The Monday 4-30-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 1, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Keeping Your Sanity. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: So there I am at mass yesterday and the sermon is about to begin. The African priest said something very interesting?" he said God wants the faithful to keep their sanity. That makes sense, but we're living in an insane world where some people completely lose their bearings.

For example, last week we told you how the far left is now saying it is a racial slur and a hate crime to call an illegal alien an 'illegal alien.' The far left also says there is a 'war on women' because some taxpayers object to paying for female birth control. But far and away the worst insanity I've seen recently is sympathy for the devil.

Last night on '60 Minutes' former CIA agent Jose Rodriguez explained to a skeptical Leslie Stahl that America has an obligation to protect its citizens by using tough interrogation techniques. He said a few Al Qaeda big shots were water boarded and denied sleep. How many times have we heard those activities described as 'torture?'

President Obama agrees and has banned them. Rodriguez says that's insane, that you can't get vital information from terrorists without some rough stuff. He said the Obama administration's default option is to kill people with drones. How do the anti-torture people answer Mr. Rodriguez? We're blowing the hell out of these people with no trial, no presumption of innocence.

But the same President who orders that will not dunk people in water. Does that make sense to anybody? Talking Points believes the President well understands the difference between drones and water boarding; his decision to ban coerced interrogation is simply a political one, playing to his crew. It's tough to make a sanity argument on that one.
Wow! That far-right talking points memo garbage proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bill O'Reilly is a right-wing idiot. Earth to O'Reilly, waterboarding is torture, and that is a fact. Drones are part of war, which is not torture, and if you can not see the difference you are stupid. And most of the experts say torture does not work, but you ignore that to report on the minority who say it does.

Then Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham were on to talk about President Obama's use of drone attacks. Williams said this: "These people are plotting terrorist activities against the United States, and we engage them on their battlefield when we use drones to attack them. They're like soldiers, and soldiers get shot and bombed. But once you capture people, then you have to abide by some standards."

Bingo, Juan Williams made some sense for once, and told O'Reilly the difference between drone attacks and torturing someone.

But of course the conservative Mary K. Ham agreed with O'Reilly and described that rationalization as tortured logic, saying this: "The justification for the drone program is exactly the same as the Bush administration's justification for using enhanced interrogation? These guys were involved in plots and they had information that we needed."

So then the insane O'Reilly concluded that drone attacks are more immoral than enhanced interrogation, saying this: "I think President Obama has done a great job with the drones, but he can't possibly think that his drone program is more humane than dunking people in water."

Then the Republican Congressman Joe Walsh was on to slam Obama and Eric Holder over the gun-running operation "Fast and Furious," under which U.S. guns wound up in the hands of Mexican drug traffickers. But notice that O'Reilly does not call for more gun control, that's because he supports the NRA who have the Republicans in their back pocket.

Walsh, whose committee is holding hearings on the scandal, said this: "We are very close to holding Eric Holder in contempt. The Justice Department has been dragging its feet and stonewalling for well over a year. They are not cooperating with our investigation, people deserve answers and Eric Holder has not cooperated. Justice has not released 92% of the documents related to 'Fast and Furious!'"

O'Reilly suggested that even a contempt citation could be fruitless, saying this: "President Obama is not going to fire Holder, so he can say, 'go ahead, cite me for contempt, I don't care.'"

What a joke, O'Reilly and the right are just using the so-called scandal as a political tool to hurt Obama politically. Nobody else even cares, and it is not a story with anyone but the right-wing media, which O'Reilly is a big part of.

Then Brit Hume was on, who was the target of one of host Jimmy Kimmel's jokes at Saturday's White House Correspondents' Dinner. That nobody cares about but O'Reily and Hume.

Hume said this: "I came home and put on the TV, and I caught most of the President's comments, which were pretty funny. Then I heard Kimmel talking about me! I was astonished that Jimmy Kimmel or his writers had even heard of me."

So then O'Reilly issued a warning to the event's organizers, saying this: "Hume and I will go next year, and we'll sit there and just glare at everybody."

Really Billy, who cares!

Then Lisa Guerrero was on to actually report some real news. She said that "Inside Edition" reported that dozens of House members lease cars, naturally using taxpayer money.

Guerrero said this: "We found that 82 Congressmen are paying for cars using your tax dollars, and 25 of them are paying at least $800 a month for their leases. We followed some of these Congressmen in their districts to find out what they were driving, the cars ranged from $800 for an Infiniti up to $1,400 for a Yukon. These folks are making $174,000 a year and a lot of us think that's a lot of money. The Senate isn't allowed this perk but the House is."

O'Reilly said this: "I lease a nice car and I pay $600 a month. $1,400 a month is ridiculous!"

Then the far-right loon Bernie Goldberg was on to cry about Dan Rather backing out of a Tuesday appearance on The O'Reilly Factor. Goldberg said this: "I think Dan would rather be interviewed by an ideological soul mate like George Stephanopoulos or Chris Matthews or someone like that, rather than sit down and be grilled by you. I think he's more comfortable sitting down with a murderer like Saddam Hussein than with you."

And that is pure speculation from Goldberg, which O'Reilly claims to not allow.

And finally Senator John McCain was on, who has strenuously objected to a new campaign ad in which President Obama boasts about killing Bin Laden.

McCain said this: "Any president would obviously have done the same thing, and to take credit for something any president would do is indicative of the kind of campaign we're seeing. This is the same President who said the surge wouldn't work in Iraq, the same President who refused to say a word on the behalf of demonstrators in Iran, the same President who now sets up an 'atrocities board' after 10,000 people have been slaughtered in Syria. I've had the great honor of serving in the company of heroes, and you know the thing about heroes, they don't brag!"

What a joke, if a Republican President got Bin Laden he would talk about it every day during his campaign, and neither McCain or O'Reilly would say a word about it.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Romney Tells Students To Borrow Money From Their Parents
By: Steve - May 1, 2012 - 10:00am

If you’re young and you want to start your own business, Mitt Romney has some advice for you: Borrow money from your parents. At a “lecture” for students at Otterbein University in Ohio today, Mitt Romney told students that, his friend, Jimmy John, started a business by borrowing $20,000 from his parents at a low interest rate.

Romney suggested anyone in the audience could do the same:
ROMNEY: This kind of devisiveness, this attack of success, is very different than what we’ve seen in our country’s history. We’ve always encouraged young people: Take a shot, go for it, take a risk, get the education, borrow money if you have to from your parents, start a business.
Hey Mitt, what if your parents do not have $20,000 dollars laying around to loan you, let alone any money to loan out at all. My God you are out of touch with the American people. My parents would have never had $20,000 to loan to me in their entire life, and they both had good jobs.

The advice fits right into the characterization that Romney is ‘out of touch’ with regular people. Most students don’t have parents with $20,000 in disposable capital sitting around to give to their kids to start a business.

But hey, at least it’s more than Romney’s surrogates had to offer young people on their youth policy conference call this week.

I also do not know one person who could borrow any money from their parents, let alone $20,000.

O'Reilly Ignores MRC Calling For Sharpton Firing
By: Steve - April 30, 2012 - 10:00am

When liberal groups called for advertisers to stop buying ads on the Rush Limbaugh radio show after he called Sandra Fluke a slut, O'Reilly flipped out and reported it for a week. O'Reilly called them un-American and said it was wrong, he even said the left want to deny Limbaugh his free speech rights, when all they did was call for sponsors to stop buying ads on his show.

And now the conservative (MRC) Media Research Center is calling for MSNBC to fire Al Sharpton and Ed Schultz. Here is a direct quote from their website www.cleanhouseatnbc.org:
MSNBC head, Phil Griffin and his boss Comcast CEO Brian Roberts have ignored calls to do the responsible thing and end the hate-fest that is their primetime cable lineup. We cannot back down, and Brent is calling on every member of the MRC Action team to contact Comcast's Board of Directors and insist that they send Phil Griffin, Ed Schultz and Al Sharpton packing!

-- The once great reputation of NBC News is being tarnished by hate-speech coming from people like Ed Schultz and Al Sharpton

-- No respectable news organization would put people like this on-air.

-- I thought when Comcast bought NBC, you would clean up the hateful speech and divisiveness on MSNBC, but it has gotten even worse.

-- You should all be ashamed of what the NBC brand has become.

-- Phil Griffin, Al Sharpton and Ed Schultz should be fired immediately
And yet, O'Reilly has said nothing, even though they are actually calling for Sharpton and Schultz to be fired. All the left did was call for his sponsors to stop buying ad time, and O'Reilly called them un-American.

But when his right-wing friends at the MRC call for Sharpton and Schultz to be fired, O'Reilly is silent. He does not report it, he does not say the right wants to deny their free speech rights, he does not say it is wrong, and he does not call them un-American.

Not to mention, MRC is listed as a 501 (c-3) non-partisan tax exempt group. Which is just laughable, because they are as biased as Hannity or anyone at Fox News. But O'Reilly never calls for their tax exampt status to be revoked, as he does with the liberal Media Matters. They do not pay any taxes, and they are basically an arm of the RNC, but O'Reilly says nothing about it.

Proving that Bill O'Reilly is a 100% biased right-wing partisan hack. If he were a real non-partisan Independent with a no spin zone (as he claims) he would report what the MRC is doing, and call them un-American too. Instead he ignores it to help them, and to cover it up so the people do not know what they are doing.

Hypocrisy Alert: O'Reilly Promotes Rove SuperPAC Ad
By: Steve - April 29, 2012 - 10:00am

Now this is a good one, O'Reilly slammed the Obama campaign for using a video of Ed Schultz from MSNBC in an ad they are running, while O'Reilly does them one better. O'Reilly put Rove on his show, let him air his ad, then promoted it and said what a good job he did getting his message out.

Even though Donald Trump said the Rove ad was terrible, and he thinks the ad is a total failure for the GOP. But O'Reilly had Rove on to promote it for free, and praised the ad saying this: "If I got it, everybody got it."

During The O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly hosted Rove to discuss the ad. After airing it, O'Reilly said that it is "aimed at younger voters, obviously saying that you were sold a bill of goods, it didn't happen. That's where you are going with that."

Rove responded: "yeah, good, I'm glad you got the message." Then O'Reilly said: "If I got it, everybody got it."

Talk about hypocrisy and bias, in O'Reillyworld it's wrong for the Obama campaign to use a video of Ed Schultz from MSNBC. But it's ok for O'Reilly to host Karl Rove on the #1 rated show on cable news to show and promote his partisan political ad for free.

Now I would say what O'Reilly did was 10 times worse than what the Obama campaign did, and yet O'Reilly only has a problem with what the Obama campaign did. If that's not the ultimate hypocrisy and total right-wing bias, I'm Elvis.

And btw, in a 24 hour period Rove was on almost every Fox News show, which played the ad and praised it, and he got all that for free, while working for Fox as a political analyst. Now that is what O'Reilly should have a problem with, yet he not only says nothing, he helped Rove promote it and also ran it for free.

If a liberal did the same thing on MSNBC for Obama, O'Reilly would lose his mind, report on it for a week, call for MSNBC to fire the host, and ask the FEC to investigate. But when Rove does it for Romney on Fox, it's a non-story and O'Reilly even helps him do it.

Republican Mitt Romney Has No Plans For Our Veterans
By: Steve - April 29, 2012 - 9:00am

But he slammed Obama for his plan, even though he has no plan himself.

President Obama announced Saturday at Ft. Stewart in Georgia that he will sign an executive order to protect veterans, members of the military and their families from deceptive and predatory marketing practices by some for-profit higher educational institutions.

Mitt Romney's campaign tried to get out front of the news today by issuing press releases suggesting that the president hasn't done enough for the nation's veterans. Campaign spokesperson Andrea Saul said this:
SAUL: Under President Obama, all Americans have suffered from one of the worst job markets in recorded history — and our nation’s veterans have been among the hardest hit.

With more than twelve percent of our most recent veterans struggling to find work and nearly a million veterans unemployed, it’s clear that we need to do more to grow our economy and ensure that those who fight for America can find a job when they return home.
The other press release titled “Mitt Romney Will Give Veterans A Chance to Find Good Jobs” links to a page on the campaign website that makes no mention of any plan for veterans.

So it appears that no plan exists on Romney’s campaign website to address various issues affecting the U.S. military — for example, veterans health care and unemployment or, as Obama addressed today, servicemembers education.

The Issues page lists 23 separate issues Mitt Romney has chosen to focus on during his presidential campaign and none is Veterans or Military.

It seems like the only outline of any plan Romney has for veterans is to, as he said in a speech to the VFW last August, use “billions of dollars in waste and inefficiency and bureaucracy from the defense budget” and “spend it to ensure that veterans have the care they deserve.”

Romney has even praised President Obama’s veterans initiative to encourage companies to hire veterans, saying last November that “it’s a good idea.”

Romney has also said he supports Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-WI) budget proposal. That budget “would cut $11 billion from veterans spending.”

The Romney campaign was even asked if the former Massachusetts governor has a detailed plan to address veterans issues but they did not respond.

On the substance, it doesn’t seem like the Romney campaign has been paying much attention to what the Obama has been doing. CAP’s Lawrence Korb and Alex Rothman noted in February that “President Obama has made much progress in tackling veteran unemployment” while urging Congress to pass the president’s $6 billion vets jobs corps program.

Last month, Obama announced a housing plan to help military vets who were victims of illegal foreclosures and First Lady Michelle Obama said earlier this month that companies had pledged 15,000 jobs for military spouses as part of the administration’s “Joining Forces” program.

The Friday 4-27-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 28, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The left in America is getting nervous. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Talking Points believes that doubt is coming into play as far as President Obama's reelection is concerned. With the polls showing the President pretty much tied with Mitt Romney and most Americans feeling dissatisfied with the direction of the country, even the President's most ardent supporters are on edge.

I am sensing some desperation on the part of the committed left because if Mr. Obama is defeated, so is their agenda. If the Democrats lose control of Congress, liberals will be pretty much on the run for at least two years. So we're beginning to see strange things happen on the left.

MoveOn.org posted a video about the word 'illegal' being heard too often on Fox News. Okay, the far left doesn't like the word 'illegal' when attached to illegal aliens. That's predictable - Talking Points believes racism, anti-religious stuff and gender politics will all be introduced into the campaign by the left, thereby diverting attention from the economy.

There's nothing wrong with liberals trying to promote their agenda, but there comes a point when Americans must decide who is really looking out for them in the common sense department.
And here is a note for the insane right-wing idiot O'Reilly, the left is not nervous at all. Because Obama is going to beat Romney, the people will not forget what Bush did, and Romney is just Bush Lite.

Then Monica Novoa, a leader in the movement to do away with the word "illegal" when referring to illegal aliens was on.

Novoa said this: "The 'i' word is racist, and it is not language that is accurate. We can take a page from Fox News Latino, which doesn't use the 'i' word at all, which has the policy that they will not dehumanize immigrants by using that language. The first thing we need to do is put human beings at the center of the conversation - an undocumented worker should be allowed to move about in a way that will allow them to provide for their families."

O'Reilly argued that Novoa and her ideological brethren are sidestepping the facts, saying this: "You're misguided in the sense that using the description 'illegal alien' is somehow wrong. It is a federal crime to enter the United States illegally."

And they are both wrong, it is not wrong to use the word illegal, because they are illegals, but it is wrong to call them illegal aliens. They are people not aliens, and the correct word is illegal, or illegals, without the alien part.

Then Janine Turner and Jim Braude were on to talk about a conservative organization that estimates that Michelle Obama's 2010 trip to Spain cost about a half-million dollars. But notice they never put out any estimates of what first lady Bush spent on her trips.

Turner said this: "Think of this scenario. Americans are struggling, they're being bullied by creditors, but the head of the household says, 'honey, why don't you take a vacation to Spain?' To take this vacation was insensitive and lacked compassion from the stewards of the people's money."

Braude said the First Lady deserved the time off: "Obviously it would have been politically better if Michelle Obama had gotten into a limousine and driven to Baltimore and stayed at the Motel 6, but I am of the belief that when you live in the most stressful environment in the world, whatever you have to do to relieve that stress is perfectly fine with me."

And of course O'Reilly said he thinks Mrs. Obama's trip was politically tone deaf, saying this: "I don't mind the First Lady going to Spain and having five days off, but she should not have taken the entourage and should have done it as economically as possible."

Take note that not once during the 8 years George W. Bush was in office did O'Reilly ever slam Mrs. Bush for her trips, let alone talk about them or the cost.

Then the Harvard professor Charles Ogletree, who teaches a class called Understanding Obama was on. Ogletree said this: "It's not a course, it's a reading group and students voluntarily decide if they want to take it. They'll get a sense of how race, religion and politics have influenced our country over the last three or four centuries. They'll understand that President Obama is a multi-faceted guy who has some flaws - he's had some successes and a lot of failures and he's no different from anybody else who held that office."

Based on Ogletree's past writings, O'Dummy questioned whether he can look at Barack Obama objectively, saying this: "You say President Obama is a great man who has done a great job. We respect that, but when you come at it from that point of view am I really going to understand the man?"

Which is just laughable, coming from a biased man like O'Reilly. If we use that argument O'Reilly would not be able to talk about anyone. Not to mention, he is saying that just because the professor has said Obama is a great man his students will not understand Obama. And on top of that, it's not a class, the students voluntarily decide if they want to take it.

Then Geraldo was on, he said the Secret Service agents may have also hired hookers in El Salvador. Geraldo reported that the agency is now enacting a new set of rules, saying this: "The Secret Service is barring agents from taking foreign nationals back to their hotel room, or visiting non-reputable establishments or drinking alcohol within ten hours of going on duty. All this is reaction to the burgeoning scandal. I guarantee you that this pattern of conduct will be discovered in every country where prostitution is legal."

O'Reilly ridiculed Colombia's ambassador to the United States, who is demanding an apology from President Obama, saying this: "We helped the Colombian economy and we gave publicity to Cartagena as a party town. What does he want us to apologize for? The Secret Service should apologize to the American people for embarrassing the country!"

Then the biased right-wing Lou Dobbs was on to slam Obama for the news that America's debt now surpasses our entire annual economic output. With no liberal guest on for balance, and they ignore how the economy is much better since Obama took office, the stock market is over 13,000, and we are adding jobs every month. They also fail to mention that polls show nobody cares about the debt.

Dobbs said this: "This means there is less money available for private investment, and less money available to create jobs. We are continuing to see our government simply subsume our private economy and our private society. If interest rates rise another point or two, we will see the interest on our debt rise to the same level as our defense budget! We are a debtor nation in perpetuity at this rate."

O'Reilly said this: "We spend far too much money, we can't cover our debts, and we have to print more money, which diminishes the value of the money in our wallets."

And finally Greg Gutfed was on for dumbest things of the week. Gutfeld went solo in Arthel Neville's absence, focused on the doggie doo-doo being slung at both presidential candidates because Mitt Romney once took a family vacation with his dog in a carrier on top of the car and President Obama ate dog meat as a boy in Indonesia.

