of our history as people.


O'REILLY: That's right, Bruce. We all have false illusions that America is a noble nation. A country that has freed billions of people all over the world at great cost. A country that provides so much opportunity to the poor that more than 20 million people have illegally entered the USA. Do you get that Bruce?

Why don't you take a look at your mansion, nice car, expensive comforts and get a little perspective. You're a working class guy, right, Bruce? Capitalism combined with your talent has made you a wealthy guy. It would not have happened in Venezuela.

Now Bruce Springsteen is not exactly a PH.D. in political science obviously. But his snide reference to America defines how the far left sees this country. And you know what? Most liberal and conservative Americans disagree with him.
You know what O'Reilly, you are a right-wing jackass, and most Americans agree with Bruce, not you.
O'REILLY: So let me spell this out so that even the Republican leadership can understand it. Get solutions to problems. Explain your culture war positions clearly and without spite. And most importantly, stick up for America, because the Democrats are certainly not doing that. Use that strategy, GOP., and you'll get back in the game.
Then the two morons Rove and O'Reilly went on to trash Springsteen, Obama, and the Democrats even more.
O'REILLY: All right, but the Democratic party has been very successful in demonizing the Republicans as a bunch of people who say no to everything., are bigoted, you know, because of their social issues of gay marriage and illegal immigration. And they've been very, very successful in doing that. And I would say that conservatives are now on the defensive and the Republican party certainly is.

ROVE: Yeah.

O'REILLY: But if you take the patriot issue. The one I just defined because this snide stuff that Springsteen does, believe me, and you know this, is all over the left wing media. Every day. We're bad, we're bad.

ROVE: Yeah.

O'REILLY: Barack Obama, the president of the United States went overseas pretty much reinforced that to the rest of the world. Yeah, we are bad. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And if the Republican party would start to seize the high ground there and say we're not bad. These people are misguided. They don't know -- you can take the momentum and swing it right back.

ROVE: Yeah.
Hey O'Reilly, you and Rove are the misguided, do you not know that Obama has a 67% job approval rating.
O'REILLY: You're too involved with politics and not involved enough with emotion.

ROVE: No, no, no. No, no, no, Bill, let me finish.

O'REILLY: Go ahead.

Let me finish. We've got to stand for a cultural view, for patriotic view of America, and seize the opportunities that were given by Democrats in Congress.

O'REILLY: They're handing it to you.

ROVE: .and by Democrats in the White House.

O'REILLY: They're handing it to you.

ROVE: Well, they hand it to us, you're right. When the president went abroad and basically said America is arrogant, you know, in France, of all places, I mean, talk about arrogant, I mean, the French. And yet, he went there and sort of condemned America. Now I call it his apology tour.

And I think we do need to seize on moments like that and contrast our view, which is a hopeful and optimistic view of our country's future and a proud and patriotic future of our country's existence.

O'REILLY: Yeah, but that's got to be the first salvo. And then you can go back into the other issues, but you've got to define yourself as apart from the Bruce Springsteens of the world. And it's not being done.

ROVE: .but if he goes abroad, we need to seize that moment.

O'REILLY: All right.

ROVE: But we have to hit on all three of those cylinders at once.


ROVE: We've got to hit on the economy, culture, and kitchen table issues.
Notice how O'Reilly keeps saying "we" the "we" is him and Rove and the Republican party. Bill O'Reilly just referred to himself as a Republican, he said "we" have to fight the Democrats over culture issues and patriotism, even though he denies being a Republican. What happened is he forgot for a minute or two that he pretends he is not a Republican and he let the "we" stuff slip out. OOPS!

So there you have it folks, O'Reilly and Rove just trashed the Boss Bruce Springsteen, President Obama, and all the Democrats, they said they are un-American and that they are not patriots. But he claims he is fair to Obama and the Democrats and that he has no agenda. Then he pulls this right-wing un-American garbage with Rove, even after he said he respects dissent.

And this garbage that Bruce, Obama, and all Democrats are not patriots is nothing but right-wing spin, it's meant to smear them and give the American people the false impression that they do not love their country. Frankly it's an outrage to even say they are not patriots, just because they admit we have done some bad things, and that they happened when Bush and the Republicans were in power. The un-American thing here is O'Reilly and Rove calling Bruce and Obama un-American for simply telling the truth about the bad things Bush and his administration did.