Which is insane, because Obama was given dog meat as a kid, Romney put the dog on the roof of his car as an adult.

Gutfeld said this: "Dogs would love to ride on top of the car in a nice safe little compartment, and so-called pet advocates don't understand the mindset of animals. Animals love the wind, but they don't like to be eaten. So in this case Romney doesn't have to worry about these stories any more, this has been 'neutered.' And by the way, if dogs could vote, you know who they'd vote for? Tim PAW-lenty!"

And btw folks, that is so-called humor at Fox, and if you thought that was funny you need some serious help.

Then the highly edited Factor mail (yes your mail is edited) and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense. And btw, Garry Trudeau actually wrote to O'Reilly about his bias.

Garry Trudeau, New York, NY: "Bill, if you are going to heap scorn on [my] comic strip for being unfunny - then editing out the punchline is both odd and dishonest. By misrepresenting the strip, you made my point about how Fox News works."

Crazy O'Reilly Slams Trudeau Over COMIC Strip
By: Steve - April 28, 2012 - 10:00am

Yes you heard me right, O'Reilly is now attacking COMIC strip writers for doing a COMIC strip about Fox News.

To begin with, it's a fricking COMIC strip idiot, get a life and a sense of humor and report on some real news. And second, the moron at Fox (Monica Crowley) claims that liberals can't take a joke, saying this: "I love exposing the Left's total lack of a sense of humor."

Here is what happened, on Thursday O'Reilly named Trudeau a pinhead, even though he says he never calls anyone names.

Thursday's Pinhead: Doonesbury cartoonist Gary Trudeau, whose latest strip says watching Fox News "is like getting your news from the town drunk."

O'Reilly also said this: "I Guess That Passes For Wit These Days." What O'Reilly failed to mention is that he edited out the punchline.

Then on the Friday show Trudeau wrote an e-mail to O'Reilly.

Garry Trudeau, New York, NY: "Bill, if you are going to heap scorn on [my] comic strip for being unfunny - then editing out the punchline is both odd and dishonest. By misrepresenting the strip, you made my point about how Fox News works."

And one last thing. O'Reilly is the guy who just called Robert Reich a communist, then claimed it was just a joke and told people to lighten up. So what does he do, he attacks a COMIC strip writer for doing a joke about Fox in a COMIC strip for God's sake. O'Reilly is a so-called journalist, not a COMIC strip writer like Trudeau is, so what he did was 10 times worse.

The Thursday 4-26-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 27, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Pushback on charitable giving and liberal politicians. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama will try to get reelected running as a social justice guy who wants to spend vast amounts of money helping the folks. The Republicans will counter by saying the country is on the verge of bankruptcy and fiscal responsibility must be restored.

While analyzing that issue, I pointed to the charitable giving on the part of some politicians, saying Vice President Biden and former Vice President Al Gore are cheap! In 1997 Al Gore gave a paltry $353 to charity when he earned almost $200,000. My point is that there are some liberal Americans who demand high tax rates, but are not very generous when it comes to giving to charity.

But some object to that analysis, and one columnist called me 'totally off-base and mean-spirited.' Talking Points believes in walking the walk, if you're a 'social justice' person and want society to help the poor, then set an example.

Mr. Biden and Mr. Gore are cheap when it comes to giving to charity, it's the truth. If you are a liberal person who wants more of my hard-earned money, then I expect you to be fair in what you give. Reasonable?
Then O'Reilly had James Salt on to talk about the Republican Paul Ryan budget plan. An organization called Catholics United is accusing budget hawks like Republican Congressman Paul Ryan of launching a 'war on the poor.'

The group's director James Salt said this: "Paul Ryan's budget fails a basic moral test. Asking poor, working-class people to pay for tax cuts for the rich isn't just unfair, it's immoral and un-Christian! Balancing the budget is an important concern, but how you do it is also critically important. The poor and the marginalized have to be the focus of our conversation."

But of course O'Reilly took issue with Salt's basic premise, saying this: "Aren't the poor already the focus of all the spending, we spend a trillion dollars a year to fight poverty. Tax policy is intended to stimulate the economy, not to enrich Bill O'Reilly. You just spouted the far-left view that any tax cut for any affluent American is damaging the poor."

Then Karl Rove was on to cry about Obama and his campaign. President Obama is flying around the country on Air Force One, giving campaign-like speeches along the way.

So Rove asked about the propriety of the President's frequent flyer status, saying this: "He has crossed the line. The President has to travel on Air Force One and with a motorcade, and the public ought to pick up the tab for his official duties. But this week his speeches on student loans that he gave in three battleground states were thinly-veiled political speeches. He attacked the Republican budget and anyone who supports it, attacking Romney in all but name. I think the President ought to step back from this."

Even O'Reilly was not sold, because he reminded Rove that in 2004 his then-boss President Bush also took a majority of his trips to swing states.

But O'Reilly did say he was going to keep track of what Obama does, even though he never did the same thing for Bush.

Then Laura Ingraham was on to cry about a campaign ad Obama put out. Obama's campaign team produced a video that includes a clip in which MSNBC host Ed Schultz accuses Mitt Romney of flip-flopping; NBC now says they are asking the Obama campaign to remove the clip.

Ingraham said this: "I'm glad NBC has responded, but for some of us who watch NBC and MSNBC it is sometimes hard to distinguish between the campaign press operation and some of the hosts on MSNBC. They are so in the tank for Obama on so many issues and say such incendiary things."

But of course you can say the same thing for Fox and Romney, but O'Reilly and Ingraham have no problem with that bias.

O'Reilly admitted that some Fox News commentators also ideologically one-sided, saying this: "If we're going to criticize MSNBC for being in the tank for Barack Obama, and they certainly are, there are people on FNC whose comments could be used by the Romney campaign. But while everybody at MSNBC is in the tank for Obama, here at Fox News every show has a different tone."

Then the far-right culture warriors Gretchen Carlson and Jeanine Pirro were on to talk about reports that the Kardashian family, despite having no discernible talent, signed a massive $40 million dollar deal with the E! channel.

Carlson said this: "I want to give them some credit. They are smart businesspeople who turned this into a multi-kazillion dollar fortune and they are the masters of public relations."

Pirro portrayed the Kardashians as a sad commentary on modern American culture, saying this: "Kim Kardashian can't sing, she can't dance, she can't act, and she started out with a sex tape. I think Americans like to look at beautiful people and luxurious cars and homes. Intelligence, excellence, discipline, and proficiency don't matter any more - this is the dumbing down of America. We're so stressed with our lives and the economy that we just want to look at something dumb and pretty."

Then Megyn Kelly to talk about the latest on John Edwards, who is on trial for misusing campaign funds. Kelly said this: "I actually think it's going pretty well for the prosecution. It doesn't seem like a lot of the facts are in dispute - this elderly woman named Bunny Mellon loved John Edwards and funneled almost $100,000 to his mistress. If the purpose was to protect him or advance his campaign, then he did something illegal."

Kelly turned to Chicago, where a black teen beat a man, reportedly to avenge the death of Trayvon Martin. Kelly said this: "Police have charged a hate crime and I think they have reason. A black 18-year-old attacked a white teenager and said this is justice for Trayvon. He was charged with a hate crime because he picked the victim because he was white then assaulted the guy with a tree branch. The crime was motivated solely because of race."

And finally in the last segment O'Reilly had Martha MacCallum and Steve Doocy on for the total waste of time Factor News Quiz. Which I do not report on because it is not news.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Reich Slams O'Reilly For Communist Name Calling
By: Steve - April 27, 2012 - 10:00am

On his Friday show last week O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: "Robert Reich is a communist who secretly adores Karl Marx."
So then Robert Reich wrote an article slamming O'Reilly and asking him to a debate. Which of course O'Reilly has not accepted, and O'Reilly even now claims he was just joking.

Here is what Reich wrote:

O'Reilly's accusation is odd, to say the least. If we were living in the 1950s, amid Senator Joe McCarthy's communist witch-hunts, the claim might have some bite and cause me injury. But these days it's hard to find a full-throated communist anywhere in the world.

O'Reilly's accusation isn't even logical. How can he know if I secretly adore Karl Marx, if it's a secret?

For the record, I'm not a communist and I don't secretly adore Karl Marx.

Ordinarily I don't bother repeating anything Bill O'Reilly says. But this particular whopper is significant because it represents what O'Reilly and Fox News, among others, are doing to the national dialogue.

They're burying it.

O'Reilly based his claim on an interview I did last week with Jon Stewart on the Daily Show, in which I argued that because America's big corporations were now global we could no longer rely on them to make necessary investments in human capital or to lobby for public investments in education, infrastructure, and basic R&D. So, logically, government has to step in.

Since when does an argument for public investment in education, infrastructure, and basic R&D make someone a communist or a secret adorer of Karl Marx?

Obviously, O'Reilly has no interest in arguing anything. Ad hominem attacks are always the last refuges of intellectual boors lacking any logic or argument. (Whoops, I think I just stooped to name-calling. Sorry, Bill.)

Yet this is what's happening to all debate all over America: It's disappearing. All we're left with is a nasty residue.

In Washington, Democrats and Republicans no longer even talk. They just vent charges and counter-charges.

The 2012 election doesn't seem likely to clarify any issue. At this moment the candidates and their surrogates are debating the treatment of dogs.

Across the nation, conservatives right-wingers and liberal or progressive lefties have stopped debating their respective views, or even listening to anyone they disagree with. They just find broadcasters and bloggers who confirm their views.

We're even sorting by belief according to where we live. Today your neighbors are more likely to agree with your politics than disagree. We've settled into like-minded enclaves where we don't need to think because everyone we meet confirms what we assume we already know.

What makes America's current polarization remarkable isn't the severity of our disagreements but our utter lack of engagement debating them.

So many Americans are so angry and frustrated these days -- vulnerable to loss of job and healthcare and home, without a shred of economic security -- they're easy prey for demagogues offering simple answers and ready scapegoats. Take, for example, Bill O'Reilly and his colleagues at Fox News.

But people can only learn from others who disagree with them -- or at least from witnessing debates between people who respectfully and civilly disagree. Without respect and civility, it's not a debate -- it's just name-calling.

A democracy depends on public deliberation and debate. Without it, the members of a society have no means of understanding what they believe or why. The Lincoln-Douglas debates were notable not because they solved anything but because they helped Americans clarify where they agreed and disagreed on the wrenching issue of slavery.

Hence the danger today - when deliberation has stopped.

This morning I left a message on Bill O'Reilly's office phone asking him to invite me onto his show to debate whether public investments in education and infrastructure are needed.

What are the odds he'll invite me on?

------------------------

Haha, I can answer that Professor Reich. The coward Bill O'Reilly will never have you on the Factor to debate him, ever. And btw, O'Reilly says he never calls anyone any names, and he even slams other people who call Republicans names.

Then he does it himself, and when he gets caught he uses the it was just a joke excuse. But calling someone a communist is name calling, even if it was a joke, which it was not. I watched the show and O'Reilly was not joking, he meant it, and Lou Dobbs agreed with him.

The Wednesday 4-25-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 26, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Will Mitt Romney run a Reagan-esque campaign? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Governor Romney won five primaries Tuesday and had prime time exposure to tell the country just why President Obama is misguided. Romney said the President 'is putting on us a path where our lives will be ruled by bureaucrats and boards, commissions and czars.'

That will be the theme of Romney's campaign for the rest of the year, that Mr. Obama is a far-left guy who wants to constrain individual freedom. President Obama's theme this week is that the rate of college loans should be kept at 3.4%. At this point no one is objecting and there is no issue, but Mr. Obama uses any opportunity to tell Americans that he's there for us, that his administration will provide.

Therefore, it is a race between a self-reliance guy and a provider. Talking Points has said this before: Mitt Romney will model his campaign on the 1980 Ronald Reagan run. Back then Jimmy Carter was the progressive guy and the economy was in big trouble. Governor Reagan defined Carter as far left and asked the compelling question, 'Are you better off than you were four years ago?'

Romney is running as Reagan, Obama is running as Obama, and the American people will decide whether they want unfettered capitalism or a federal provider.
Now that is just laughable, the biased O'Reilly is comparing Romney to Reagan. Talk about dreamland and bias, this is it. And btw, O'Reilly will be crying in his beer when Obama is re-elected. Not to mention this, remember what Bush did just 4 short years ago. He almost ruined the country, so why should anyone ever elect a Republican again. O'Reilly wants you to forget that, but we will never forget.

Then O'Reilly had the biased idiot Dick Morris on to analyze Ronald Reagan's come-from-behind victory over Jimmy Carter in 1980. Morris said this: "The Carter administration was floundering every day over the Iran hostage crisis, and he looked weaker and weaker. There were gas lines, high interest rates, high unemployment and high inflation."

Morris also said this: "There are very important differences between Obama and Carter - I think Barack Obama has essentially given up trying to persuade the majority of American people to reelect him. Instead, he's trying to persuade a minority to turn out disproportionately. Everything he is doing is aimed at a special interest constituency where he wants to hype the turnout. He's using the politics of division and envy and animosity to raise that turnout level."

Which is just ridiculous, but O'Reilly never disagreed, and added this: "Reagan came across as much more confident and credible in the debates, and that's what turned it for him."

Then Sara Carter was on to talk about a new study that says Mexican illegal aliens are leaving the U.S. at the same rate as they're arriving. Carter said this: "We have suffered a very bad economy, and I have talked with immigrants who say they absolutely can not find enough work. A lot of their friends have gone back to Mexico mainly because of a bad economy. But if they're going back because of a bad economy, what will happen when the economy starts to pick up again? They'll come back."

O'Reilly also gave credit to tougher U.S. immigration policies, saying this: "The National Guard is down there and the border fence is much more extensive."

Notice he did not give President Obama any credit, even though he has had more illegals deported than Bush or anyone.

Then Sally Quinn and David Rehr were on to cry about Andrea Mitchell. MSNBC host Andrea Mitchell, who doubles as chief foreign affairs correspondent at NBC News, lamented that she had to watch simultaneous speeches given by Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich.

O'Reilly explored Mitchell's apparent bias, Quinn said this: "I don't understand what the fuss is. Have you ever tried to watch two speeches at once and then try to report about either one of them? And she said she thought Romney's speech was good. Andrea is beyond reproach as a journalist."

Rehr (the conservative of course agreed with O'Reilly) saying this: "She needs to make it clear what's fact and what's her opinion. She didn't do it in this case, she took a cheap shot at the Republican presidential candidates. It's bad for NBC, their management, their shareholders and everyone in the organization."

Then O'Dummy speculated that NBC News is no longer even attempting to appear objective, saying this: "Pew Research did a study that showed that NBC News, of all the television news agencies, was the most supportive of Barack Obama."

And that's funny, because O'Reilly and Fox are more biased than anyone. Not to mention, O'Reilly quoted the Pew study, but failed to mention the media gave Obama more negative coverage than Romney, by far. All she did was say she did not want to watch two speeches at the same time, that's not bias, O'Reilly just made it up. Hey O'Reilly, do your job and stop worrying about what the rest of the real media is doing.

Then the Factor producer Jesse Watters was on with his lame garbage, which is not news so I will not even report it.

Then Dennis Miller was on with his lame so-called comedy, which I also do not report on because it is not news.

And finally Juliet Huddy was on for did you see that, she watched footage of President Obama repeatedly quoting Abraham Lincoln and portraying Honest Abe as a 'tax the rich' kind of guy. Huddy said this: "President Obama is trying to get the country in his corner by referencing Republican presidents. He's brought up Lincoln a total of 80 times since 2009 and he's mentioned Dwight Eisenhower 90 times! He wants to be seen as a centrist."

Huddy then talked about the former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, who actually took it seriously when Bill jokingly referred to him as a "communist." Huddy said this: "Mr. Reich wrote a little piece on the Huffington Post website entitled 'Why Anyone Should Care That Bill O'Reilly Calls Me A Communist.' I think he knew this was a complete joke, but used this to reel people in. Then he called you 'tumescent' and an 'intellectual boor.'"

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

O'Reilly Somehow Forgets Fox News Is Dishonest
By: Steve - April 26, 2012 - 10:00am

Declaring that he "has had enough" of news programs that mislead American voters, Bill O'Reilly said he will now tell the viewers "every time I see craziness in the national media during the campaign."

But the examples of so-called "craziness" O'Reilly cited, including the myth that "Obama was not born in America," have all been promoted on Fox News -- something he failed to mention.

Billy said this:
O'REILLY: The problem for American voters is that anything goes these days. The Internet is full of unbelievable nonsense, as well as gross defamation. And now on some national news programs, we're getting the same craziness. So if you're uninformed, how can you possibly know what's true and what's not true?

And the problem is not exclusively on the left.

How many times have we heard that Barack Obama was not born in America, that he's a Muslim, a Manchurian candidate, a plant from outer space? Whatever madness the anti-Obama forces can think up.

We live in an age where truth really doesn't matter anymore. Greedy news executives and the net have obliterated it. Journalistic standards have collapsed -- the Trayvon Martin case proves that.

You can pretty much do anything you want in the media, and the courts don't care. It's almost impossible for a well-known person to win a judgment of defamation.

But Talking Points has had enough. So every time I see craziness in the national media during the campaign, I'm going to show it to you. And I hope you will vote with the clicker. That's the only solution to the problem.
What's funny is that Fox News has spent years promoting whatever madness the anti-Obama forces can think up.

Following Donald Trump's lead, Fox News figures repeatedly embraced or hyped the birther conspiracy theory by falsely claiming that President Obama has not produced his birth certificate, or by hosting birthers to hype their discredited theories unchallenged.

During a June 2009 segment, Special Report aired a quote by Obama foreign policy adviser Denis McDonough, in which he talked about how Obama "experienced Islam on three continents" and spent part of his childhood in Indonesia with a Muslim father. Special Report included this question above the quote: "Islam Or Isn't He?"

Charles Krauthammer (who is a Factor regular) was on Special Report in 2009, discussing an Obama trip to the Middle East, Krauthammer said this: "I think it's good for the president to use the fact that he does have a Muslim upbringing, relations, contacts, and an affinity for Islam as a result. That's important. He should use that in trying to warm relations with the Muslim world."

And on and on, I could list examples of Fox dishonesty for days, but O'Reilly never says a word about any of it, from Beck, Hannity, Coulter, Cavuto, none of them. While he is saying the rest of the media is dishonest, he is being more dishonest than any of them, and everyone at Fox does it, even the so-called straight news anchors.

The Tuesday 4-24-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 25, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: More madness in the presidential campaign. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: We knew the campaign was going to be bitter, with muckraking all over the place, but we didn't know it would be downright hysterical this early. Last night on MSNBC Chris Matthews called Mitt Romney a 'flat-earther' and referred to the Republican 'Grand Wizard crowd.'

I have no beef against Matthews - he doesn't usually attack people personally, he's simply a committed Democrat. But to call Mitt Romney a 'flat-earther' is simply madness. In 2007 Romney said, 'I believe evolution is most likely the process God used to create the human body.'

For honest folks, that's the end of the discussion! The problem for American voters is that anything goes these days. The Internet is filled with unbelievable nonsense as well as gross defamation, and now on some national news programs we're getting the same craziness.

The problem is not exclusively on the left - how many times have we heard that Barack Obama was not born in America, that he's a Muslim, a Manchurian candidate? We live in an age where truth doesn't matter anymore. Journalistic standards have collapsed and the Trayvon Martin case proves that.

You can pretty much do anything you want in the media and the courts don't care; it's almost impossible for a well-known person to win a judgment of defamation. But Talking Points has had enough, so every time I see craziness in the national media during the campaign I'm going to show it to you. I hope you will vote with the clicker, which is the only solution to the problem.
Here we go already, O'Reilly is attacking the media for their reporting on Romney. Notice he never attacks the right-wing media for the lies they put out about Obama. From now until the election O'Reilly is going to spin for O'Reilly as if her were working for the Romney campaign. While at the same time he will attack and lie about Obama, proving his right-wing bias once again.

Hey O'Reilly, stop worrying about what other journalists are reporting on, and do your own job, idiot!

Then Linda Chavez and Alan Colmes were on to evaluate the Talking Points Memo. Colmes said this: "Chris Matthews apologized, and his saying something crazy doesn't define all liberals and all Democrats. But Romney has reversed himself on global warming and it's up to the media to hold him accountable."

The conservative Chavez faulted the Internet for our dysfunctional political discourse, saying this: "We can get a lot of information that's unfiltered and not true. We see it on the right and the left, and the problem is that people want to look for information that confirms what they already believe, so we're very polarized."

O'Reilly urged the media to act responsibly, saying this: "We're supposed to shed light on truth, but that's not happening now and I predict this is going to be the worst campaign in American history in terms of mud and garbage and untruth."

But O'Reilly never once says a word about anyone at Fox or anyone on the right for lies and bad things they say about Obama or any other Democrats.

So then O'Reilly had the far-right Matthew Continetti on to talk about the internet. Continetti said this: "I'm attacked every day by left wing websites and 95% of it is false. A lot of people believe this stuff and it's led to death threats against me and all kinds of defamation."

And that's because you put out right-wing lies, just like O'Reilly does.

Continetti also said this: "Technology is neutral, and it can be used for ill or for good. Just as many times as we have false stories we can also put out the facts. We use the Internet and Facebook and Twitter to expose the truth - it's not a question of the technology, it's a question of what use people are putting it to."

Then Continetti said 99.9% of the Internet sites are seeking the truth, but O'Reilly said the actual number is closer to 50%. And both of you are speculating right-wing idiots, which O'Reilly said he never does or allow on his show.

People who want to legalize prostitution are using the Secret Service scandal to advance their agenda. So O'Reilly had the pro-legalization attorney Sienna Baskin on to discuss it.

Baskin said this: "This brings about an interesting comparison. In Cartagena the sex worker had rights, she was able to assert her rights and go to the police to report a theft. In the United States sex workers can never go to the police, even when they suffer more extreme crimes like rape and assault. Under our criminalization system my clients are afraid to go to the police and when they do report crimes they are ridiculed, ignored, or harassed."

And of course O'Reilly disagreed, and laid out an argument against legalization, saying this: "It sends a message that this is 'okay,' but I think selling your body diminishes a person and does harm to them."

Which is just laughable, because in a so-called free country a woman should be able to do anything she wants with her body, it's called freedom you fool, the same freedom you claim to support.

Then the insane John Stossel was on to talk about the Justice Department, apparently seeking for injustice anywhere and everywhere, says shops and restaurants must accommodate miniature service horses, which sometimes help people with disabilities.

Stossel, needless to say disagreed, saying this: "You can not house train a horse, but now businesses are getting sued for not letting them in. It should be up to the storekeeper, but our ever-busy regulators say the store has to let the horse in. They say they make our lives better, but I'm going around the country with a sign that says 'No They Can't.'"

O'Reilly laughed at the prospect of seeing a horse walking through the aisles, saying this: "I'm trying to picture myself in a store when a horse knocks me down."

Then Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on for is it legal. The Supreme Court is about to decide whether Arizona's tough immigration law passes legal muster.

Wiehl said this: "The administration says Arizona can not verify someone's identification, even if they have probable cause to stop them. Also, the fact that you have to carry documents with you all the time makes it a crime if you don't carry documents."

Guilfoyle argued that Arizona is well within its rights, saying this: "They are just enforcing federal law and that's what they're saying to the government - 'we're not changing the law, we're not trying to act special, we just want the federal laws enforced."

And finally Charles Krauthammer was on, who has said that Senator Marco Rubio would accept an offer to be Mitt Romney's running mate.

Krauthammer said this: "There are two kinds of vice presidential candidates. There are the established guys who have been around, such as Mitch Daniels, a successful governor who has had a great career. He doesn't need the vice presidency. The other kind of candidate is the up-and-comer, a guy like Rubio or maybe Paul Ryan. It's hard to say no if you are the up-and-comer and it's hard to resist the pressure you'd get from the party."

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Study Shows O'Reilly Wrong About Obama Media Coverage
By: Steve - April 25, 2012 - 10:00am

Last week O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama has one huge advantage - the media. The Associated Press is the most widely distributed news service in the country, and the other day its chairman Dean Singleton introduced President Obama as a man who 'pushed through the biggest economic recovery plan in history and led a government reorganization of two of the big three auto manufacturers to save them from oblivion.'

I'm surprised Singleton wasn't wearing an Obama button! The President understands that most in the media will back him, but it will go beyond that, as MSNBC demonstrated when host Lawrence O'Donnell said Mormonism was founded by a man who 'got caught having sex with the maid and explained to his wife that God told him to do it.'

What a smear! And so the campaign is underway and it could be the dirtiest in the nation's history."
And there is one problem with all that right-wing spin, it's a lie. While a friendly media for President Obama may fit nicely into the right’s narrative of liberal bias in the press, a new study from the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism shows that of all the presidential candidates during this election cycle, President Obama has had the least favorable coverage by the news media.

Let me say that again, of ALL the reporting by the MEDIA President Obama has had the least favroable coverage.

Since January, presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney has actually enjoyed twice as much positive coverage as President Obama.

Proving once again that O'Reilly does not report the facts, he just reports spin for the right that he wants you to believe are the facts.

The Monday 4-23-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 24, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Is our entitlement society strangling our economy? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: We are about to give you some amazing stats about America becoming a welfare state. During the last two years the feds have spent more than $1 trillion on programs to help poor Americans.

Most of that money goes to direct assistance - Medicaid, food stamps, child care, nutrition, things like that. Since 1970, means-tested entitlements have increased by an unbelievable 5,500% and right now an astounding 150 million Americans live in households that receive some kind of government assistance.

There is no question that the feds and states have loosened standards under which Americans receive entitlements. Since President Obama has been in office, federal welfare spending is up about 41%; food stamps are up about 135% since 2007; disability payments are up 116% from a decade ago.

Those who advocate cutting entitlements or making it more difficult to receive them will be immediately branded as 'bad people.' Just for telling you this I'll be labeled a horrible guy. But what's worse? A bad economy for all Americans and a $16-trillion debt, or a responsible entitlement agenda that gets spending under control?

All sane people know that safety nets are needed, but when standards are so lax that the system becomes easy to game you know you have a problem. And we do.
And that my friends is what you call right-wing propaganda. Notice that O'Reilly never mentions that Bush and the Republicans cause most of the problems we have today, including the Bush tax cuts, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, the finance meltdown, the housing crisis, and the recession. In O'Reillyworld somehow it's all the fault of the poor, the Democrats, and Obama, which is just ridiculous. And proof O'Reilly is a right-wing idiot.

Juan Williams and Mary Katharine Ham were on to talk about the O'Reilly TPM. Williams said this: "The eligibility standards for these programs haven't changed under President Obama. The economy is having a tough time and the folks are struggling with food costs so the government should be helping them out. Who are you going to throw off? Are you going to throw kids and the elderly out?"

Ham said she was worried that entitlement programs discourage folks from seeking work, saying this: "You want to encourage as many able-bodied people as possible to be working and succeeding. But the economy that the Obama administration is presiding over doesn't offer a lot of that, so you get people like Nancy Pelosi saying unemployment compensation is a great stimulus, you get Jesse Jackson saying it's an honor to be the 'food stamp president.'"

Then Brit Hume was on to slam Obama for going on tv shows. President Obama has been a frequent guest on comedy programs and will appear on Jimmy Fallon's late night show this week. Hume said this: "The entertainment media will certainly be a factor for President Obama, because he had all that enthusiasm from young people who tend to watch these shows. That enthusiasm is probably not there for him this year, so I'm sure he will do what he can to reach young people by going on those shows."

O'Reilly added that even though Fallon's show airs after midnight, "Everything he says on Fallon immediately goes out on the web and the Twitter world."

And O'Reilly got that wrong, he said the Jimmy Fallon show is on at 3am, when it is on at 11:30pm CST. So that is how misinformed O'Reilly is, and yet he still added his 2 cents. Not to mention, who cares if Obama goes on the Jimmy Fallon show, and how is that news. When Republicans go on Leno, or whatever show, O'Reilly and Hume say nothing.

Then the far-right loon Wendy Murphy was on to talk about the murder suspect George Zimmerman who has been released on bond and is now living in an undisclosed location because of threats on his life.

Take note that Casey Anthony had to do the same thing after her trial, because O'Reilly and his friends said she was guilty even after the jury said not guilty. But O'Reilly sure did not care she was getting death threats because of him, and even denied he was to blame for any of it.

So Murphy said this: "There is blatant hypocrisy. When I scream about prosecutors not bringing charges in child abuse cases, people call me a 'fascist.' But when Al Sharpton goes to Florida and brings crowds to pressure the prosecutor to bring murder charges, all of a sudden this is democracy in action. The very same people on the left who call me a fascist celebrate Al Sharpton for forcing a prosecutor to bring charges."

Murphy also characterized the case against Zimmerman as paper thin, saying this: "The lead investigator conceded that there is no evidence to contradict Zimmerman's claim that Trayvon Martin physically punched first."

Then O'Reilly had Kim Serafin & Paul Bond on to cry about a video about the crazy Rick Santorum. But when conservatives in Hollywood do videos about liberals (like Jon Voight) O'Reilly is silent and never says it will hurt them. Proving once again that he is a biased right-wing hypocrite.

Ashley Judd appears in a video ridiculing Rick Santorum for his anti-abortion stance. So Billy asked the two entertainment reporters whether Judd's career could be affected.

Bond said this: "It is risky. We took a poll showing that a lot of Republicans and a good number of Democrats actually look at the politics of actors before they shell out money to see them in movies. So Ashley Judd is taking a slight risk, but she is nowhere near people like Sean Penn and Jane Fonda."

Kim Serafin of InTouch Weekly added that activism is nothing new for Judd, saying this: "She's been a long-time political supporter of President Obama and local Democratic candidates. She's actually going to the Democratic National Convention as a delegate for Tennessee."

And of course O'Reilly thinks that Judd has alienated tens of millions of Americans, saying this: "People who are pro-life, and that is more than 50%, are going to note that Ashley Judd mocked Rick Santorum. I don't think they're going to forget that."

Then the far-right idiot Bernard Goldberg was on to cry with O'Reilly about what some people in the media are saying, especially at MSNBC. MSNBC's Chris Matthews asked his guests whether Americans will be reluctant to vote out the first black president. So Billy asked Goldberg to SPECULATE why Matthews was so eager to inject race into the election. SPECULATION that O'Reilly claims to not allow btw.

Goldberg said this: "It's because he's a liberal, and like many liberals, he's obsessed with race. In 2010, after the State of the Union Message, Matthews went on the air and said, 'I forgot he was black tonight for an hour.' About the Tea Party, he said, 'Every single one of them is white.' I'm wondering whether Chris Matthews is really saying Barack Obama should not be tossed out precisely because he's the first black president."

Earth to idiots Goldberg and O'Reilly, the reason liberals talk about race sometimes is because almost all the racists are Republicans, and that is a fact. And what Matthews said is 100% accurate, all the Tea Party idiots are white, and Republican.

And finally the Factor Reality Check, which has no reality and almost no checks. It's just O'Reilly by himself putting out right-wing spin about something someone else said.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots garbage.

Some Economic Facts For The Idiot O'Reilly
By: Steve - April 23, 2012 - 10:00am

The economic expert Rodger Malcolm Mitchell wrote up a fact sheet on money, debt, and the economy for O'Reilly and the rest of the idiots at Fox, that do not have a clue what they are talking about, here are a few of those facts:

-- Federal deficit spending is necessary for economic growth; all money is debt; federal taxes do not pay for federal spending.

-- For you and me, running a financial deficit is bad. Deficits can deplete our personal money supply, reducing our ability to pay bills. Similarly, when a corporation or a city, county or state runs a financial deficit, their ability to pay bills is reduced.

-- However, despite what O'Reilly and the right-wing media tell you, when the U.S. government runs a deficit, that is good – in fact, it's necessary.

-- By definition, a large economy has more money than does a small economy. So, a growing economy must have a growing supply of money. Federal deficit spending is the way the government adds growth money to the economy. Because the federal government has the unlimited power to create money, it never can run short of money to pay its bills.

-- Every form of money is a form of debt. Bank savings accounts, checking accounts, money market accounts, CDs, travelers checks, corporate bonds and T-bills all are types of debt and money. Even the dollar bill is a debt of the federal government, which is why it has federal reserve note printed on it. Bill and note are words describing debt.

-- As debt and money are identical, a growing economy must have a growing supply of debt. It can be personal debt, corporate debt, city, county and state debt, and it can be federal debt. All debts, except federal debt, are limited by the debtor’s ability of pay, and excessive debt can lead to bankruptcy. This makes federal debt the safest form of debt. It can grow endlessly, without causing bankruptcy.

-- One counter-argument is that foreign countries (especially China) will refuse to lend us money. But, we don’t need to borrow from China or from anywhere else. We borrow by creating T-securities out of thin air, then selling them. This process is a relic of the gold standard days, when the government did not have the unlimited ability to create money.

-- Today, the government does not need to create and sell T-securities. It merely can create money, also out of thin air. The processes are functionally identical. The end of federal borrowing would end concerns about federal debt. Rather than discuss debt we would discuss money created.

-- A second counter argument is that printing money causes inflation. Examples are given of pre-war Germany, China and Brazil, which suffered hyper-inflation, a different process. Hyper-inflation occurs if a government prints money in response to inflation, when the proper response is to raise interest rates.

-- But ever since WWII inflation has not been caused by excessive money printing, but rather by excessive oil prices. The largest, recent inflationary period came during the modest Carter deficits. The massive Reagan deficits saw inflation decline. Making money more valuable by raising interest rates, prevents and cures inflation.

-- O'Reilly and the right-wing media tell us the federal government spends taxpayers money or our grandchildren's money. Neither is true. Other governments – city, county and state — do not have the unlimited ability to create money, so they spend taxpayers money. The federal government does not.

-- There is no historical relationship between federal deficits and tax rates. The federal government literally destroys incoming tax money, and creates new money to pay its bills. There is no federal bill-paying account funded by taxes.

-- Federal debt has increased 1400% in just the past 30 years, and the government never has had any difficulty paying its bills. Were taxes to fall to $0, this would not affect by even one penny, the government’s ability to pay its bills.

-- In summary, most of what O'Reilly and the right-wing media tell you about our economy is either is obsolete or always has been wrong. The lack of understanding that federal deficits are different from all other deficits has prevented universal health care and improvements in education, pension support, the ecology, the infrastructure, energy, the military and numerous other situations.

In other words, O'Dummy is either lying to you, or he is too stupid to know how the economy, taxes, debt, and federal spending works. Then again, he could be that stupid and lying to you, which is exactly what he is doing in my opinion.

Romney Blames Obama For Factory Closing Under Bush
By: Steve - April 22, 2012 - 10:00am

Now here is some crazy (dishonest) garbage from Romney, and of course O'Reilly never said a word about the lie.

Thursday, Mitt Romney made a major campaign stop at the closed down factory where then-candidate Barack Obama spoke in 2008. Romney said this: "The plant closing underscores the failure of this president's policies with regards to getting the economy working again."

Now get this, Romney's implication that the plant's closing is a result of Obama's economic policies is undercut by the fact that the plant closed before Barack Obama even took office.

The factory closed in June 2008, when George W. Bush was still president.

And this is NOT the first time the Romney campaign has tried to blame Obama for something that happened under his Bush.

The Romney campaign's central piece of evidence in arguing that Obama has been bad for women (that 92 percent of job losses under Obama were from women) counts job losses that occurred from the beginning of January 2009, even though Obama wasn't sworn in until January 20th, and none of his policies took effect for at least 6 months after that.

The Friday 4-20-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 21, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: News networks battle over Trayvon Martin case coverage. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin is a national story in a number of areas, not just a crime situation. We now have two competing news organizations - ABC and NBC - covering the story in completely different ways.

ABC News has done 42 stories on the case and this morning an ABC reporter aired a photo showing George Zimmerman's bloody head. ABC has basically been reporting the case as a 'hard news' story with little commentary attached to it. NBC News has been doing the exact opposite - that organization is invested in convicting George Zimmerman of murder.

As Talking Points has stated, it is very dangerous for any news operation to try a criminal case on television, but that is what NBC has chosen to do through its cable arm MSNBC. In the process, a heavy racial component has been introduced into the case, and if Mr. Zimmerman is not convicted violence is certainly possible.

We believe Florida authorities are competent and are running a fair case, and it is up to the jury to decide whether George Zimmerman is guilty of second degree murder. That being said, the ABC News exclusive this morning is newsworthy - Mr. Zimmerman's defense will be that he was attacked and had the right to stand his ground.

The fact that we now have two major television operations covering a very important story in opposite directions says a lot about where we are as a nation. The Factor believes that the media should use restraint in coverage of the case and we don't believe commentators who have already convicted Mr. Zimmerman are responsible.

In fact, we believe they hurt this country. We will continue to cover the case without prejudice.
Wow! This is the most hypocrisy I have ever seen. O'Reilly convicts people on tv all the time, and the best example is the Casey Anthony case. O'Reilly said she was guilty many times over, and he did it before the jury verdict. Not only that, after she was found not guilty he said he does not care and proclaimed her guilty anyway.

Then Geraldo (the big Fox News DINO) was on to agree with the insane hypocrite O'Reilly and give his analysis of their Martin/Zimmerman coverage.

Geraldo said this: "NBC has changed since I was there. There was a decision by MSNBC to choose ideological sides, specifically in this criminal action. They made a decision that they would be on the side of the victim in this case and that they would argue strenuously for the conviction of George Zimmerman. They have a very firm conviction that it's not so much about the evidence as it is about the fact that a young, unarmed, black teenager was shot dead."