The Tuesday 5-5-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 6, 2009 - 8:50am

The TPM was called GOP Comeback? Billy actually admits the GOP is in big trouble, but he claims they can make a comeback. O'Reilly also admits the left has successfully labeled the Republicans as the party of no, maybe because they are the party of no. They vote no on everything, and O'Reilly ignores it, but when the Democrats voted no on Bush O'Reilly called them un-American. Then he went through a list of things they can do to make a comeback. Then O'Reilly did some crazy attack on Bruce Springsteen, Billy played a clip of something Bruce said and then implied he was not sticking up for America, whatever that means.

Basically he called Bruce Springsteen un-American, dumbass O'Reilly called the Boss un-American, what an idiot. Springsteen is more American than O'Reilly could even dream of, and such a crazy statement by O'Reilly proves what a fool and a what right-wing idiot he is. Then crazy O'Reilly had Karl Rove on to discuss his GOP comeback talking points garbage. Not only did O'Reilly say again that Springsteen was un-American for not sticking up for America, he said both Obama and Springsteen say we are bad, and that they are not patriots.

Yes you heard me right folks, Bill O'Reilly said president Obama and Bruce Springsteen are not patriots, and that they are not sticking up for America. People may not believe he said this so I will publish the transcript tomorrow. O'Reilly even said the Republicans are patriots and the Democrats are not, and the last time I looked the Boss and Obama were Democrats, so O'Reilly is saying they are not patriots. And btw, Rove agreed with everthing O'Reilly said, and even added to it. Which shows how stupid and biased both of them are.

They also talked about the Obama supreme court pick and Rove said something that was totally insane. Rove claims that because Obama voted against Alito and Roberts when Bush nominated them, now he has no right to pick a liberal to replace Souter. Which is ridiculous, and may be the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Especially when Bush was the president Rove and the Republicans said the president has a right to put anyone he wants to on the court, as long as they are qualified. Now suddenly Obama can not pick who he wants because when he was a Senator he voted against Alito and Roberts, that argument is ridiculous, and it just shows what a right-wing idiot Rove is. That argument sounds like a retarded 5 year old made it.

Then O'Reilly talked about the hate crimes bill and quoted a Republican Congressman about it. He put some insane right-wing spin on it about the bill protecting child molesters, when it does no such thing, it will include attacks on gay people as a hate crime. The right-wing idiots like O'Reilly are trying to say that's protecting child molesters, as in, all gay people molest children, which is not in the bill, and frankly, just total right-wing garbage.

Billy had the Democrat Dr. Marc Lamont Hill on to discuss it. O'Reilly spewed out more of that crazy spin he was putting out and Dr. Hill disagreed with everything he said. Basically O'Reilly took the right-wing spin on the bill and run with it, like the good little Republican he is. Dr. Hill was not buying it, and he told O'Reilly the truth, but it never stopped O'Reilly or even slowed him down. The sad part is there is no bill, it has not even been decided on yet, so nobody knows what is even in it. O'Reilly speculated what could be in it and cried about it, when it's not even a finished bill yet.

O'Reilly jumped the gun, he is attacking a bill in process that has not even been finished. Then at the end of the segment Dr. Hill got the last word, and when he was done O'Reilly said I have no idea what you just said and laughed at him. Which was insulting, and something he would never do to a Republican guest.

Then O'Reilly did another segment on the Miss California anti-gay marriage story. Earth to O'Reilly, let it go man, nobody cares but you and a few right-wing idiots. Billy even complained that the media will not leave her alone, when he is reporting on her every damn night. Billy, you are the media, did you forget? And you report it every fricking night, are you so old and senile you can not even understand that idiots like you are keeping the story alive. Move on already, nobody cares. O'Reilly did a whole segment on it and even had her crazy right-wing Pastor on to discuss it.

Then the body language bimbo segment that I refuse to report on because it's total garbage. Then the is it legal garbage with Megyn Kelly and Lis Wiehl. They talked about the US Supreme Court and the Janet Jackson case, Billy and the both of them said it was an important case. When only right-wingers think so, the rest of us do not care that Janet Jackson had a wardrobe malfunction, because we are not old prudes who still think it's 1950. They also talked about a lesbian school story, where 2 lesbians were kicked out of school for simply admitting they are lesbians, and a Florida judge story. It was basically a waste of tv time, and more garbage for ratings.

Then the stupid culture quiz with Steve Doocy and Martha MacCallum, the pinheads and patriots crap, and the cherry picked and highly edited e-mails. And another 99% one sided biased O'Reilly Factor was over, with 7 Republican guests and 1 Democrat. Which is what O'Reilly calls a fair and balanced guest list. In O'Reilly world 7 to 1 is balance.

The Truth About O'Reilly & FOX News
By: Steve - May 5, 2009 - 11:20am

Last night O'Reilly said you can not trust the media in America, because they are corrupt and they all lie to you. But then he said you can trust the Factor and FOX News because they tell the truth. He must be watching a different FOX News, because the one I watch is nothing but a dishonest biased right-wing News Network, that spins out right-wing propaganda as if they were paid by the Republican party.

And as far as the truth, they have very little of that. To prove what I claim, and to prove O'Reilly is just an idiot that ignores all the lies and spin from FOX, read these 7 examples of lies and spin from FOX News anchors. This is what O'Reilly calls truthful reporting, when it's dishonest journalism.

1) On the May 1st O'Reilly Factor, during a segment suggesting that Gore has profited from his advocacy of renewable energy and climate change mitigation, guest host Laura Ingraham presented clips of Gore's April 24 congressional testimony that had been edited to remove his statements that he donates the money he makes from his climate-related work to a nonprofit organization.

2) During the March 16th edition of The Live Desk, Martha MacCallum claimed that "after weeks of economic doom and gloom, the Obama administration is now singing a slightly different tune. Take a look at what was said in recent interviews this weekend." Fox News then aired clips of administration officials purportedly giving an optimistic view of the economy, which included a clip of Biden stating: "The fundamentals of the economy are strong." After the clips aired, MacCallum contrasted the administration's purported remarks from "this weekend" with what then-Sen. Obama said during the 2008 presidential campaign, when he criticized Sen. John McCain for stating that the "fundamentals of our economy are strong, but these are very, very difficult times."

However, Biden did not make his remarks during an "interview" over the past weekend; Biden made his remarks at a September 15, 2008, campaign event, and, like Obama, was criticizing McCain for his remarks -- not echoing McCain.

3) On April 7, 8, and 9, several Fox News personalities -- including Hannity, O'Reilly, Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocy -- aired cropped video of Frank's exchange with Harvard University student Joel Pollak, who asked Frank during an event at the Harvard School of Government, "How much, if any, responsibility do you think you bear" for the financial crisis. The Fox News stooges stated that Frank had refused to answer Pollak's question and had denied any responsibility for the crisis.

In fact, in portions of the exchange not aired by Fox News, Frank said, "The answer is, yes, I do take responsibility for something." Frank later added that after filing "a bill in 2006, when I was still in the minority, to say hedge funds should be registered," in 2007, he "was approached by Republicans who said, No. No. You can't do too much regulation, and I backed off. I wish I hadn't." Frank also noted that he did, in fact, work on legislation to deal with mortgage lending, stating that in 2007, his committee passed restrictions on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and on subprime lending.

4) On the March 6th edition of Hannity, he falsely claimed that Obama made a "campaign promise" to allow "no earmarks." After purporting to "go to the videotape" and "show the audience at home" Obama's "campaign promise" of "no earmarks," Hannity aired a number of clips from the 2008 presidential campaign in order to claim that Obama was breaking his promise, when, in fact, in three of the clips, Obama was referring to reforming the earmark process, and in a fourth, he was asserting that an opponent was being hypocritical for taking earmarks and then advocating against them.

In the fifth clip, which was actually taken from a January 6th -- not during the presidential campaign, as Hannity suggested -- Obama stated: "We are gonna ban all earmarks -- the process by which individual members insert pet projects without review." However, Obama was referring to his desire to "ban all earmarks" from his "recovery and reinvestment plan," which he specifically distinguished from "the overall budget process."

5) Just like Hannity, O'Reilly aired Obama's statement, "We are going to ban all earmarks," and falsely characterized it as a promise to ban them from all legislation, not from the recovery plan. On the March 4th O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly aired Obama's statement, then said, "President Obama pledging last January to end earmarks in federal spending." Later in the show, referring to earmarks included in the omnibus appropriations bill, O'Reilly stated, "But Obama's on record -- we just played the clip -- that he's going to do away with this. And then he takes 9,000 of them and signs it?"

6) On the April 3rd America's Newsroom show the FOX anchors claimed that President Obama's $3.6 trillion fiscal year 2010 budget is "4x bigger than Bush's costliest plan." 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 biggest Bush budget.

Not only did FOX lie about the size of the Obama budget compared to the Bush budget 1 time, they did it 3 times in 3 different segments with 3 different guests. And what makes it even worse is that in the last Bush budget of $3.1 Trillion he did not include some of the 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.