Which is ridiculous, because all they did was report the truth and call for justice when an unarmed teenager got shot to death. And if the shooter was black with a white teen O'Reilly would be doing exactly what MSNBC is doing, report the damn truth.

Geraldo the moron also singled out Al Sharpton, saying this: "Sharpton is the person pushing for the arrest of George Zimmerman and he also anchors a show on MSNBC - how could that not affect that network's coverage? They are cheerleading for the conviction of George Zimmerman, but Zimmerman is going to be acquitted and people are going to be disappointed because of advocates like MSNBC."

And Geraldo is as big of a liar as O'Reilly, because all Sharpton did was call for Zimmerman to be arrested and let justice and a jury decide the case. He did not call for a conviction, ever, and the dishonest Geraldo knows it. If he had, they would have showed a tape of it, and they did not, because they do not have one.

Then O'Reilly said President Obama slammed Romney by saying he wasn't "born with a silver spoon in his mouth." Janine Turner and Leslie Marshall were on to assess the statement.

Marshall said this: "I think this was aimed not only at Mitt Romney, but toward rich Republicans on the right. The President is saying, 'I'm a rich guy now but I wasn't always, I was like you and I'm looking out for you.'"

Turner argued that Mitt Romney's rise to the top had little to do with his Father's money, saying this: "There are a lot of children raised in rich families who wound up becoming incapable, alcohol, derelict. Money is not the answer, the answer is character, leadership, true grit. Those are the things that make a person great."

And of course the Republican O'Reilly warned that Democratic attacks on Romney's wealth have just begun, saying this: "They are trying to portray Romney as a 'silver spoon' guy who is totally out of touch, and I see that as a theme that will carry through the whole campaign."

Then O'Reilly had the far-right FNC military analyst Col. David Hunt on to talk about the photos showing U.S. troops posing with body parts of dead Taliban bombers.

Hunt said this: "I have no problem with what they did. War is a brutal thing and the American public needs to see some of it. We've forgotten what's going on and this is a reminder. It's important to understand that we have about 100,000 guys in Afghanistan and we've seemed to have forgotten about them."

But of course O'Reilly argued that the Times could have described the scene without showing photos, saying this: "A picture like that goes out over the Internet to all the Muslim countries. They're not going to say this Taliban suicide bomber blew himself up, they're going to say the American military did this. So it's going to be used as propaganda."

Except O'Reilly does not follow his own rules, because when he did a report on spring break drinking he ran video of girls in bikinis over and over during the segment. And when Laura Ingraham said he could have reported it without the sexy video, he said it was important to show the video, which of course was bull, and kills his argument that the Times could have run the story without the photos.

Then the Fox News stooge Lou Dobbs was on to talk about President Obama's push to crack down on speculation in the oil market.

Dobbs said this: "It's worthy to bring attention to this, but to start conflating speculation and manipulation in the oil markets is irresponsible on the part of the President. I'm very skeptical of the government and the regulatory agency in this area has been historically weak and poorly led. I would limit positions so that one hedge fund could not corner 30% of the market. Make that a maximum of 10% of the market."

Dobbs also reacted to former Labor Secretary Robert Reich, who urged more government "investment" in research and development, saying this: "There won't be much in the way of private investment, as long as the government continues to borrow trillions of dollars and suck the capital out of the economy. How can companies invest if government is sucking up all of the resources?"

And finally Arthel Neville and Greg Gutfeld were on for dumbest things of the week. Neville went with Kraft Foods, whose print advertisement showed a baby holding an Oreo cookie while drinking milk from his mother's breast.

Gutfeld went with the young man who tried out for the Denver Broncos cheerleader squad. And O'Reilly singled out Madonna, who expressed her firm objection to smoking, even though she appears in videos puffing on cigarettes.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Poll Says Mitt Romney Has Record Low Approval Rating
By: Steve - April 21, 2012 - 10:00am

And as usual, O'Reilly ignored the poll and did not say a word about it. But he does report polls that are put out by the biased Rasmussen and Fox that have Romney beating Obama.

A new Washington Post/ABC News poll finds that Mitt Romney is heading into the general election with "the weakest favorability rating on record for a presumptive presidential nominee since 1984."

He's 21 points behind President Obama in personal popularity, and the first likely nominee to have an unfavorable rating higher than his favorable rating in the poll's history.

But if you watch the O'Reilly Factor you would never know it, because he has not reported the poll, and never will.

Just 35 percent of Americans see Romney favorably, while 47 percent have an unfavorable opinion of him. Only 12 percent see him strongly favorable, suggesting a persistent enthusiasm gap.

The Thursday 4-19-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 20, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama invokes Abraham Lincoln. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: As author of the book 'Killing Lincoln,' I know a little bit about the nation's first Republican president. President Obama knows something about Mr. Lincoln as well and often cites Abe in his speeches. This week he quoted President Lincoln saying 'through government we should be able to do together what we can't do as well on our own.'

Mr. Obama is responding to criticism that he's a 'social justice' guy who wants government to somewhat control individual outcomes. But what did Mr. Lincoln actually mean? Let's take slavery - no American could defeat that on his or her own; we had to fight a war for emancipation.

That's a legitimate function of the federal government, is it not? What President Obama does not seem to understand is the limitations of the bureaucracy. If the President continues spending the way he has he'll bankrupt the country. Is that justice for all? Economic chaos is not far away, and that is what this year's presidential election will be about.

I believe President Obama is a sincere man, but I do not believe he understands economics and I don't think he lives in the real world. For years he worked on the south side of Chicago and saw millions of dollars poured into that neighborhood; he saw that the money did very little to improve the lives of the people there. So President Obama has his story and he's sticking to it, but Abraham Lincoln's story? That's another matter.
Then O'Reilly had Professor Marc Lamont Hill on to explain how Chicago's south side is such a mess despite the infusion of millions of dollars in federal funds.

Hill said this: "I don't concede that there's a failure attached to the money. When you dump money into a place that's starting behind square one, that money just gets you back to zero. When you look at the money allocated for food, health care, and schools, that's real life stuff and without those resources people would die - there would be more violence, more crime, and more poverty. But you also need proper management and anti-corruption rules." So O'Reilly concluded this: "President Obama wants a just society, but he doesn't understand that you can't micromanage individual lives from Washington."

Then O'Reilly explored the bigger picture of excessive government spending with Tom Schatz, head of Citizens Against Government Waste. Schatz said this: "The culture of waste is alive and well. We're spending more money than ever and no one is watching how the money is being spent."

Schatz offered a specific example of rampant abuse, saying this: "Before the stimulus bill, the Department of Energy spent about $225 million a year on weatherization; the stimulus increased that to $5 billion even after the inspector general told the Secretary of Energy that they couldn't keep track of the original $225 million. The big problem in Washington is that the money comes in, it goes out, and it's spent before anyone finds out it's been wasted."

Then O'Reilly had the crazy far-right idiot Ann Coulter on to talk about her latest column in which she advises black Americans to arm themselves and join the National Rifle Association.

Coulter said this: "This was in reaction to the Trayvon Martin case, and I am making the point that if George Zimmerman really stalked this young man just because he was black and shot him in cold blood, the conclusion isn't that we need more gun control laws."

Coulter also claimed that gun control has historically been used by racists to keep blacks unarmed, saying this: "It was the Republican Party and the NRA that always supported allowing blacks to protect themselves from the Ku Klux Klan. Martin Luther King Jr. applied for a gun permit after his house was firebombed, but the Alabama authorities said, no. People who are for gun control are trying to keep guns out of the hands of the powerless."

O'Reilly then questioned whether liberals are exploiting the killing in Florida to push for new gun laws, saying this: "Is the left really that concerned about Trayvon Martin or are they once again trying to ram their agenda down the throats of the American people under the guise of being sympathetic to this poor teenager and his family?"

Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about Casey Anthony. While under investigation for murder, Casey Anthony accused her babysitter of killing her infant daughter Caylee; the sitter, Zenaida Gonzalez, is now suing Anthony for defamation.

Kelly said this: "The judge has just denied Casey Anthony's request to have this case thrown out, so unless Casey Anthony settles the case, she will have to go to civil trial as the defendant. Gonzalez claims her reputation has been ruined because she was the one Casey pointed to as the one who kidnapped her daughter. The problem with this case is that almost all of Casey Anthony's statements about Zenaida Gonzalez are protected. There's an immunity that protects statements made to cops."

Then the two right-wing Culture Warriors Gretchen Carlson and Jeanine Pirro were on, they talked about the TV show 'Glee,' which often includes cross-dressing and alternative lifestyles.

Carlson said this: "Here we go again, pandering to the .3% of the population that considers itself transgendered. Now I get to explain this to my 8-year-old when I just wanted her to see a family show with some nice music. They have these positive messages about hopes and dreams and taking risks, but why do they have to come up with these wild story lines? I don't get it."

But Pirro disagreed saying this: "'Glee' has been a show that displays kids you don't see on other shows, kids who are homeless or transgendered or handicapped or gay. There are 700,000 transgendered people in this country, and now teens who have this problem and are being bullied can watch this show and have someone to relate to. This is about the reality of the world we live in."

And the far-right O'Reilly said he was worried that unsupervised children "might go out and experiment with this stuff."

And finally Martha MacCallum & Steve Doocy were on for the total waste of tv time Factor News Quiz, that I do not report on because it's a worthless segment that nobody cares about, except O'Reilly.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the totally lame pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Catholics Slam GOP Budget; Catholic O'Reilly Ignores It
By: Steve - April 20, 2012 - 10:00am

Here is an example of more right-wing bias and hypocrisy from O'Reilly. He found a Catholic Bishop and put him on the Factor, who said he will not tell his followers to vote for Obama. But when the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops slam the GOP budget for mostly hurting the poor, O'Reilly is silent.

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) last week attempted to use his Catholic faith to justify the House GOP's budget cuts to programs that aide the poor, earning an admonishment from faith leaders across America.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops also jumped in this week, criticizing the budget's cuts to food stamps, tax credits for immigrant families, and other safety net programs as unjustified and wrong.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), who, like Ryan, is Catholic, brushed off the criticism. Ryan responded today, saying the GOP's plan was to remove the poor's dependency on the government to help take them from welfare to work:
MacCallum: The Catholic Bishops conference has also come out and said they don't like what the plan entails for food stamps and also a child credit for illegal immigrants. What do you think about that?

RYAN: These aren’t all the Catholic bishops, and we just respectfully disagree. We think quadrupling this area has not succeeded to get people out of poverty. One in six people, Martha, are in poverty today. Poverty is at the highest rate it's been at in a generation under the president's failed policies.

What we're trying to do here is take people from welfare to work, just like we succeeded in doing when we reformed cash welfare in 1996. We want to take those ideas and reform these other welfare programs so we don't keep people on welfare but take people from welfare to work.
Ryan painted the dispute with the Bishops as a respectful disagreement, but his budget ignores the Church's social teaching when it comes to helping the poor.

He also ignored the facts regarding the nation's social safety net. Rather than reinforcing poverty, social safety net programs have helped keep millions of Americans out of poverty. And while Ryan touts the GOP-led 1996 welfare reform effort as a success, it created a program that has failed to help the neediest Americans.

"Much as overlooked critics of the restrictions once warned, a program that built its reputation when times were good offered little help when jobs disappeared," the New York Times wrote of the reformed welfare program earlier this month.

His argument that the safety net is on an unsustainable path of growth is also wrong. Many of the programs were expanded after the Great Recession as the unemployment rate rose and more Americans were in need; as the economy has recovered, those programs are now shrinking.

The Wednesday 4-18-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 19, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Why no American should pay a penny more in taxes. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama continues to urge higher taxes on the affluent, but he also continues to expand the federal government in record-breaking ways. Since the President has been in office, about 147,000 government employees have been added to the payroll and waste has reached epidemic proportions.

Jeffrey Neely of the General Services Administration may have taken 131 trips on the taxpayer dime, and he was also behind the outrageous $823,000 Las Vegas junket. So Mr. President, you're telling me I should pay more taxes so Jeffrey can run around the world jumping into hot tubs?

The federal government needs to be downsized and reorganized - if it isn't Secret Service guys chasing hookers, it's bankrupt solar energy companies or studies that put shrimp on a treadmill. It is beyond galling to hear the Democratic Party pound the table for more tax dollars in light of what's happening.

I think God sent us Jeffrey Neely, the Deity allowed government investigators to uncover what that guy was doing. If voters still don't understand the giant con that is going on at the federal level, we deserve to be like Greece. Talking Points believes the government should respect taxpayer dollars, downsize, and transfer some power to the states. Jeffrey Neely gamed the system and we all paid for it - put him on trial.
Dear Bill O'Reilly, please, please, please, shut up about taxes you over-paid right-wing idiot. You should pay more just for crying about paying so much in taxes. If I were you I would gladly pay whatever my fair share should be and like it.

Then Democratic strategist Margie Omero and FNC's Kirsten Powers were on to discuss it. Powers said this: "You're absolutely right that this was a waste of money, but this is not the norm. I worked in the Clinton administration and we planned a lot of trips, but we were very careful with money. I don't think it's fair to say this is the way the government runs. We're paying for a lot of things George Bush and the Republicans ran up, it's not just Obama."

Omero portrayed President Obama as a study in frugality, saying this: "It's important to look at the bigger picture and what President Obama has done to reduce spending on government travel, IT, real estate and printing."

Then Billy said this: "President Obama is the biggest spending president of all time, no one is even close. And you're telling me I should be impressed by his cutting?"

Earth to right-wing idiot, Obama had to spend that money to keep us out of a recession Bush and the Republicans created, you jerk. Then on top of that a lot of that spending was done by Bush, you just count it for Obama because he is the President now, idiot!

Then Dick Morris was on to talk about the election. Morris said this: "A president almost always loses the undecided vote, and historically 89% of the undecided vote goes to the challenger. Obama is polling at 45% so people say it's a 45 - 45 race, but he's only going to get about 43% or 44%. This is going to be a 14-point blowout for Romney."

WOW! Dick Morris is a total idiot. And I predict he will be 100% wrong, because unless the economy crashes and gas goes to $5.00 a gallon Obama will easily beat the flip-flopping right-wing moron Mitt Romney.

Morris is so crazy that even O'Reilly disagreed with him, saying this: "People have a lot of questions about Mitt Romney, who is the most undefined challenger I've seen in my lifetime. So I think there's uncertainty about who this guy is and how good a president he might be."

Then Laura Ingraham was on to talk about the photos showing U.S. soldiers posing with the dismembered bodies of suicide bombers in Afghanistan. Ingraham hammered the NY Times and its editors for putting the photos out.

Ingraham said this: "Long gone are the days when the U.S. government could expect the media to rally behind the troops, especially during a long military engagement that is very unpopular. I would not have published the photos - you can describe them without giving the photographic evidence. Hanging soldiers out to dry because they posed for a few pictures is not helpful."

Billy said he was worried that this incident is part of a wider pattern, saying this: "We had the sergeant who killed 17 Afghan civilians and Marines were urinating on the dead bodies of Taliban soldiers. So it looks like discipline is breaking down and it's a wider story that Americans need to know about."

After Billy dishonestly slammed Al Sharpton for making accusations in the Trayvon Martin case, Sharpton said he has nothing for which to apologize. So O'Dummy had the biased right-wing stooge from Fox Juliet Huddy on to discuss it.

Huddy said this: "As a respected leader within the African American community, he has the ability to reach people. And when he talks about the 'murder weapon' and calls it a 'hate crime,' he has publicly convicted George Zimmerman without any trial. This is irresponsible."

And of course O'Dummy agreed with her, saying this: "I think Sharpton knows exactly why I came down on him and exactly what he should apologize for."

Earth to right-wing morons, Sharpton was right and you two were wrong. So if anyone should give an apology it's you two.

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because he is just a lame comedian who is on to make jokes about liberals, with no liberal comedian on for balance, and because it's not news.

And finally Karl Rove was on to lay out a strategy for Romney to win Hispanic votes. Rove said this: "He has to realize, that Hispanic voters have the same concerns that the rest of Americans do - they're worried about the prosperity of the country and what Obamacare is going to do to them."

Rove also said a lot of people in the Latino community are hard-nosed about border security, they believe fervently that we need to secure the borders. So Romney has that part of it covered, but he does need to show compassion with regard to the people who are already here.

Rove then added that President Obama's record on immigration is open to criticism, saying this: "He said he was totally in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, but he voted with the labor unions to gut reform. And as President he has never even had a significant meeting on it."

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots garbage.

O'Reilly Has Totally Ignored The Ted Nugent Scandal
By: Steve - April 19, 2012 - 10:00am

O'Reilly loves to slam the rest of the media for ignoring political news stories that make Democrats look bad, as he does the very same thing with news stories that make Republicans look bad. As he has with the Ted Nugent scandal. Nugent said that if Obama is re-elected this November he will be dead or in jail, which implies he will try to kill Obama and be shot dead or end up in jail for trying to kill him. And yet, O'Reilly does not say a word.

Here is the story from Reuters:

Ted Nugent said on Wednesday that the U.S. Secret Service has arranged to meet with him after the rock musician severely criticized President Barack Obama during the National Rifle Association convention last week.

Nugent appeared on conservative radio host Glenn Beck's show on Wednesday. He was asked if he had heard from the Secret Service.

"We actually have heard from the Secret Service, and they have a duty, and I salute them. I support them and I'm looking forward to our meeting tomorrow," Nugent said on Beck's show.

Nugent, is a longtime advocate for gun rights and in recent years he has campaigned for conservative politicians and causes. A Secret Service spokesman declined to directly address whether the federal agency tasked with protecting the president would be meeting with Nugent.

"We are aware of the incident with Ted Nugent, and we are conducting appropriate follow-up," said spokesman Brian Leary in a statement. "We recognize an individual's right to freedom of speech but we also have a responsibility to determine and investigate intent."

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney also made a high-profile appearance and speech at the NRA convention attended by Nugent, who has endorsed Romney.

U.S. Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chairwoman of the DNC, said at the time, "threatening violence -- or whatever it is that Nugent's threatening -- is clearly beyond the pale."

In other comments at the convention in St. Louis last week, Nugent aimed his barbs at other officials in Obama's administration.

"We need to ride into that battlefield and chop their heads off in November," Nugent said at the convention. A spokesman for Nugent could not be reached for comment on Wednesday.

Following Nugent's comments last week, a Romney spokeswoman said the candidate believes "everyone needs to be civil," but stopped short of condemning Nugent.

The Tuesday 4-17-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 18, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama and the welfare state. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: All the polls say Americans who don't have a lot of money overwhelmingly support the President; that's because since Mr. Obama has been in office welfare spending has increased by 41%.

When Lyndon Johnson declared war on poverty in 1964 the poverty rate was about 19%; since then America has spent $15 trillion fighting poverty, yet the poverty rate remains above 15%.

All the money has not done much to combat the problem and the reason is that poor education and poor parenting are driving destitution. As long as Americans refuse to educate themselves and family units remain chaotic, you will have a 15% poverty rate.

People have the right to be a moron and no government can stop irresponsible parenting, so what is the solution? President Obama believes the government should give money to the poor, but many of them will use it irresponsibly.

Mitt Romney would be wise to lay out his own anti-poverty program, one that would be heavy on personal responsibility. Society must be compassionate, but must be responsible in trying to help these people, especially the kids. Right now there is no discipline in the entitlement culture and President Obama simply wants to throw more money at the problem.
Then Faith Jenkins and professor Mark Sawyer were on to take their best shots at the Talking Points Memo. Sawyer said this: "You're wrong on a number of points, First of all, very little of the money is going to cash payments and most of what you call 'welfare' doesn't actually go to the poor, a lot of those programs are aimed at working people and the middle class. If we weren't spending this money, the poverty rate would be much higher."

Jenkins argued for more spending on schools, saying this: "We're spending more than enough money to fight poverty but we're not using it in the right ways. We should take the trillions of dollars we're spending on entitlement programs and use it to invest in education."

So then O'Reilly placed much of the blame for poverty on family breakdown, saying this: "If you're born into a chaotic family and there's no emphasis on education and responsibility, you're almost doomed."

Then O'Reilly had Sandra Smith & Eric Bolling on to talk about oil speculators. President Obama is urging tighter controls on oil speculators. Smith said this: "There are already a lot of constraints. The futures markets and derivative markets are some of the most regulated in the world. Speculators play a very important role in the market - they increase the liquidity of the market and improve the price."

But Bolling, a former commodities trader, argued for more regulation and higher margin requirements, saying this: "One of the most alarming things is that on any given day I could have walked onto the floor of the exchange and bought $10 million worth of oil and sold it the same day. Do you know how much money I would have to put up to do that? Not a single cent! There are no intraday margin requirements on speculative trading."

Then Alan Colmes and Monica Crowley were on to discuss the Secret Service agents who hired hookers while on assignment in Colombia. Colmes said this: "If the story turns out to be true, you fire them. But having rogue people step out of line doesn't make the whole organization corrupt."

Crowley thinks that the problem may far greater than a few bad apples, saying this: "These guys were supposedly blabbing to the hookers about how they were there to protect the President. There may be a cultural problem at the Secret Service, and this agency is so critical to the President's security that the problem has to be rooted out."

Then Tonya Reiman was on for the body language nonsense, which I do not report on because it is a total waste of tv time and not news.

Then Kimberly Guilfoyle & Lis Wiehl were on to talk about former baseball pitcher Roger Clemens, who is on trial for perjury. Federal prosecutors are trying to prove that he lied to a Congressional committee about steroid use. Wiehl said this: "They want to make an example of him, and to show that even if you're high and mighty, you can't take an oath and lie in front of Congress. I think the government has to do this."

Guilfoyle turned to the Trayvon Martin slaying in Florida, where media outlets are suing to obtain all the files in the case against George Zimmerman. Guilfoyle said this: "Florida has one of the most liberal laws with respect to cameras in the courtroom and transparency. But I believe in a case of this nature, where the stakes are very high, names should not be given out."

Then the insane O'Reilly said he was worried that if the documents are released "MSNBC and Headline News will be trying the case on TV."

Which is just laughable, because O'Reilly does the very same thing all the time. He declares people guilty before the jury verdict about once every other month. One example is Casey Anthony, O'Reilly called her guilty on his show many times, and even after she was found not guilty he still said he thinks she was guilty. Talk about hypocrisy, O'Reilly is the king of hypocrisy.

And finally O'Reilly had Charles Krauthammer on to talk about Democrats and their allies who gearing up to attack Mitt Romney's wealth, religion and business career, Billy asked Krauthammer how Romney should respond.

Krauthammer said this: "Negative campaigns can work, so I think Romney's strategy should be to embrace that negativity. He should point out how it's a sign of scurrilousness and hypocrisy. The hypocrisy, of course, is that Barack Obama shot to national consciousness by giving a speech in which he would unite red and black America. But the Democrats are running the most divisive campaign on race, ethnicity, class and gender. It's going to be the dirtiest campaign you've ever seen - hide the children and check the plumbing because you're going to have to shower several times a day."

Notice that O'Reilly never has anyone on to talk about how Obama or any Democrats should deal with the dishonest attacks from the right. And that's because O'Reilly is a Republican who does not want to give Obama or any Democrats any advice on anything, proving his bias once again.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Senate Republicans Vote Down Buffett Rule Bill
By: Steve - April 18, 2012 - 10:00am

The Buffett Rule (a bill backed by President Obama that would ensure millionaires pay a comparable tax rate to middle-class Americans) fell to a Republican filibuster in the Senate Monday, despite a new poll showing it to be overwhelmingly popular with a majority of the American people.

Proving that even though Republicans say they go by the will of the people, they really go by what the wealthy who donate to their campaigns tell them to vote.

While the rule, named after billionaire investor Warren Buffett, earned a majority vote of 51-45, it didn't get the 60 votes needed to overcome a GOP filibuster. Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) was the only Republican to vote yes.

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) did not vote, but put out a statement opposing the bill. The vote is no surprise as Republicans vowed to block it, but Democrats wanted to put the GOP on the record as yet again filibustering to preserve lower tax rates for the wealthy.

A CNN poll released Monday found that 72 percent of Americans (including 53 percent of Republicans and almost 70 percent of independents) support the Buffett Rule.

And you will never see that poll reported by O'Reilly, because he is a Republicans who is also opposed to the Buffett rule. In fact, O'Reilly never even reported the story, at all.

The Monday 4-16-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 17, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Personal generosity, social justice and the White House. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama and Vice President Biden have released their 2011 tax returns and, once again, what they donated to charity is instructive. The President and Mrs. Obama made about $800,000 and they donated 22% of that to charity - very generous! But Vice President Biden is another story - he donated just over 1% of his entire income to charity.

That's paltry, but that is what the Vice President has done every year since he's been in office. By contrast, it's estimated that Mitt Romney donated 19% of his $21 million income to charity last year. In 2007 President Bush donated 18% of his income to charity; in 2005 Dick Cheney donated a whopping 77%.

Bill Clinton was also generous in his personal donations, but not Al Gore. In 1997 Gore made about $200,000 and donated $353 to charity - 0.2%! Author Arthur Brooks studied charitable donations by liberals and conservatives and says that conservative Americans give about 30% more on average.

There's no question that people who believe in self-reliance are more generous to those in need than those who espouse a federal nanny state. Charitable giving is obviously a personal matter, but it does say something about character. The cold truth is that the federal government is almost bankrupt, so we the people have to help one another.
What a joke, O'Reilly is so biased it's laughable. The real measure would be to look at what percent of money a person donates to charity compared to what they make. Not the total dollar amount, so what O'Reilly did is total right-wing spin. On top of that, who fricking cares what political party donates the most money to charity.

Then Juan Williams and Mary Katharine Ham were on to talk about the left/right divide in charitable giving. Williams said this: "The key element you overlooked, is that conservatives are more likely to go to church. If you took out giving to the alms basket, liberals give slightly more than conservatives. Gays are the most generous in terms of giving to charity and secular conservatives who don't go to church are the stingiest."

Ham said this: "They know they're going to get a pass because they're liberals and they have their 'compassion card.' There are two versions of compassion - conservatives give freely without having the government take it, they give in their own communities to places they know are accountable because actually helping people matters. To many liberals, although many of them are very generous, they get this 'compassion card' by advocating the taking of money from other people."

Then O'Reilly had the biased far-right Obama hating Lt. Col. Ralph Peters About a dozen Secret Service agents were sent home from Colombia after reportedly hiring prostitutes. The Factor pursued the story with Fox News military analyst Lt. Col. Ralph Peters on to use the Secret Service scandal to trash Obama. Peters said they are a great organization that has done tremendous work, but as with the military, sometimes you get this sort of thing."

Peters also said this: "Latin America has always been regarded as the 'party continent,' and this was obviously an incident of poor leadership. If the leader of the team is misbehaving or tolerating misbehavior, the troops will go bad."

O'Reilly called for a thorough examination of the Secret Service's role, saying this: "They were doing this stuff on Wednesday, just two days before President Obama was scheduled to arrive. This was a shocking breach and there has to be a drastic realignment of the Secret Service."

Then O'Reilly had another far-right stooge on to trash Obama. Katie Pavlich was on to talk about the Justice Department's "Fast and Furious" gun-running operation that resulted in narco-criminals obtaining U.S. weapons.

Pavlich, who has written a book about the botched operation said this: "People don't know the details of this story. The Obama administration is being protected by the mainstream media because they know that if the American people knew the details of this program and what was done to push a political agenda, it would definitely swipe a second term from Obama."

O'Reilly then complained that "Fast and Furious" has had no impact on the coming election, saying this: "As much as talk radio and some conservative pundits are yelling and screaming, this story has not hurt President Obama."

Then another conservative was on, Brit Hume was on to discuss the Secret Service prostitution scandal. Hume said this: "This indiscreet personal behavior, poses security risks and that's obviously something we have to be concerned about. Colombia is kind of a wild and wooly kind of place so this kind of conduct doesn't shock me. But we don't know what really happened - it may turn out to be more or less serious than we're hearing."

Hume also commented on the "Fast and Furious" scandal, saying this: "It never inspires confidence, when you have the kind of stonewalling that appears to have gone on. We now have three administrative scandals - at the Justice Department, in the Secret Service, and in the General Services Administration. There may be a critical mass reached where people draw conclusions about how well the Obama team administers the government."

Obama had nothing to do with it morons, get a clue and stop with the partisan bias.

Then Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about a Sunday roundtable on CNN, where media reporter Julie Mason implied that Fox News and Bill O'Reilly shill for the Republicans.

The biased far-right O'Reilly butt-kissing Goldberg laughably said this: "I don't have a clue as to what she's talking about, but let me tell you what I think this is about. I think you, Bill O'Reilly, have become the poster boy for every liberal complaint about anything on cable TV. Not because you're biased, but because you're the most well known person - that's the price you pay for being well known."

What a joke, face it idiots Mason is right and the complaints about O'Reilly are his right-wing bias, plus the fact that he will not admit he is a Republican, he lies about having a no spin zone, he lies about being an Independent, and he lies about being non-partisan. It's all bias and lies from O'Reilly, he is just as biased as Hannity, he just refuses to admit it.

O'Reilly even took issue with the notion that FNC is Republican-occupied territory, saying this: "Dick Cheney won't come on this program, John McCain was very hesitant to be interviewed by me, and I can give you scores of other examples of Republicans who don't want any part of this show."

And finally O'Reilly had his ridiculous Factor Reality check, which I do not report on because it's nonsense. It's just O'Reilly by himself putting his right-wing spin on something someone else said.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

O'Reilly Makes Insane Claim About Fox News
By: Steve - April 17, 2012 - 10:00am

This may be the dumbest thing O'Reilly has ever said in his life, and that is saying a lot because he says some dumb things. He actually said that in his opinion Fox News is not trying to get anyone elected.



And yes he said it with a straight face, making O'Reilly a big joke. Because everyone knows Fox is going to do everything in their power to get Romney elected and Obama thrown out of the White House.

It's just laughable to claim Fox is not trying to get anyone elected, because they spend 24/7 slamming Obama and praising Romney. In fact, O'Reilly should not be allowed to say he has a no spin zone after that massive right-wing spin.

Fox News Stooges Deny Big Oil Tax Breaks Are Subsidies
By: Steve - April 16, 2012 - 11:00am

Here is some great proof that the right-wing stooges at Fox are biased and pretty much in the back pocket of the big oil companies, because they are lying for them.

Eric Bolling said this on 3-29-12:
BOLLING: So President Obama -- first of all, he calls the tax credits to the oil company subsidies. This is completely off base. Not one dollar of taxpayer money comes from the government and Congress and is sent to the oil companies.

He said that on the podium, President Obama did. He said "we're sending -- Congress has decided to send billions more dollars to the oil companies."

We're not doing that. We're allowing them to keep more of their profits. Profit is a good thing. Profit is capitalism. Profit creates jobs, creates incentives for the oil companies to hire more people, to buy more equipment and guess what, to drill more money.
Stuart Varney said this on 3-30-12:
VARNEY: Since when do we have taxpayer giveaways to the oil companies? Show me the check, Mr. President. Show me the check. All companies in America, when they invest in equipment, get a tax break on that investment, the oil companies included.

The president says that is a subsidy; it is not. It is not a payment of money from the Treasury to an oil company.

I mean, do you get a payment from the Treasury when you have a break on your mortgage, on your interest? Of course you don't. He is confusing everybody with his use of the word "subsidy."
Rush Limbaugh said this on 3-30-12:
LIMBAUGH: By the way, they don't get subsidized. Folks, this is another blatant lie. It is a blatant lie about tax subsidies. Big Oil does not get subsidized. They have tax breaks like many other industries do, just like you have a home mortgage interest deduction.

And the tax breaks they have are to incentivize their production and exploration for oil. Their tax breaks are not to cause you to pay higher gas prices, their tax breaks are there to facilitate more supply and thus cheaper prices.
Shannon Bream and Juan Williams said this on 3-30-12:
BREAM: And to be clear, the vote in the Senate today was about a bill from Senator Menendez and it would have cut tax breaks, which the White House refers to as subsidies. But really, there is a difference, Juan.

WILLIAMS: There is a difference. But you know, the tax breaks are meant to incentivize oil production. And the oil companies make this point and that they need these and say that prices would go up without these incentives. Nonetheless, the money comes out of my pocket, your pocket, the American taxpayers' money, and that's why the White House calls them subsidies.

BREAM: But is it coming out of the oil companies' pockets? I mean, it's less money that they're paying in to the tax base.

WILLIAMS: Correct. Well, it's a deduction, a loophole, however you want to describe it.
Now get this, these are talking points from the American Petroleum Institute, and the right-wing media are denying that the tax incentives oil companies receive are a subsidy.

While Independent experts say that such incentives have effects similar to more direct cash transfers from the government, and tax expenditures make up a major part of the government's energy policy.

From the Pew Charitable Trusts' SubsidyScope.org:
Tax expenditures have a similar effect on the federal deficit as government spending. They can also have effects on recipients that are similar to grants or other types of subsidies.

For instance, if the government wants to encourage people to buy solar panels for their homes, it could send checks to those who bought panels or offer tax breaks after the panels have been purchased.
From the Center for American Progress report America's Hidden Power Bill: Examining Federal Energy Tax Expenditures:
To reiterate, a tax expenditure is a government spending program that delivers subsidies through the tax code via special tax credits, deductions, exclusions, exemptions, and preferential rates.

This reduction in taxes is the amount of the subsidy provided to that individual or company. In the energy sector, this means specific companies receive credits for investing in renewable energy, deductions related to oil exploration, and credits for production of alternative transportation fuels, among other benefits.
The New York Times reported in July 2010 that "an examination of the American tax code indicates that oil production is among the most heavily subsidized businesses, with tax breaks available at virtually every stage of the exploration and extraction process."

A report from the fiscal watchdog organization Taxpayers For Common Sense estimated that oil and gas companies will receive "more than $78 billion" in subsidies, including $55 billion in industry specific subsidies.

And take note that O'Reilly never says a word about the bias from anyone at Fox, while they cover for the oil companies, that even he admits are gouging the American people.

Republican Says Money Is More Important To Men
By: Steve - April 15, 2012 - 10:00am

Talk about a war on women, that Ingraham and the right claims is made up, here is more proof it is real.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) quietly repealed his state's equal pay law last week, a decision that will make it harder for victims of wage discrimination to sue for lost earnings and back wages. The law was enacted primarily to address the massive pay gap that exists between male and female workers, which is even bigger in Wisconsin than in other states.

Repealing the law was a no-brainer for state Sen. Glenn Grothman (R), who led the effort because of his belief that pay discrimination is a myth driven by liberal women's groups.

Ignoring multiple studies showing that the pay gap exists, Grothman blamed females for prioritizing childrearing and homemaking instead of money, saying, Money is more important for men:
Whatever gaps exist, he insists, stem from women's decision to prioritize childrearing over their careers. "Take a hypothetical husband and wife who are both lawyers," he says.

"The husband is working 50 or 60 hours a week, going all out, making 200 grand a year. The woman takes time off, raises kids, is not go go go. Now they're 50 years old. The husband is making 200 grand a year, the woman is making 40 grand a year. It wasn't discrimination. There was a different sense of urgency in each person."

Grothman also doesn't accept the studies. He said this: "You could argue that money is more important for men. I think a guy in their first job, maybe because they expect to be a breadwinner someday, may be a little more money-conscious. To attribute everything to a so-called bias in the workplace is just not true."
Among Grothman’s lies is the idea that only men expect to be a breadwinner someday. Because in two-thirds of American families, women are either primary or co-breadwinners, and yet they still earn less than their male counterparts in all 50 states.

In 2011, the Wisconsin GOP carried out an extensive war on workers that led to recall efforts for state representatives, senators, and Walker himself. In 2012, Grothman and his colleagues have expanded that war to one on women, meaning a group of workers that was already struggling to keep pace with their male counterparts is only going to fall further behind.

The Friday 4-13-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 14, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Mitt Romney on the ascent. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: As predicted here a few days ago, Mitt Romney is getting a bounce in the polls. Rasmussen has the Governor up 48 - 44 among likely voters and a Fox News poll also has Romney defeating Obama. Also in the Fox poll, a whopping 67% of Americans say they are unhappy about the direction of the country.

These numbers are bad news for the President - it's pretty much impossible for an incumbent to be reelected when two-thirds of the nation believes we are on the wrong track. However, 2012 is different than most other election years because class warfare is on the table.

Democrats believe voters who want government benefits will make the difference and the election will come down to philosophy - the nanny state versus self-reliance. We have millions of citizens who are not very well educated, not very motivated to work hard, but have a strong sense of entitlement.

Their philosophy seems to be, 'Where's mine?' President Obama's solution is not to call for personal discipline, spending discipline or shared sacrifice. He is saying the system is rigged and the wealthy get all the breaks. Millions of Americans believe that and there are entire cable networks that embrace that point of view.

Most newspapers believe it and Hollywood continues to be thrilled with Mr. Obama's overall philosophy. So this election is going to be very intense - Mitt Romney is in pretty good shape according to the polls, but he better bring his 'A' game when he goes up against President Obama.
O'Reilly is a joke, because likely voters may or may not vote, what counts are registered voters because you know they will vote. And to use the biased right-wing Rasmussen poll is laughable, especially when all the other polls still have Obama beating Romney.

And btw, of all the polls only Rasmussen and the Fox News poll have Romney beating Obama, so what does that tell you, that their polls are biased, and that O'Reilly is biased for cherry picking them to report on his show. And 67% of Americans do say they are unhappy about the direction of the country, but that is also spin from O'Reilly because they all do not say they blame Obama.