7) On the April 9th O'Reilly Factor Billy said the Obama job approval numbers have dropped 9 points with Independents in the last month, and his source for that drop, Karl Rove.
O'REILLY: 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.
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, 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.

O'Reilly claims FOX News tells you the truth, then how does he explain all these lies I have documented right here. These are documented and proven lies put out by O'Reilly and FOX News, it's right here, just look at it. And this is not all of it, it's maybe 10%, you could fill a website with their lies, and they are all about Democrats, notice that none of their lies are about Republicans.

It shows they are massive liars, and that they have a total right-wing bias. Yet O'Reilly claims everyone is a corrupt liar except for FOX, when they are more corrupt, and they tell more lies than anyone in the media. I have 7 examples here today, but I could find a hundred more if I had the time, the list is endless.

What say you Billy?

The Monday 5-4-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 5, 2009 - 9:40am

The TPM was called Don't Trust The Press. O'Reilly pulled his old tired propaganda about how the media is corrupt, and you can not trust them. Except of course for FOX News and him. Which is totally ridiculous, and anyone who believes that garbage should be locked up in a padded room. O'Reilly was projecting again, he said the media only does tabloid news to get ratings and said they do not care about informing the people, and they do not report the news the people need to know.

And what O'Reilly just said describes him and his show perfectly. Bill O'Reilly is the worst of anyone, and he is the most corrupt journalist you can not trust. Half his show is tabloid garbage for ratings, like the Culture warriors, the culture quiz, the tv icon segment, all the segments with Geraldo, the body language bimbo, the reality check garbage, the octo-mom crap, the miss california crap, chimp attacks, snake stories, the craigslist killer crap, and on and on.

O'Reilly is the king of tabloid garbage and he barely reports any news the people need to know. What you get is 70% right-wing spin with 95% right-wing guests, and the other 40% of the show is tabloid garbage for ratings. And yet O'Reilly complains about the rest of the media as corrupt, and says they just report garbage to get ratings, when that is exactly what he does, and it's what the Factor is all about.

Look in the mirror pal, you are corrupt, and your name should be Bill (Corrupt/Tabloid) O'Reilly. Everything you do is right-wing lies, spin, or propaganda, and when you are not doing that you are reporting on tabloid garbage for ratings.

Then Billy had Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on to agree with him about the media, and of course they both did. Juan is the so-called Democrat, then he agreed with O'Reilly. Which proves that he is no Democrat, because no real Democrat would ever agree with O'Reilly, on pretty much anything. Yet Juan agreed with everything he said, and of course so did Ham, she is a joke and always agrees with O'Reilly, no matter what he says. That's how she stays on the show, it's called ass kissing.

It's so funny to watch biased right-wing FOX News idiots complain about the bias and corruption in the media, when they are more biased and more corrupt than anyone. It's like the Detroit Lions complaining about other football teams being bad, when they were the worst. O'Reilly even trashed the media for their over-reporting on the swine flu, when FOX News reported it more than anyone, yet he never says a word about them. At the end of the segment O'Reilly said the only News Network you can trust is FOX because they tell the truth.

After falling off my chair laughing I realized O'Reilly was being serious, which proves that he is off the charts crazy. I document lies and spin from O'Reilly every day, and other websites like Media Matters and Think Progress document lies and spin from Hannity, Beck, and the rest of FOX News every day, it's endless. In fact, they lie and spin so much nobody can document it all, they only catch about 70% of it. And yet O'Dummy claims they tell the truth, yeah if you live in bizarro world where lies and spin is called the truth.

Then O'Reilly reported the right-wing lie about Obama using threats on a hedge fund, it's all lies started by Drudge. And only right-wing idiots are reporting it, so of course O'Reilly helped spread the lie. He even had Megyn Kelly on to spew that garbage out. She said it was allegedly a story, so even she knew it was crap. The Obama administration denies it happened, and the law firm put out a statement saying it never happened, O'Reilly even called it strong arm tactics.

Then later in the segment Billy admitted it was an internet rumor that he could not verify, yet he reported it anyway, even though he says he only deals in the facts, and never speculates. Then he did an entire segment on the story that was nothing but a dishonest smear job on Obama. The whole thing was put out by Drudge, then O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends report it as if it's true. It's called the right-wing echo chamber, and O'Reilly is right in the middle of it. Talk about corrupt journalism, that was it, complain about that jerk.