And what's really funny is that in 2000 almost all of the newspapers endorsed George W. Bush, but you did not hear O'Reilly complain about them then. Not to mention, even with the so-called liberal media supporting Gore he still lost to Bush, so explain that O'Reilly you biased moron. And the millions of Americans O'Reilly says believe him, are Fox News viewers.

Then O'Reilly had two Democratic strategists on to talk about why so many Americans are disenchanted with the direction of the country. Hahn said this: "It all depends on who the American people blame. Are they going to blame President Obama, who inherited one of the worst economies since the Great Depression, or are they going to blame the Republicans who created this mess under Bush. I don't think they're going to blame President Obama for this great recession."

Bingo, that kills the right-wing spin from O'Reilly in one short statement, and btw O'Reilly had no answer for that statement by Hahn.

Mary Anne Marsh put a positive spin on the President's poll numbers, saying this: "There's no question that President Obama has had a tough few weeks, but I'd still rather be Barack Obama than Mitt Romney. More people still like and trust Barack Obama, and don't underestimate the importance of that number in a close election." Then O'Reilly had Janine Turner and Leslie Marshall on to debate whether political spouses should be off limits to criticism. Turner said this: "I think it's fair game. Ann Romney is a smart and capable woman who knew exactly what she was walking into. I love seeing her out there speaking out for women, she can take it."

But Marshall argued that family members should be left alone, saying this: "I don't think any spouse or child of anyone running for office should be fair game unless they are running themselves. They haven't signed up for this - it's their spouse or their parent who is running."

O'Reilly agreed with the conservative Turner of course, and reminded Marshall that Ann Romney is in the arena, "talking about the economy and telling people they should vote for her husband."

Then the biased far-far-right Charles Krauthammer was on to of course slam President Obama and his allies who insist that raising taxes on the rich will increase fairness without harming the economy.

Krauthammer said this: "We are talking about the 'Buffett tax,' which is a disguised doubling of the capital gains tax. John Kennedy asked for a reduction in the capital gains tax because it spurs economic expansion and increases revenue to the treasury."

Now think about this, and remember you never hear this from O'Reilly, Krauthammer, or anyone on the right. Bill Clinton did it, he raised taxes on the wealthy, and it not only did not hurt the economy, it led to 8 years of economic boom. But O'Reilly and Krauthammer act like it never happened, they just ignore it to spin out right-wing propaganda.

Then Jesse Watters was on to talk about the sights and sounds of New York's annual Auto Show, which is not real news so I did not report on it.

Then of course Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on to discuss the case against John Edwards, who is accused of illegally funneling campaign funds to his mistress. Even though O'Reilly ignores all the sex scandals involving Republicans.

Wiehl said this: "This is a very weak case. They have to go inside Edwards' mind and say he knew this $900,000 was being used to cover up the affair. The prosecution's star witness is a guy who lied about the case and originally took all the blame himself."

Guilfoyle said this: "They need to prove this was specifically at his direction. If someone takes the stand and says 'John Edwards told me to give this money to support her and to cover it up,' how much more proof do you need?"

Then O'Reilly SPECULATED (which is something he never claims to do or allow on the show) that "the feds must have a paper trail, they wouldn't bring this case only on the word of a weasel." And Wiehl even predicted that Edwards will be acquitted, while Guilfoyle said he's headed for the big house.

And finally it was dumbest things of the week. Arthel Neville picked Joy Behar, who mocked the very-pregnant Jessica Simpson for her rotundity. "It is dumb to criticize any woman who is pregnant," Neville said. "I don't care if she's a celebrity or if she posed nude to show her pregnant belly, it's just dumb."

Greg Gutfeld brought up the company that sends scantily-clad maids to clean your home. "This is an American story about innovation and it's fantastic. They're taking something that exists and combining it with nudity to create a whole new industry."

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Media Study
By: Steve - April 14, 2012 - 10:00am

Thursday night O'Reilly reported on a recent study by George Mason University's Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA) that covered stories on Republican primaries. O'Reilly said according to the study, claims that Fox News Channel "shills for the GOP" simply aren't true.

From The O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: A new study by George Mason University says that the three networks and Fox News are pretty much the same when it comes to scrutinizing the Republican field.

Isn't that interesting? While the president and the Democratic Party believe FNC shills for the GOP, an academic study says that is not the case.
Now what's really interesting is that the study did not say that, because they only looked at the first half hour of Fox News Channel's 'Special Report. They did not include the O'Reilly Factor, or Hannity, etc. in the study.

And the coverage of the first half hour of Special Report, Fox's flagship "straight news" program, is clearly not representative of the entire channel, which has mostly conservative opinion programming.

Not to mention, any study showing a lack of bias in Fox's reporting should be met with skepticism. Because anyone with a working brain (who watches Fox News for even an hour) can clearly see they are biased to the right.

And there is certainly reason to be skeptical of the CMPA study. For one thing, CMPA's president, Robert Lichter, is a former paid contributor for Fox News. Which is information that O'Reilly did not report, and he also did not report that they only looked at the first half hour of special report.

The study evaluated "ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news" but only looked at "the first half hour of Fox News Channel's 'Special Report.'"

Fox News has shown that it acts as the communications arm of the Republican Party. Its programming is at times nearly identical to Republican National Committee campaign ads and it has a history of passing off Republican research as its own, typos and all.

And O'Reilly knows that, but he still lied about the CMPA study. This is dishonest journalism, coming from a man who claims to be a non-partisan Independent. This is what O'Reilly does, spin and lie for Fox and the GOP.

The study is a joke, because it did not include a representative sample of the majority of News shows at Fox, they cherry picked one half hour from one show they have, making them not only dishonest, it also makes them look like biased fools. And O'Reilly jumped all over the flawed study, making him look like a biased fool too.

The Thursday 4-12-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 13, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: What must Mitt Romney do to defeat Barack Obama? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Last night Dick Morris said he believes Governor Romney will win easily in November; Talking Points dissents, I believe the vote will be very close. The wild card is Mitt Romney himself, who must convince skeptical voters that he's looking out for them.

He has to do it in a very personal way, but that is not Governor Romney's style. He's a reserved man who is a traditional campaigner, saying the same things over and over. President Obama also repeats himself frequently, but the President does have the common touch and his speaking ability is convincing to many.

Last time around John McCain did not have enough persuasive power to overcome the charismatic Obama, but now the President has a record and many believe it is weak. Can Mitt Romney exploit the shaky economy, rising gas prices, and out of control debt? He can expect no help from the media.

Talk radio may help Governor Romney, but that's about it, so the Governor himself must defeat Barack Obama one-on-one. He certainly has enough ammunition as the USA is not in good shape. Nevertheless, President Obama has a devoted constituency - labor, African Americans, entitlement people, and he's working hard to convince women and Hispanics that he's their guy.

Governor Romney must diminish the Obama coalition but can only do so by out-performing the President man-to-man.
Notice that while O'Reilly is trying to tell Romney how to beat Obama he never once reminds the people what happened under the REPUBLICAN George W. Bush. Let's recall that, Bush and the REPUBLICANS almost destroyed the country. Remember that, Bush and the REPUBLICANS ran the country into the ground in 8 short years, so O'Reilly wants us to elect Bush Jr. as in Mitt Romney.

Then Bret Baier and asked him to analyze a new poll showing that 67% of Americans believe the country is on the wrong track. Baier said this: "If those numbers hold into the fall, President Obama is in for a long election night. Also in this poll Mitt Romney is up by two points, the first time he's been ahead since November in a head-to-head matchup with President Obama. It shows that even as this primary process comes to an end Mitt Romney does have some strengths. A lot of his supporters I'm talking to say they want Mitt Romney to come out and be forceful, the guy who came out in that debate in Florida after he was killed by Newt Gingrich in South Carolina."

And of course O'Reilly said he agrees with the opinion that America is not in great shape, saying this: "I'm not rooting for anybody and I have to take a skeptical view of both men, but I'm not comfortable with the direction the country is going in."

Then Laura Ingraham was on to cry about a legal boycott "Color of Change" is calling for against the right-wing group ALEC.

Ingraham said this: "Color of Change gets huge influxes of money from George Soros, and has ties to SEIU and MoveOn.org. There are all these tentacles connecting these organizations, and what they're designed to do is basically shut down conservative speech. This is an intimidation campaign - 'Color of Change' doesn't want free speech, they don't want any real debate."

And of course O'Reilly agreed saying that folks on the left are better organized when it comes to intimidation: "I don't think there's any doubt that the far left not only doesn't want free speech, but they'll try to hurt you and your family if you dare to go against their ideology. This is what totalitarian regimes do."

Which is nothing but right-wing propaganda from O'Reilly and Ingraham. All Color of Change is doing is taking money from the people that support them and using it to call for a boycott against idiots on the right that use hate speech.

It's all legal and as American as apple pie. But O'Reilly and Ingraham only have a problem with it when the left does it, when the right does it they not only do not cry about it, they support it, and O'Reilly has even called for boycotts himself.

Then O'Reilly had Trayvon Martin's mother Sybrina Fulton on, who affirmed her faith in the system, saying this: "We've wanted to have peaceful rallies and protests, and we're not supporting any violence or anything like that. I believe in the judicial system and I believe George Zimmerman can get a fair trial."

Attorney Benjamin Crump, representing the Martin family, argued that the protests served their purpose, saying this: "The rallies and demonstrations were just to get him arrested and we feel that had that not happened, they were never going to arrest Zimmerman. This shouldn't be a racial issue, it should really be about justice."

O'Reilly (the two-faced right-wing phony) praised Ms. Fulton for showing grace despite losing her son, saying this: "You and Trayvon's father have been magnificent, you've called for restraint. But others have whipped up emotion and I think Al Sharpton should apologize for some of the things he said."

What? Why should Sharpton apologize, he was right and you were wrong, you should apologize, idiot.

Then O'Reilly asked Megyn Kelly why George Zimmerman is not free on bail. Kelly said this: "You don't get bail automatically when you are charged with second degree murder. His lawyer has to ask for a hearing where evidence will be presented pertaining to the case against him. Zimmerman's lawyer said that given the fervor surrounding the case right now, this is not the best time to ask for bail. He's going to ask for bond, but he's worried about his client's safety."

Kelly also claimed that the case against Zimmerman could conceivably be dismissed, saying this: "In Florida this may never get to a jury. They have the 'stand your ground' law and the defense will assert he did this in self-defense and the 'stand your ground' law applies. That gets decided by a judge, not a jury. If the judge is convinced that a 'preponderance of the evidence' shows that 'stand your ground' applies, he can throw the whole case out."

Then Janine Pirro & Gretchen Carlson were on to cry about a portion of Jennifer Lopez latest video, in which she writhes in a sultry and sexual manner, was aired on American Idol.

Carlson said this: "Jennifer Lopez said it was a 'good message,' but I'm wondering how talking about making love when my 8-year-old is watching is a good message? This is provocative, it's all about hooking up. Would she let her young twins watch this?"

Pirro agreed that showing part of the video at 8 PM was absolutely inappropriate, saying this: "I watched this several times but there is no message. This video is raw and wrong, it's a faux orgy! We're seeing a dangerous social unraveling of what once was unacceptable sexuality - it's starting to permeate all layers of television."

Said the 2 old right-wing bible thumpers, get a clue idiots, you are old fools.

And finally Cheryl Casone & Steve Doocy were on for the lame as ever Factor News Quiz. Which I do not report on because it's not news and it's a waste of tv time.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as it can get pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Fox News Lawyers Warn Mole Joe Muto In Letter
By: Steve - April 13, 2012 - 10:00am

TVNewser has obtained a letter sent to Joe Muto, the former O'Reilly Factor associate producer revealed to be a mole working for Gawker. The letter is from a law firm representing Fox News saying his actions thus far are likely criminal.

In fact a Fox News spokesperson tells TVNewser, "It's now in the hands of our lawyers and law enforcement given that a crime has been committed."

Muto, who was paid $5,000 by Gawker, was fired today after 8 years with the network. Last night he was questioned, put on paid leave and escorted from Fox News headquarters.

From the letter:
Be advised that your admissions are admissions of likely criminal and civil wrongdoing on both your and Gawker's part, which will be the subject of further extensive investigation.
The letter goes on advise Muto he should immediately stop providing information and videos to Gawker and immediately stop writing columns based on information that you unlawfully obtained while employed at Fox News.

You should also immediately take all necessary steps to preserve all documents and information that may be relevant to your hire and employment at Gawker.

Earlier in the day, Epstein, Becker & Green also sent a cease and desist letter to Gawker demanding they immediately stop publishing information and videos that have been unlawfully obtained by or from Joe Muto and return them to Fox News.

And of course you never heard a word about any of it from O'Reilly, but if this happened to an MSNBC mole O'Reilly would be all over that story.

Newt Gingrich Said Fox Is Biased For Mitt Romney
By: Steve - April 13, 2012 - 9:00am

Newt Gingrich, who just a year ago was on the payroll at Fox News channel as a political analyst, attacked his former employer at a private campaign event yesterday, accusing the conservative cable news channel of being in the tank for Mitt Romney.

Gingrich said this at a private campaign event Wednesday:
"I think FOX has been for Romney all the way through," Gingrich said during the private meeting at Wesley College.

"In our experience, Callista and I both believe CNN is less biased than FOX this year."

"We are more likely to get neutral coverage out of CNN than we are of FOX, and we're more likely to get distortion out of FOX. That's just a fact."

"I assume it's because Murdoch at some point who said, 'I want Romney,' and so fair and balanced became Romney."

"And there's no question that Fox had a lot to do with stopping my campaign because such a high percentage of our base watches FOX."
Now what are the odds O'Reilly reports that, 200 million to one. I will bet O'Reilly ignores it and never says a word about any of it.

The Wednesday 4-11-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 12, 2012 - 11:00am

O'Dummy started with the news that Florida prosecutor Angela Corey charged George Zimmerman with second degree murder in the Trayvon Martin slaying. Alex Ferrer, a former judge in Florida, explained the indictment, saying this: "Second degree murder doesn't require an intent to kill, Florida defines it as 'performing an act imminently dangerous to another' and showing a depraved mind. That means it has to be an act that resulted from ill will, spite, or evil intent."

Attorney Joe Jackson opined that prosecutor Corey should have relied on a grand jury, saying this: "This should have gone to a grand jury, which would have instituted public confidence. When you're talking about second degree murder, you're talking about depravity. Was there depravity here? The defense will have to claim that George Zimmerman was in imminent fear for his life or bodily harm."

O'Reilly said that Corey has raised the bar, saying this: "Manslaughter would be a much easier beef to convict on."

Then Santita Jackson, daughter of Jesse Jackson was n to comment. Jackson said this: "I'm glad to see that the justice system does work. Many people have been concerned that the son of a former judge could essentially stop our system of jurisprudence and we just want to know what happened."

Which is ridiculous, because it took 45 days to get him, while the cops, the police chief, and the state attorney should all be fired for corruption. O'Reilly and Jackson (who is a Republican) ignored all that.

Jackson also urged black leaders to tone down the rhetoric, saying this: "We have an inflamed atmosphere and there is a wide divide about this case, but we should not be violent. We should follow the example of Trayvon's mother and father, who have called for peace and calm."

Then O'Dummy condemned the New Black Panther Party, which has advocated violence, saying this: "The rhetoric has been very inflamed for the past couple of weeks and the Black Panthers are not doing the nation any good at all."

And not once did O'Reilly admit he was wrong about the media, or admit he was wrong to slam Al Sharpton and MSNBC for their accurate reporting on the Zimmerman shooting. And that was it for the Zimmerman story, O'Reilly dropped it, while all the other media shows spent the entire hour reporting on it with balanced guests.

Then the TPM, it was called: What we've learned from the Santorum campaign. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: There are many lessons to be learned from the campaign run by Rick Santorum. The first is that if you work hard in life and don't give up you are likely to succeed. No one gave Santorum much of a shot last summer, but he convinced the voters of Iowa to support him by old-fashioned meet-the-folks campaigning.

Second, the Senator walked the walk - out of all the politicians I know, Rick Santorum is perhaps the most sincere. On the downside, however, Mr. Santorum allowed the media to define him, which is a rookie mistake. If you are a conservative Republican running for office in this country, you must assume that the media will try to hurt you.

They'll take things you say out of context, they'll bait you with questions designed to make you look foolish, and Rick Santorum allowed himself to be drawn into theological arguments. Like it or not, America is a secular nation, and while most of the folks continue to believe, they don't want religious instruction in the public arena.

Rick Santorum never quite learned that lesson, but all in all he ran a noble campaign. The Senator should be very proud.
Then Dick Morris was on to handicap the coming horserace. Morris said this: "President Obama is not leading in the polls. He's tied in the polling of likely voters, which is key. And being tied at this point as an incumbent means you probably lose because the undecided almost entirely goes against you."

Morris also said this: "He is completely abandoning the notion of any defense of his incumbency, but voters aren't stupid - they know he's the incumbent and they know these problems got worse with his presidency. By failing to defend his own record, he's just going to let Romney pile up points about his lousy record."

And that is just laughable, because Obama is beating in all the polls with registered voters, who are the people that vote. Morris is spinning and lying so much he should be taken off the air for dishonesty. If the economy is good 6 months from now Obama will crush Romney, and even if it's flat he will still beat Romney.

O'Reilly summarized the race this way, saying this: "This is a campaign between a guy who preaches self-reliance against a guy who says he's going to give you stuff."

Then Bernie Goldberg was on, who worked with Mike Wallace at CBS News, he was asked about his former colleague. Goldberg said this: "I agree with you that he was the best interviewer, and Mike also understood the medium in which he worked. He understood that there is a lot of show business in television news and he was a great performer. He was able to move seamlessly from putting on a velvet glove to putting on brass knuckles. He was also absolutely fair!"

Goldberg also commented on Barbara Walters claim that it's hard to discern most reporters political leanings, saying this: "This woman is clueless. Back when Bill Clinton was president, a reputable organization found that 89% of Washington journalists voted for Bill Clinton, while 7% voted for George Bush. Fast forward to the last election, when even liberal journalists admitted that the media were rooting for Barack Obama. So Barbara, we do know whether reporters are Republicans or Democrats - they're overwhelmingly Democrats and they're overwhelmingly liberal!"

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because it is not news. And he is just a comedian who is on to make jokes about liberals, with no liberal comedian on to make jokes about conservatives for balance.

Notice that O'Reilly almost totally ignored the Zimmerman murder story, but if the story was about a black man shooting a white teen you can bet the farm O'Reilly would have done the entire show about it. Proving once again how biased he is, and what a hack of a fraud journalist he is.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Fox News Mole Worked On The O'Reilly Factor
By: Steve - April 12, 2012 - 10:00am

The Fox News employee hired by Gawker to write about his experience inside the network has revealed himself as an associate producer on "The O'Reilly Factor."

Joe Muto, who joined Fox News in 2004, says he has been suspended, with pay and was escorted out of Fox News headquarters Wednesday by two nice gentlemen from security.