Billy even trashed John Edwards and Bill Richardson, when both of those stories are also speculation and nobody has even been indicted for anything. In the Edwards story a now dead guy said he paid the mistress, which is all legal, then he died so he can not testify. So O'Reilly makes fun of the dead guy, and he even said he should not make fun of a dead guy, but he did. It was all right-wing garbage, all speculation, and no facts. Yet he reported it anyway, then he has the nerve to complain about other journalists being corrupt. The whole thing was unproven speculation and nothing but a right-wing smear job with no Democrat to give the counterpoint or provide the balance.

Then Billy reported on the Jon Stewart apology, and he had Ellis Henican on again to talk torture. O'Reilly pulled the ticking time bomb torture scenario and justified torture once again, even though it's illegal and a crime, he defends it because his hero Bush did it. But if a Democrat had done what Bush did O'Reilly would call for his head, so it's total political bias, and total right-wing spin on torture. Earth to O'Reilly, read the damn UN Convention on Torture, it says torture is illegal, with no exceptions, none.

Then Billy had a tabloid garbage segment on some womans body image crap. The guests were Marc Rudov and Tammy Bruce. O'Reilly wasted a whole segment on this crap, after he just complained about the media doing tabloid crap for ratings, then he does it in the very same show. The funniest part was when O'Reilly said the media show beautiful women only and it gives other women a body image problem, when he does it as much or more than anyone.

All his women guests are beautiful, and he shows the sexy videos of women in bikinis and on the beach at spring break etc. pretty much every damn night. So this dumbass is complaining about the very same thing he does every night. He even gets e-mail from viewers that complain to him about all the sexy video he shows, did you forget that stuff you senile old fool.

In the very next segment O'Reilly had the culture warriors, Hoover and Carlson on. And they talked about the tabloid craigslist killer story, the very stuff O'Reilly complained the media reports too much on for ratings, then he does it himself. O'Reilly even said the story was tabloid heaven, then he reported on it. Billy asked if the guys girlfriend (who supports him) is doing anything wrong. Carlson said no, but Hoover and O'Reilly think she is doing it wrong, Billy said she should just shut up. Hey Billy, did you forget about free speech again.

The whole segment was tabloid garbage, the 2nd one in a row. And yet O'Reilly complains about too much tabloid reporting by the media. Look in the mirror idiot, you are as bad as any of them, if not worse. Just watch your own show, it was half tabloid garbage, and the rest was right-wing smears on Obama and other Democrats based on made up internet rumors by Drudge. And you call that News the people can trust, it's nothing but right-wing spin and propaganda and tabloid garbage.

Then the insane reality check segment, Billy did 7 reality checks, and 5 of them had no checks at all. O'Reilly just reported a story and then moved on, with no reality check, it's crazy. It's a total waste of time, and nothing but more right-wing spin from O'Reilly. Most of the time there is no check, and 1 or 2 are usually about his ratings, or ratings for other FOX shows, so it's more self promotion, and right-wing spin on what he calls reality.

Then the pinheads and patriots and the highly edited e-mails. The pinhead was Denise Richards, and she was a pinhead why, because she sang the Cubs song off key. If that's the best he has, he should just do away with the pinheads and patriots, and try reporting some real news for a change. And of course O'Reilly ignored 2 or 3 big news stories, so he could report all the tabloid garbage.

Rove Hypocrisy Proves His Analysis is Biased
By: Steve - May 3, 2009 - 9:50am

Karl Rove is a political analyst for the FOX News Network, he goes on pretty much every show they have to do political analysis, including the O'Reilly Factor on a regular basis. Rove is just like Bill O'Reilly, he is a biased hypocrite with double standards. One standard for Republicans, and a whole different standard for Democrats.

When George W. Bush was the president Karl Rove said he has the right to put anyone he wants on the US Supreme court. Rove said this to the Washington Post in July 2005:
ROVE: Precedents from the most recent Supreme Court vacancies suggest that opposition-party senators have a responsibility to back a president’s choice if they believe a nominee is qualified, even if they disagree with the person’s views.
He also maintained that a strongly held ideological stance would not amount to “extraordinary circumstances” justifying a Democratic filibuster under the bipartisan Senate deal. What Rove said is that no Senator should block the presidents choice for the US Supreme court if that person is qualified, even if they disagree with their political views. And that even if the person is a far right conservative, the president should be allowed to put them on the court.

But that was the Rove analysis when the president was a Republican, when the president is a Democrat he has a whole different story. Yesterday on Fox News, Karl Rove criticized Judge Sonia Sotomayor, a potential nominee for the upcoming Supreme Court vacancy.

“She could be even more liberal than Souter was,” Rove said. “She has a reputation on the Court of Appeals that she’s on for being very liberal.”

He argued that Sotomayor’s views would be cause for conservatives to oppose her, despite her qualifications for the position. Which is the exact opposite of what he said when Bush was the president. That hypocrisy and double standards proves that Karl Rove is a biased hack of a political analyst. He does not give you an objective analysis, he gives you a partisan biased analysis with massive hypocrisy and big double standards.

This is the kind of biased hypocrite FOX News hires to be their top political analyst. O'Reilly has him on at least once a week, if not more, and he loves to use Karl Rove. When he is on it's always alone, nobody is ever allowed to be on with Rove. That is so Rove can put his bias and spin out with nobody to counter his right-wing garbage. This is done on purpose by O'Reilly, he knows that Rove is a biased right-wing hack, and yet he puts him on all alone to spin out right-wing bias and hypocrisy.

O'Reilly does that just like he does with Laura Ingraham, they are both always on alone, and they are both known right-wing hacks, yet Billy gives them a forum to spew out their propaganda all alone with nobody to counter anything they say. It's even worse with Ingraham, because O'Reilly let's her fill in for him when he is not there. These are the #1 and #2 political analysts for O'Reilly, which says a lot about him.

The fact that he would give those two biased right-wing hacks such an important job on his show, proves that O'Reilly is just as big of a right-wing hack as they are. It's insane to argue you are not a Republican, when your top two regulars are Karl Rove and Laura Ingraham, but O'Reilly does. Even though it just makes him look like a lying fool, it's his story and he's sticking to it.

Not to mention all the other Republicans that are Factor regulars, Morris, Goldberg, Crowley, Miller, Gingrich, Kelly, Wiehl, Hoover, Carlson, Carpenter, Garrett, Hume, Cameron, Angle, and on and on, the list is endless. Now look at the regular Democrats that get on the Factor. Juan Williams, Alan Colmes, and Dr. Marc Lamont Hill.

The Factor is 95% Republican guests with 99% Republican spin. And that is a fact, yet O'Reilly claims he is an Independent with a no spin zone that is fair to both sides. Which is just ridiculous, and a total lie. So Bill O'Reilly is a proven liar, and nothing he says should have any credibility. The Factor is nothing more than a paid commercial for the GOP, and that is the real no spin truth.

The Friday 5-1-09 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 2, 2009 - 9:00am

The far right nut job Laura Ingraham was the fill in for O'Reilly last night, so I did not do a full review, but I do have a few things to say about the show Ingraham did. First, she did the entire talking points memo on Miss California, and her anti gay marriage story at the Miss USA contest. That is a week old story, and nobody cares about it but right-wing idiots like O'Reilly and Ingraham. She is opposed to gay marriage, nobody cares, so get over it and report some real news.

It's just a distraction to cover for all the bad things that are happening to the Republican party, and to ignore all the good things Obama and the Democrats are doing. Obama has a 64% job approval and the people support him, so O'Reilly, Ingraham, Hannity, etc. are trying to smear and trash Obama to get his approval numbers down so they can really hammer him. Earth to right-wing idiots, it's not working, so stop trying to smear Obama and do some honest reporting for a change.

They also do it for ratings, because the mostly right-wing Factor viewers love the anti gay marriage talk, especially when they show video of a hot blonde in her bikini while they talk about it, which they do, over and over and over.

Ingraham did a segment on the CIA memos and Obama, and of course she had two right-wing idiots on to talk about it. One of them was the crazy far right Bo Dietl, who supports torture 100%, and would probably torture his own mother if a Republican president told him to. He laughed at waterboarding, and claimed it was just swallowing a little water. For anyone who does not know what waterboarding is, they lay you on a board and tie you to it, then they put your feet up in the air, then they put a towel over your nose and mouth, and pour water on it.

This forces water up your nose and in your mouth at the same time. This is called drowning, they are drowning you, and if they keep pouring the water in your nose and mouth YOU DIE. The only way to stop you from being killed, is to stop pouring the water. If they do not stop pouring the water, YOU DIE. Bo Dietl, Laura Ingrahams great friend, that she invited on to talk about torture, calls that just swallowing a little water. Which shows what a right-wing idiot he is, and what an idiot she is, for putting that moron on the air to debate torture.

Hey Bo, was it just swallowing a little water when the Japanese waterboarded Americans who were in the military after WWII, then they went to prison for 15 years for torture. Would you tell them (and their family) it was just a little water swallowing, you dumbass. If we prosecute people for torture and send them to prison for 15 years it's torture, even if we do it because the president said we could, you total fricking idiot. And if you had one brain cell in your head you would understand that.