At 8:42pm Wednesday night, Muto wrote this on Gawker:
Two hours ago I was called into a meeting with Dianne Brandi, the Fox News Executive Vice President of Legal and Business Affairs and suspended indefinitely... with pay, oddly enough. They nailed me.

I am a weasel, a traitor, a sell-out and every bad word you can throw at me... but as of today, I am free, and I am ready to tell my story, which I wasn't able to fully do for the previous 36 hours.
Muto signs off, "Stay tuned for much, much more tomorrow."

Another Good Poll For Obama O'Reilly Has Ignored
By: Steve - April 12, 2012 - 9:00am

O'Reilly sure loves to report polls, but he only reports the minority of polls he cherry picks to make Romney look better and Obama look worse. He does not report the majority of polls that have Obama beating Romney in almost every category.

And a new Washington Post/ABC News poll finds President Obama leading Mitt Romney in almost every category.

The poll finds Obama with a double digit lead on protecting the middle class and handling of international affairs and health care.

Obama is seen as better on women's health, and women favor him heavily. But you will never see this reported on the Factor, by O'Reilly or Ingraham, because it shows there is a war on women by Republicans, and that they are losing that war badly.

The Tuesday 4-10-12 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - April 11, 2012 - 11:00am

Laura Ingraham filled in for O'Reilly again, and her TPM was called: Santorum drops out. Crazy Ingraham said this:
INGRAHAM: Now that Rick Santorum has suspended his campaign, the ball is fully in Mitt Romney's court. His campaign can no longer blame the travails of a long primary to explain polls that show his support lagging in swing states, among women, and in other key demographic groups.

We know what Barack Obama's strategy is going to be - paint Mitt Romney as a defender of the rich, an enemy of women's rights, an out-of-touch elitist who loves firing people, and a guy with mega-mansions and a car elevator.

Obama will continue his get-out-the-vote razzle-dazzle operations, complete with celebrity endorsements and a wife who shows up to sell his accomplishments on every entertainment platform known to man.

But Romney should take heart because many of us are convinced that voters actually want to see a serious debate about how to turn this country around. To get folks to rally for him, volunteer for him, go door-to-door for him, Romney needs to demonstrate quickly that he will be as tenacious in taking the fight to Obama as he was in taking it to Gingrich and Santorum.

There's chronic underemployment and unemployment, stagnant wages, rising prices for food and gasoline, record debt levels and deficit spending. So if the President does the divide-and-demonize dance during this election, Governor Romney should emerge as the adult in the room, offering a mature and fact-based plan to restore the American dream to all people.

The games Barack Obama has played with our money have brought us dangerously close to a point of no return. Game on!
Wow, that my friends is not only a bunch of lies, it's pure 100% right-wing propaganda. And I am going to predict right now that Romney will lose to President Obama. Proving that Laura Ingraham and O'Reilly are both right-wing fools that can not see reality.

Then Ingraham had Democratic strategist Robert Zimmerman and conservative Monica Crowley on to discuss it. Zimmerman said this: "The problem Mitt Romney has, is that he's painted himself into a corner. The curse of winning the Republican nomination is that it comes with him taking positions that are far right wing and out of the mainstream. He defined his candidacy not by economic growth, but by advocating deportation of undocumented workers and defunding Planned Parenthood."

But Crowley disagreed saying how she thinks Romney can beat Obama. Crowley said this: "He has to stay focused on making this election about Barack Obama and his record. The other challenge is that he has to give voters a compelling reason to vote for him, not just against Barack Obama. He has to put forth a proactive and positive agenda for America, and he has to do it with a joyful and upbeat attitude."

In other words, Crowley is saying Romney has to lie to the people about his far-right positions and try to spin them to believe that Obama has been a bad President. Which is not only dishonest, the people are not dumb enough to fall for that garbage.

Then Ingraham had the hero of the right Paul Ryan on, Ryan, whose budget proposal was slammed by President Obama as "social Darwinism," was on to defend his efforts.

Ryan said this: "We're used to these verbal tantrums from the President. What he has decided to do, instead of offering solutions of his own to prevent a debt crisis, was wait for the Republicans to offer their solutions and then attack them. We have the highest poverty rates in a generation and President Obama's policies are making it worse, so why should we keep throwing money at failed programs? We want to reform these programs to get people off of welfare and back to work."

And that's a lie, Ryan simply wants to give more tax breaks to millionaires who fund Republican campaigns and take everything away from the poor to pay for it. Which will never happen, and that is a fact. They even know it, he just put this insane budget forward to make the far-right base happy, even though they know it will never happen.

Ryan also had praise for Mitt Romney, saying this: "He reminds me of leaders from the 'greatest generation' - he's very civil, principled, and honorable. He has an earnest way about him like leaders from the 50's."

Then David Callahan & Erica Payne were on to talk about how President Obama is promoting the "Buffett Rule," which would insure that ultra-wealthy individuals pay their fair share of taxes.

Payne said this: "The 'Buffett Rule' is not nearly aggressive enough for me. Right after World War II people with incomes of more than a million dollars paid as much as 91% in taxes. We did that because we had a massive financial collapse and a war we had to pay for. When we had a problem we turned to the people who had the most money to solve it, and we're in the same position today."

Callahan added that fairness dictates higher taxes on investment income, saying this: "People living off their stocks and investments shouldn't be paying a lower tax rate than people who go to work every single day. It's one of the biggest loopholes we have and it makes no sense."

Ingraham argued the ridiculous right-wing spin that "49% of Americans are sharing none of the federal income tax burden and 10% of the income earners pay 70% of the federal tax burden."

Then Keith Watters and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on to talk about how George Zimmerman's attorneys abruptly quit Tuesday, complaining that they haven't been able to contact their client.

Guilfoyle said this: "It's odd that Zimmerman's attorneys had never met him, because usually you want to have a face-to-face interaction with your client. But with a bounty on his head, Zimmerman probably didn't want to be out in public or traveling."

Watters reported that Zimmerman has also improperly tried to contact the special prosecutor, saying this: "What we have again is Mr. Zimmerman not following instructions. He's not cooperating with his lawyers, he's going to the special prosecutor, and you see a pattern of behavior with this individual not being able to control himself."

Ingraham described Zimmerman's precarious legal position, saying this: "He is operating without counsel and he could very well be charged by this special prosecutor within days."

And Finally the insane far-right loon John Stossel was on, to argue for the legalization of drugs. Ingraham said this: "There's no indication that you would drive down addiction if you legalize drugs. In fact, you'd probably have more people using illicit drugs, which would be cheaper."

Stossel agreed, but insisted that legalization would still be a societal net plus, saying this: "More people would try things at first, and some of them would be hurt by it. But the current law doesn't stop people from using drugs and it causes all the crime. Drugs hurt people, but drug laws hurt more people! We don't have 'wine gangs' and 'beer cartels' - ending the crime would be such a wonderful thing. Plus, once you're an adult, don't you own your own body?"

For the record, Stossel is an idiot and wrong 99% of the time, but on this one issue he is right. Some drugs should be legal, but not all of them, pot should be legal, but not hard drugs.

Then the lame pinheads and patriots nonsense that is not even worth reporting.

The Monday 4-9-12 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - April 10, 2012 - 11:00am

The far-right loon Laura Ingraham filled in for O'Reilly, her TPM was called: The White House, the economy and women. Crazy Ingraham said this:
INGRAHAM: Keeping with the theme of suffering, on Good Friday the White House hosted a 'women in the economy' conference. This follows the relentless push by Democrats to gin up the contrived 'war on women' election year narrative.

The Obama campaign has made it clear that appealing to working women is a key part of the President's reelection strategy, and the White House confab was choreographed for maximum political pandering.

What happened to bringing people together rather than dividing them along racial, gender and socioeconomic lines? If you look at the facts, women are doing better than men. In U.S. cities, single women in their 20's without children make more than men, and almost 40% of working wives out-earn their husbands.

In 49 of the last 50 months, unemployment was lower for women than for men, and women receive about three-fifths of bachelor's degrees. Three-fourths of women now say they can advance as far as their talents will take them, and nearly as many report that they have not experienced discrimination in the workplace.

I know the President would like to take credit, but these gains began long before his inauguration. We do not need to waste taxpayer money on transparently political events designed to reinforce the bogus notion that Democrats care more about women.
Then Ingraham had the Republican South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley on to discuss Democratic claims that her party is anti-female. With nobody from the left (or the Obama administration) on to provide the balance.

Haley said this: "President Obama doesn't want us talking about his record, and he doesn't want us talking about the debt or the unemployment rate. This is a President who is trying to create distractions - there is no 'war on women,' women are doing well, and women are thoughtful. We care about jobs and the economy and health care and education, so don't call us 'victims.'"

Governor Haley (a Romney supporter) also predicted that Mitt Romney will eventually be able to close President Obama's lead among women, saying this: "We haven't had the opportunity that President Obama has had to get out there and talk and I hope the Republican nominee will focus on those groups we're weak with. Governor Romney has to go out there and he has the best 'golden bullet' in the world, Ann Romney."

Then Juan Williams & Mary K. Ham were on to talk about President Obama's former "spiritual adviser," Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who spoke at a church last week and returned to his theme of "white privilege."

Hey guess what Ingraham, Obama does not go to his church anymore so all this right-wing propaganda is meaningless and nothing but right-wing garbage.

Williams said this: "There's no shortage of race-baiters in American society, but there is something deeper going on here. Race is a major issue as the presidential campaign approaches and I think people are playing on it. People are playing on racial anger and racial fears, maybe because they want publicity."

Ham criticized Democrats and liberals for sometimes encouraging racial demagogues, saying this: "The left countenances some of these guys who say pretty racist stuff in the pulpit, then they want to lecture the rest of us about having a 'national conversation on race,' which is a political tool so we can have a narrative that benefits the left."

Then Brit Hume was on to talk about how some Democrats have begun to focus on Romney's Mormon faith. Even though it was someone in the media not in congress or the White House that said it, and the Republicans have also slammed Romney for being Mormon, but neither Ingraham or Hume reported that fact.

Hume said this: "We've had a lot of members of Congress and a lot of prominent people who are Mormons, and is there any evidence that their Mormonism has affected the conduct of their public policy? I would say no, so where is the evidence that Mormonism is some kind of malevolent force? Harsh criticism of people's religion goes over badly with most Americans."

Ingraham called out MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell, who mocked Mormonism as a religion invented by a man who was caught having sex with the maid, saying this: "The things he said were incredibly vicious and it would be nice to hear someone like Senator Harry Reid, a Mormon and a Democrat, speak out against that kind of rhetoric. If that kind of stuff was said about Islam there would be a national outcry."

Then Crystal McCrary was on to talk about the special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case who will not have a grand jury proceeding; instead, she will decide whether or not George Zimmerman will face criminal charges.

McCrary said this: "This allows all the noise that has been out there in the press to quiet down, and she can now make a decision independent of those factors. George Zimmerman will still get a preliminary hearing at which his defense attorneys can make the claim that it was self-defense."

Then Rebecca Rose Woodland and Jonna Spilbor were on to discuss the case of the 26-year-old NFL cheerleader Sarah Jones, who is accused of having sex with a 16-year-old student when she was a teacher. And this is tabloid garbage so I will not report on it.

And finally Ingraham played a tape of O'Dummy's 2005 interview with newsman Mike Wallace, who died Saturday at age 93. Which I do not report on because it was an old taped interview that has already been on the show.

Then the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense, that is not even worth reporting.

Haley Spins For The Republicans On O'Reilly Factor
By: Steve - April 10, 2012 - 10:00am

And she did it while Laura Ingraham was filling in for O'Reilly. Not to mention, Ingraham did not have anyone on from the other side to give the opposing view, so it was nothing but 100% right-wing spin and propaganda.

Now think about this, O'Reilly let her do it, because he supports the Republicans on the issue, as he does on 99% of the issues. To even let Laura Ingraham host his show proves he is a right-wing hack, because no real (so-called) non-partisan Independent would ever let the partisan hack Laura Ingraham host their show.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley (R) defended her party against charges of a war on women, saying on Fox News The O'Reilly Factor Monday night that women are doing well:
HALEY: This is a president that is trying to create distractions. There is no war on women. Women are doing well.
Now you have to wonder about Haley’s definition of well. Because women accounted for the entire drop in labor force participation during the recession, and 88 percent of jobs created since the end of the recession went to men.

In Haley's state of South Carolina, women are paid just 76 cents for every dollar a man makes, and own just 28 percent of businesses, despite making up slightly more than half of the state's population. As with the nation as a whole, women also face higher poverty rates in the state, with 19 percent below the poverty line, compared to 15 percent of men.

“If you don’t feel this is an attack on women, you need to go home and talk to your wife and your daughters,” Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) said after Republican lawmakers spent months aggressively attacking women's access to contraception and their right to chose.

Haley, a key Mitt Romney surrogate, has become her party's face in responding to charges of the war on women. But she'll likely need a better counter-narrative than woman are doing just fine, as Romney appears to be hemorrhaging female support. A new Washington Post/ABC News poll out this morning shows him trailing Obama by 19 points among women.

Zimmerman Donation Website Has Racist Photo On It
By: Steve - April 9, 2012 - 11:00am

And this story will never be reported by O'Reilly, because he does not want to report the news on it, he is too busy covering for Zimmerman.

According to NBC News, George Zimmerman has launched a new website. On the website Zimmerman solicits donations to support his "living expenses and legal defense."

He wrote this: "I have created a Paypal account solely linked on this website as I would like to provide an avenue to thank my supporters personally and ensure that any funds provided are used only for living expenses and legal defense, in lieu of my forced inability to maintain employment. I will also personally, maintain accountability of all funds received."

He also features a photo of a vandalized black cultural center at Ohio State University. And the other photo on the website is from a rally held by the crazy far-right Koran-burning pastor Terry Jones.

NBC News published a story confirming the authenticity of the website: "Attorneys confirmed to NBC News that the site, which domain records show was created Sunday, is real and is operated by Zimmerman himself."

Notice that the website was only reported by the mainstream media, nobody at Fox or any other right-wing news outlet ever said a word about it, including the so-called non-partisan Bill O'Reilly.

Republican Congressman Calls Ryan Budget A Joke
By: Steve - April 8, 2012 - 11:00am

And of course O'Reilly ignored that story, to claim only President Obama and the liberals think it's a bad budget plan. Even his friend Newt Gingrich said the Ryan budget was bad, and called it right-wing social engineering.

But O'Reilly never reports any of that, because he is too busy defending the plan, and spinning out the right-wing propaganda that only Democrats oppose it.

Rep. Connie Mack IV (R-FL), who is running for the Senate, strongly criticized the House Republican budget authored by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) this past weekend.

At a Tea Party forum in Orlando, Mack explained why he didn’t vote on the Ryan budget. “I was here in Florida campaigning,” Mack said. “You know that budget was a joke, doesn’t balance the budget for years.”

And while the Florida congressman will likely be hammered by fellow Republicans, as presidential candidate Newt Gingrich was when he called Ryan’s budget “right-wing social engineering” last year, Mack is right.

The GOP budget doesn’t actually balance the budget.

In fact, it makes the debt worse. “Deficits would never drop below 4.4 percent of GDP, and would rise to more than 5 percent of GDP by 2022,” Center for American Progress Tax and Budget Policy Director Michael Linden noted.

And btw folks, Mitt Romney also supports the Ryan budget plan. Even though it takes a massive amount of money away from programs that help the poor, while not cutting anything from the wealthy, and it would pretty much end Medicare as we know it. Not to mention, it even has more big tax breaks for the wealthy, which nobody in America supports but the Republicans in Congress.

The Friday 4-6-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 7, 2012 - 11:00am

Juan Williams filled in for O'Reilly so there was no TPM. Williams started the show with President Obama's large lead over Mitt Romney among women voters. He asked Fox News contributors Tammy Bruce and Jehmu Green to analyze it.

Green said this: "Women are running towards Obama, and they are fleeing the GOP. I will admit that the 'war on women' message that Democrats have been pushing is an oversimplification, but there have been bills across the nation that go after women's reproductive rights."

And of course the conservative Tammy Bruce disagreed and said that many women will eventually embrace the conservative message, saying this: "Women should fear government's involvement in our lives. The conservative ideal is that we have enough financial independence and freedom to make choices for ourselves. Romney needs to be clear that we have two choices - are women going to be treated like wards of the state, or the conservative message is that women are smart and independent."

Then Janine Turner and Leslie Marshall were on to talk about the Canadian Jenna Talackova, who was born a male, and who was initially banned from competing in the Miss Universe contest, but she may now be allowed to enter.

Turner said this: "It's a private enterprise and they have the right to set whatever rules they want. But I feel naturally born women are at a disadvantage, especially if they haven't had breast augmentation."

Marshall advised beauty pageant aficionados to get used to this brave new world, saying this" "This is going to happen more because more people are going to change their gender. The transgender community is a part of our society."

Then Williams had defense attorney Joey Jackson on to assess the special prosecutor's progress. Jackson said this: "There's a process here, and I think the special prosecutor needs to conduct a full and fair investigation. We don't want her to make an arrest predicated upon public outrage; we want her to make an arrest predicated on the facts. We want to make sure that every stone is overturned in this case, and I predict she will indict Zimmerman based on the facts."

Williams thinks that Zimmerman should have been arrested weeks ago, saying this: "If we're talking about public confidence and a fair investigation, none of that would be precluded by having him arrested. I think it would inspire confidence in the process."

Then Geraldo was on to talk about Charles Manson coming up for parole. And my question is why, and who cares? He will never get out so why even report on it, this was a total waste of tv time.

Then Williams had Ben Stein on to talk about the jobs report and oil. The unemployment rate dropped to 8.2% in March, but only a few jobs were created and many Americans have exited the labor force.

Stein said this: "The oil companies haven't done anything wrong. They don't set the prices and they're losing market share all over the world to the big state-owned oil companies. President Obama has kind of a 1937 socialist youth league approach to all economic questions - he goes after the oil companies and Wall Street. The oil companies are not doing anything illegal and the vast majority of people on Wall Street are good, honest people who are just doing their jobs."

Williams thinks that President Obama is right to go after big oil, saying this: "The American people are mad at the oil companies. They're shipping more oil overseas and their salaries are over the roof."

And finally Williams played a tape of O'Reilly's recent interview with Timothy Cardinal Dolan.

Then the pinheads and patriots nonsense, where Juan Williams named O'Reilly the patriot for simply making a surprise appearance on Jon Stewart's Daily Show. Really Juan? Can you possibly kiss O'Reilly's ass any better, give me a break. How does that make O'Reilly a patriot?

O'Reilly Ignored The Voter ID Law Suppression Report
By: Steve - April 7, 2012 - 10:00am

And the reason O'Reilly ignored the report is because he supports the Republican voter suppression ID laws the Republicans are passing (or trying to pass) all over the country. Even though there is almost no actual voter fraud in America, and the voter ID laws are only meant to block people who vote Democratic from voting.

Wednesday morning the Center for American Progress released Voter Suppression 101, a report documenting conservative efforts to disenfranchise voters through state restrictions on voting.