Later in the show Ingraham even did a full segment on the Miss California anti gay marriage statement, after she already did an entire talking points memo on it. She said that liberals who criticize Miss California are guilty of hate speech against her. Which may be the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. It's just insane, and it shows what a total idiot Ingraham is. Speaking out against some right-wing fool that is opposed to gay marriage is not hate speech, it's just honest criticism, especially when it's true.

Republicans have this new talking point that any criticism of them is suddenly hate speech. O'Reilly does the same thing, the other night he said Garofalo was guilty of hate speech for simply pointing out there was racism at the tea party protests. Which is just ridiculous, especially when she was right, there was racism, I saw it, they had numerous racist signs and t-shirts against president Obama. Saying you saw racism at a protest is not hate speech, and it's not even close to hate speech.

Hate speech is calling someone a Nazi, or calling a black man the N-Word, or calling a gay person a Faggot, that is hate speech. Stating that you saw racism at a protest is not hate speech, and saying you do not like a woman who is anti gay marriage is not hate speech. To even claim that it is, shows what right-wing insanity O'Reilly and Ingraham are trying to spew out.

Then Ingraham had the Al Gore smear job segment, read my other blog posting for the details, it was as dishonest as it gets. She edited what Gore said, then misrepresented how he made his money from his Global Warming work. Then she put a dishonest right-wing guest on to agree with her, and did not have anyone on to represent Al Gore, so it was a one sided biased right-wing smear job. And the whole thing was done on purpose just to make Al Gore look bad.

Ingraham did have 3 Democrats on the show, but all 3 segments were just totally ridiculous. In one segment the Democrat was on with a Republican, so they barely had time to speak. And when the Democrat did try to speak Ingraham and the other Republican constantly cut them off and talked over them. So the Democrat barely got a word in, and you could not even hear half of it because nasal nose and the other Republican idiot talked over them and would not let them speak.

The other 2 segments with Democrats were just as bad, if not worse. Ingraham frames a question with some bogus right-wing talking points, then as the Democrat tries to de-spin her right-wing garbage Ingraham cuts them off and talks over them, or tells them to stop and shut up. She did everything but cut their mic, she constantly cut them off and talked over them so it was all Ingraham, and the Democrat barely got a word in.

Ingraham was worse than O'Reilly, she is so ridiculous I could barely watch her without changing the channel. It's like watching a female Sean Hannity, she is the female version of Sean Hannity. And this is who O'Reilly (the so-called moderate Independent) picks to be his fill in host. She is a stupid bomb-throwing far right idiot, and yet O'Reilly put her on his show to do a totally one sided biased right-wing fraud of a news show. This was not news, it was an hour long tv commercial for the Republican party.

Laura Ingraham is a far right idiot, it's like watching Ann Coulter or Sean Hannity. It's nothing more than 100% right-wing lies, spin, and propaganda. The Gore segment alone proves that, and O'Reilly is just as bad as she is for letting this crazy right-wing lunatic host his show.

As Billy would say, it's guilt by association, and you O'Reilly are as guilty as she is for that biased insanity, because it's your show and you let that crazy nasal nose lunatic put all that right-wing garbage out in your name.

Laura Ingraham Caught in Dishonest Journalism Segment on Al Gore
By: Steve - May 1, 2009 - 9:50pm

On the 5-1-09 O'Reilly Factor, Ingraham said Al Gore is a fraud with his dog and pony show on Global Warming. Then during a full segment on Al Gore, she suggested he has profited from his advocacy of renewable energy and climate change mitigation, Ingraham played a clip of Gore's April 24th congressional testimony that had been edited to remove his statements that he donates all the money he makes to a non-profit organization.

Ingraham stated:
"It seems that being green does pay big time, just ask Al Gore. Mr. Global Warming was worth about $2 million or so when he left office in 2001, but after eight years of tirelessly working to save the world, the planet, he's now reportedly -- get this -- worth a whopping $100 million."
Ingraham then aired the following edited clip from Gore's testimony:

REP. MARSHA BLACKBURN (R-TN): Is the legislation that we are discussing here today, is that something that you are going to personally benefit from?

[Ingraham's edit]

GORE: If you believe that the reason I have been working on this issue for 30 years is because of greed, you don't know me.

[Ingraham's edit]

GORE: I've been willing to put my money where my mouth is. Do you think there's something wrong with being active in business in this country?

BLACKBURN: I am simply asking for clarification.

GORE: I'm proud of it.

BLACKBURN: -- of the relationship.

GORE: I'm proud of it.

Now here is the full transcript of what Gore said, including the parts Ingraham edited out. Notice she only cut the parts out where Gore said he gives every penny of his global warming money to a non-profit company.

Unedited Transcript:
BLACKBURN: So you're a partner in Kleiner Perkins. OK. Now, they have invested about a billion dollars in 40 companies that are going to benefit from cap-and-trade legislation. So is the legislation that we are discussing here today, is that something that you are going to personally benefit from?

GORE: I believe that the transition to a green economy is good for our economy and good for all of us, and I have invested in it. But every penny that I have made, I have put right into a nonprofit, the Alliance for Climate Protection, to spread awareness of why we have to take on this challenge.

And Congresswoman, if you're -- if you believe that the reason I have been working on this issue for 30 years is because of greed, you don't know me.

BLACKBURN: Sir, I'm not making accusations, I'm asking questions that have been asked of me and individuals -- constituents that were seeking a point of clarity, so I am asking you for that point of -- point of clarity.

GORE: I understand exactly what you're doing, Congresswoman. Everybody here does.

BLACKBURN: And, well -- you know, are you willing to divest yourself of any profit? Does all of it go to a not-for-profit that is an educational not-for-profit --

GORE: Every penny that I have made --

BLACKBURN: Every penny --

GORE: -- has gone to it. Every penny from the movie, from the book, from any investments in renewable energy. I've been willing to put my money where my mouth is. Do you think there's something wrong with being active in business in this country?

BLACKBURN: I am simply asking for clarification.

GORE: I'm proud of it.

BLACKBURN: -- of the relationship.

GORE: I'm proud of it.
What Ingraham did is the most dishonest form of right-wing journalism you can do. She edited a clip of Gore speaking to Congress, then she implied Gore has got rich from global warming money. She also put a right-wing guest on to agree with her, to make it look like she was telling the truth. Then the two of them sat there and dishonestly smeared and lied about Al Gore.

And this was done on purpose, because you can not accidently cherry pick the parts she edited out of what Gore said. This is what Ingraham does as the fill in for O'Reilly, and it's biased right-wing garbage. Yet O'Reilly will say nothing, and just keep letting her fill in for him.

And btw, the Blackburn in the transcript, is the dishonest REPUBLICAN Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn, and she tried to do exactly what Laura Ingraham did, smear and lie about Gore by implying he got rich from global warming money. Except he was able to defend himself because it was a Congressional hearing. Unlike Ingraham who edited out the parts that show Al Gore gives all that money to a non-profit.

Notice that Nasal Nose Ingraham only edited out the parts where Gore mentions that every penny he makes from his Global Warming work goes to a non-profit company, and that was the only parts she removed. That is about as dishonest as a (so-called) journalist can get, and O'Reilly uses her as his fill-in, so what does that say about him.

Remember when O'Reilly reported on the association with Obama and Pastor Wright, he said you judge people by who they associate with, the guilt by association stuff, look in the mirror Billy, because you associate with Laura Ingraham, and you are as bad as she is (actually worse) because you let her do this garbage in your name, on your show.

More Right-Wing Hate For O'Reilly to Ignore
By: Steve - May 1, 2009 - 8:50pm

O'Reilly claims there is no hate on the internet from the right, that he has never seen it, and neither him or Amanda Carpenter or any of his 15 member staff can find any of it. Which is nothing but lies and total right-wing spin, because I document page after page of right-wing hate and racism, on this website, and in my blog.

Earth to Bill O'Reilly and Amanda Carpenter read this, it's called hate.

Eric Erickson, Editor-in-Chief of RedState, wrote this on his tweeter account.
ewerickson: LMRM: The nation loses the only goat f--king child molester to ever serve on the Supreme Court in David Souter's retirement. #TCOT #RS
This is the leader of the right's most prominent online community, not some carefree flame-throwing blogger. RedState is not an official GOP site, but it's a center of the conservative movement with a stated desire to take over leadership of the party.

He not only wrote it once, he deleted it then re-wrote it and sent it again, adding the proper tags ("LMRM" Let Me Repeat Myself) and ("TCOT" Top Conservatives on Twitter) ("RS" RedState). And if you think he deleted it after the word got out today, you would be wrong, it's still on his tweeter account as I type this at Friday 9pm.

The ball is in your court Billy, you can ignore this as you always do, or you can try to get an ounce of your integrity back by actually reporting some hate from the right. I would bet the farm you never report this, ever, and that you just pretend it never happened, as you do with all the hate from the right.