At a press call accompanying the release, former Civil Rights Movement leader and current Congressman Jim Clyburn (D-SC) was asked for his personal feelings on seeing another wave of voter disenfranchisement after he fought so hard to end Jim Crow. His response:
CLYBURN: I cannot remember -- even sitting in an Orangeburg County jail -- when I had as much anxiety as I’m experiencing today.

Back then, even when we were at the back of the bus and we were not able to sit down at lunch counters, we really felt strong that what’s happening to me here in Orangeburg, SC or Columbia, SC, ah, if I can get my plight before the United States Supreme Court, the promise of this country will be delivered for me.

That’s what we felt, and I can remember our discussions in meetings -- yeah, we’re going to jail now. We are going to be convicted. But we know that that conviction is going to be overturned by the United States Supreme Court.

I don’t feel that today.
Clyburn is right to be anxious. When the first voter ID law came before the Supreme Court four years ago, the Court completely abdicated its responsibility to strike them down -- despite the fact that they were only able to find one example of actual voter fraud in the last 140 years that would have been prevented by a voter ID law.

Four years before that, the Court’s five conservatives abdicated its responsibility to strike down partisan gerrymandering of Congress and state legislatures. Yet, when George W. Bush saw the presidency slipping out of his fingertips, the Court’s conservatives suddenly deemed that to be a massive constitutional violation worthy of their attention.

The Thursday 4-5-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 6, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Democrats on the attack. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Last night I told you the Democratic Party's strategy to reelect President Obama will be to attack Mitt Romney and the Republican Party, and presto, a few minutes later Howard Dean showed up on MSNBC and accused Republicans of 'gay-bashing, Muslim-bashing, Latino-bashing, immigrant-bashing, and women-bashing.'

What we have here is the Democrats trying to put together a 'coalition of the aggrieved,' millions of Americans who feel they are not getting what they deserve, and of course President Obama is here to help them.

Here's how the campaign is going to unfold: The coalition of the aggrieved will be stoked up by guys like Howard Dean and other liberal bomb throwers. They will say America is not a fair country and the only person who can make it fair is President Obama. The bomb throwers will then slime Mitt Romney in every way possible.

On the other side, conservatives and Republicans will make a mistake if they sink into that swamp. Everybody knows President Obama, there's no need to demonize the man.

But everybody does not know how much danger there is in uncontrolled federal spending - that is what Mitt Romney and the Republicans have to make crystal clear. If they can get that point across, everybody will be aggrieved, not just a few selected minorities.
Haha, yeah you are a genius O'Reilly, NOT! Everybody knows Obama and the Democrats will attack Romney and the Republicans because that's how politics works you biased idiot. Now guess what, Romney and the Republicans will attack Obama and the Democrats, because that's how politics works.

You act like the Democrats and Obama are doing something odd or wrong, but they are not, they are doing what all political people do, attack the other guy. And btw, Obama and the Democrats are using the truth to attack Romney and the Republicans, so they are just informing the American people.

Because Republicans are guilty of 'gay-bashing, Muslim-bashing, Latino-bashing, immigrant-bashing, and women-bashing.' And let's not forget what happened after Bush got in, he almost ruined the country, and O'Reilly wants everyone to forget that.

Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about President Obama slamming the Supreme Court and his claim that it would be "unprecedented" if the Court overturns Obamacare.

Kelly said this: "The Department of Justice has acknowledged, that the federal courts and the Supreme Court have the ability to declare a law unconstitutional if that's what they conclude. It's not unusual for a president to want the Supreme Court to uphold a law that he worked hard to get passed, but the President got himself into some trouble and then he tried to dial it back."

O'Reilly said he thinks that President Obama may have made it more likely that the Supreme Court will rule against him, saying this: "The justices know what President Obama did and some of them will think he was out of line. That's going to hurt his cause."

Black author Shelby Steele has written that Trayvon Martin's killing by a white man was an anomaly because "black teenagers today are afraid of other black teenagers, not whites." So O'Reilly had Professor Marc Lamont Hill on to comment.

Hill said this: "Shelby Steele is wrong all over the place. The first thing he's wrong about is the premise that black civil rights leaders were outraged that Trayvon Martin was killed by a non-black person. The truth is that we're outraged because there was no justice and the shooter was allowed to go home."

Professor Hill then turned to black-on-black violence, saying this: "It's a real issue and there's no black leader worth his or her salt who doesn't work to address it."

And of course O'Reilly agreed with Shelby Steele's argument that too many young black men live in perpetual fear of other blacks, saying this: "The good black kids fear the killers who are running wild in Chicago. There are no white gangs running wild in Chicago, that's not who's doing the homicides."

Then Jesse Watters was on to talk about Chicago, which has racked up more than 100 murders so far this year. Here is what some folks told Jesse: "It starts at home because you have a lot of people born into families without fathers" ... "Money is not enough, it's going to take family-to-family and block-to-block to not only bring the crime down, but to raise the value of life" ..."We've got to do more graduations than funerals to turn this thing around."

Then Watters was back in the studio, he reported that most of the killing is drug-related, saying this: "They're fighting over smaller scraps because the economy is bad and white people aren't buying as many drugs. Profits are down and they're fighting over turf and respect. One of the main beefs is that Arabs are buying up all the stores in these communities and employing the gang-bangers. So they're running drugs in and out of these Arab-owned stores that are just fronts."

Then John Stossel was on to promote his new book. Stossel said this: "I was a consumer reporter, and I used to call on government to fix things with more regulation. It took me a long time to see that it doesn't work - there are too many regulations and that crushes entrepreneurs."

Stossel related a story to illustrate the perpetual failure of collectivism, saying this: "It's intuitive to think that 'sharing is caring,' but the Pilgrims tried that and for two years they nearly starved because some people didn't work as hard. It's called the 'tragedy of the commons' - you don't take care of something that everybody owns. We have Thanksgiving only because they changed the rules and said they'd have private property."

Proving once again that John Stossel is a certified right-wing idiot, and O'Reilly is worse than he is for giving this loon a forum on tv to spew out his insane right-wing garbage.

Then the Culture Warriors Jeanine Pirro and Gretchen Carlson discussed a new report showing that teens are drinking and drugging more than ever.

Pirro said this: "Teenage binge drinking is an epidemic, and drug use is an epidemic. The consequences are tragic - murder, rape, sexually transmitted diseases, drunk driving accidents. It's time we started prosecuting parents who allow underage drinking parties."

Carlson said this: "I think it's more of the public imagery that kids are seeing and the fact that more things are acceptable at a younger age. If you start this before 14, you're a goner, and I believe we could have preventative programs."

O'Reilly said some of the blame is our values-free education system, saying this: "Public schools won't ever tell kids what's right and what's wrong, teachers are petrified to say that if you're getting drunk at age thirteen you're an idiot. There's a breakdown in the public schools."

Wow are these people stupid. You three are right-wing idiots. Do you think telling kids not to do something will stop them, if you do you need a check up from the neck up. In fact, telling them not to do it will probably make them want to do it even more. And you three old right-wing fools are not going to change anything, if anything you will most likely make it worse.

If I was a young person and I heard that Bill O'Reilly said to not do something, I would probably do it just to piss him off.

And finally Martha MacCallum & Steve Doocy were on for the ridiculous waste of tv time Factor News Quiz. That I do not report on because it's not news, it's nonsense.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the total waste of time pinheads and patriots.

Juliet Huddy Lied About The Ratings For Sarah Palin
By: Steve - April 6, 2012 - 10:00am

Huddy said this on the Wednesday Factor show:
HUDDY: "Sarah Palin won in the ratings, and that wasn't a big surprise. Katie Couric isn't the biggest ratings grabber and her return to morning television wasn't that big of a deal. The Today Show was up 10% from normal with Sarah Palin."
And that would be what unbiased people call a lie, because the Today Show ratings with Palin were up about 2 percent.

Palin's appearance as a guest host for Today resulted in a modest increase in the ratings for NBC (5.497 million viewers, compared to an average of 5.39 million viewers in the first quarter of 2012).

New York magazine noted that "beyond her prime-time commentary, Palin hasn't turned into the television asset Ailes had hoped" and that her decision not to run for president (announced on Mark Levin's radio show and not Fox News) had short-circuited her appeal as a pundit for the network.

In January 2010, Fox hyped Palin's debut appearance as a Fox pundit on the O'Reilly Factor as hitting "the nearly 4 million viewer jackpot." The rest of her time at Fox has not been as successful.

Her first TV special for Fox aired April 1, 2010. The special, Real American Stories, caused controversy when interview subjects like actor/musician LL Cool J alleged that Fox was "misrepresenting" an old interview as new "in order to promote Sarah Palins Show."

It was also not a ratings success. Real American Stories had 10% lower ratings than the episode of On The Record with Greta Van Susteren that aired in the same slot the previous week. The special lost 183,000 viewers from its Hannity lead-in.

When Fox announced Palin's hiring, they said she would host "periodic episodes" of Real American Stories. But only one episode has been released since 2010.

Her reality show on TLC, Sarah Palin's Alaska, debuted in November 2010 with 5 million viewers, but by the second episode the ratings had declined 40% to 3 million viewers, and as the Hollywood Reporter noted, "the median age of the show is 57 -- that's 15 years older than TLC's average."

Entertainment Weekly later reported that TLC has "no plans" to produce a second season of the show.

Palin and her husband Todd reportedly pitched a different reality show to TLC and A&E, but both networks passed on the program. A "network insider" told The Hollywood Reporter that "I think it's safe to say her time has passed."

And of course O'Reilly never reported any of this, or that Huddy lied about the 10% ratings increase for the Today Show when Palin was on it.

The Wednesday 4-4-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 5, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Will the media skew the election in Obama's favor? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: There's no doubt it will be Mitt Romney running against President Obama in November, and the President is already defining his opponent as a guy who cares only about the rich and would harm everyday Americans because the Republican Party wants to cut government spending.

Thus President Obama will say that if you don't want to pay for birth control, you're anti-woman, if you don't want to spend more on education you don't care about the kids, and if you call for Medicare reform you want to hurt the elderly. The Democrats will paint themselves as the party of compassion, while the Republicans are the bad people who just don't care.

Liberal Americans will buy that, but it is those in the middle who will decide the election. President Obama has one huge advantage in courting them - the media.

The Associated Press is the most widely distributed news service in the country, and the other day its chairman Dean Singleton introduced President Obama as a man who 'pushed through the biggest economic recovery plan in history and led a government reorganization of two of the big three auto manufacturers to save them from oblivion.'

I'm surprised Singleton wasn't wearing an Obama button! The President understands that most in the media will back him, but it will go beyond that, as MSNBC demonstrated when host Lawrence O'Donnell said Mormonism was founded by a man who 'got caught having sex with the maid and explained to his wife that God told him to do it.' What a smear!

And so the campaign is underway and it could be the dirtiest in the nation's history.
Then O'Reilly had Dick Morris on to agree with his biased garbage and talk about the campaign. Morris said this: "This will be horrible, and that MSNBC clip was absolutely revolting. There are 15-million Americans who are Mormon - if he used the same words going after Islam they'd have fired him! It's notable that he was not reprimanded and not fired."

Morris also theorized that President Obama's current lead in the polls may be deceptive, saying this: "Obama is up by seven points among 'registered voters,' but there's only one pollster who is tracking 'likely voters,' who are much more expensive to poll. Obama and Romney are tied among likely voters, meaning Obama has a lot of people out there who would vote for him but won't show up."

Then Mark Eiglarsh & Jude Faccidomo were on to talk about the shooting of Trayvon Martin that focused attention on Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, which allows someone to use deadly force in self-defense.

Eiglarsh said this: "Even if a judge finds that George Zimmerman was the aggressor, that's separate from what he was confronted with at the time he used deadly force. If he reasonably feared death or great bodily harm at the time he pulled the trigger, case closed! He would be legally entitled to immunity under 'Stand Your Ground.'"

But Jude Faccidomo thinks that Zimmerman could still be found guilty, saying this: "You can't bring yourself to the fray and then apply 'Stand Your Ground.' Mark is doing what a lot of the media is doing - confusing the difference between 'Stand Your Ground' and self defense."

Then William Dear was on to talk about his new book in which he argues that O.J. Simpson did not kill Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman. Dear said this: "In all probability this is the actual knife that was used to kill them, holding up a hunting knife. This came from the storage facility of O.J. Simpson's son Jason - he was 24 at the time, 5'11", 235 pounds, and on probation for assaulting his previous employer with a knife. This knife was designed to cut and to kill and when you compare this to the laceration on the skull of Nicole it matches perfectly."

O'Reilly questioned why the LAPD has ignored Dear's theory, saying this: "Why aren't the cops taking your knife and doing all the forensics? We're going to call the police chief and the attorney general of California, we'll follow up on this."

Then Lou Dobbs was on to talk about tax rates and the 1 percent. O'Reilly asked Dobbs if he and those other dastardly "one percenters" are paying enough in taxes. Then Dobbs cried like a little bitch about how he pays too much in taxes, and for that he should have to pay 25% more for being a rich cry baby.

Dobbs said this: "People don't even realize what we're paying as individuals, because the employer withholds the money. By the time we're done, it's more than 50% - we're crushed when it comes to paying taxes. The top 5% of earners in this country are paying 60% of federal income taxes; they're paying too much and our federal government is spending far too much!"

And of course O'Reilly agreed then added a few stats of his own: "There are about 1.4 million 'one percenters,' Americans earning more than $344,000 a year, and they fork over 37% of all the federal income tax collected."

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because he is a joke and a has been comedian who is only on to make jokes about liberals, with no liberal comedian on to make jokes about conservatives.

And finally Juliet Huddy was on for did you see that, she talked about the Tuesday morning battle between Katie Couric, who guest hosted on ABC's Good Morning America, and Sarah Palin, who sat in on NBC's Today Show.

Huddy said this: "Sarah Palin won in the ratings, and that wasn't a big surprise. Katie Couric isn't the biggest ratings grabber and her return to morning television wasn't that big of a deal. The Today Show was up 10% from normal with Sarah Palin."

Huddy then turned her attention to the YouTube video in which a baby bites his big brother's finger. "This has 500-million views and the family is making money off of this because when you hit a certain amount of views on YouTube you can participate in revenue sharing. So they've made $500,000."

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as it can get pinheads and patriots nonsense.

O'Reilly Would Shoot A 4-Year Old If He Had A Gun
By: Steve - April 5, 2012 - 10:00am

O'Reilly On Shooting An Armed Assailant: "I Don't Care If He's 4 Years Old, If The Guy's Got A Gun On You"



Only in the sick & twisted world of Bill O'Reilly is it considered to be no big deal to go ahead and put a bullet into the body of another human being simply because the Law of that land might allow for you to legally do so and still possibly not be charged with any criminal offenses.

Only in Billy Sick & Twistedville could one actually believe and openly declare that putting bullets into the body of a 4 year old child is a reasonable, logical, sound and acceptable form of self defense.

Yes folks, in O'Reillyland, a 4 year old is magically transformed into "A Guy if he's Got A Gun On You" and it's all ok to pump that 4 year old Guy-body full of hot lead for his evil and wicked criminal behaviour!

And what is even worse is that O'Dummy actually believes 90% of Americans agree with his insane argument. Earth to O'Reilly, I guarantee you 90% of Americans do not think it would be ok to shoot and kill a 4 year old child if he had a gun on you.

The Tuesday 4-3-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 4, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Government bureaucrat resigns after spending taxpayer money on lavish party. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Martha Johnson has been forced to resign as the chief of the General Services Administration. That's because she presided over a conference near Las Vegas that cost taxpayers a whopping $820,000. They spent $146,000 on catered food and drinks, including $44 per person for breakfast.

It cost $130,000 just to scout the hotel location on six separate trips and they spent $4 per shrimp at a cocktail reception. This kind of stuff demonstrates the mindset of the federal government - America is $16 trillion in debt, so what if we're paying $4 per shrimp? The money fountain never stops!

I've been fortunate and can buy pretty much whatever I want, but I'm not going to pay $4 for a shrimp, ever! What has happened in the public sector is cynicism - taxpayer money means nothing. The Obama administration is quite clear, it is going to continue record spending no matter what the debt is.

Just today the President attacked Congressman Paul Ryan's call for fiscal austerity. To be fair, the President did order the firing of Martha Johnson, but he had to. All of us should take the abuse of taxpayer money personally because it's our money.

It's being wasted over and over, whether it's terrible investments like Solyndra or the failure to watch where entitlement money goes or the lavish conferences for government employees. The abuse of taxpayer dollars is now an epidemic and it must stop!
Okay, so one woman in Government spent money like an idiot, that does not mean we should cut all the money to the poor like O'Reilly and the Republicans want to do. We should cut most of the debt by raising taxes on the wealthy and dropping the tax breaks for the oil companies that are robbing us blind.

Then O'Reilly had Karl Rove on, who also denounced out-of-control government spending. With no Democratic guest for balance, just the biased Karl Rove.

Rove said this: "There is a sense of entitlement among some federal employees, and what really gets me about this is that someone did something that is potentially illegal. The government sets fixed rates for what rooms can cost, so the hotel padded the bill for catering by $41,000 to make up for what they were losing on the rooms."

Rove also said this: "This is indicative of what this administration is doing - the $825 billion stimulus bill had tens of millions dollars for a commission to study the use of animated characters to sell breakfast cereal to children. We have a government working group that is developing standards to get rid of Tony the Tiger!"

Then Monica Crowley & Alan Colmes were on to talk about how Hillary Clinton smacked down Rush Limbaugh for referring to law student Sandra Fluke as a slut. Crowley said this: "I went back to the 1990's, and I found two examples where Hillary Clinton made some rather lukewarm criticisms of bomb-throwers on the left. One was Louis Farrakhan and the other was of Rev. Jeremiah Wright during the 2008 primary season."

Colmes applauded Clinton for answering a direct question about Rush Limbaugh, saying this: "She was responding to a question, she didn't bring it up, and she was responding to a current event."

Crazy O'Reilly claimed that Clinton was exacting a measure of revenge, saying this: "I think this was about payback to Rush Limbaugh, who was really brutal toward Hillary Clinton."

Hey O'Reilly and Crowley, maybe she was just telling the truth when asked a question about Limbaugh, did you two right-wing idiots ever think about that, of course not because you are partisan hacks.

Then O'Reilly attacked a NY Times writer. Writing in the New York Times about the Trayvon Martin shooting, author Rich Benjamin accused George Zimmerman of "taking out his handgun and shooting the youth in cold blood."

Benjamin was on to defend his accusation, saying this: "I tried to put myself in the shoes of Trayvon Martin. He was a 17-year-old talking to his girlfriend when an adult came up to him, and adult with no badge or uniform, and then an altercation started. The end result was that Trayvon was murdered in cold blood."

So of course O'Reilly slammed Benjamin for rushing to judgment, saying this: "You weren't there but you have convicted Zimmerman. There is evidence on both sides that there was an altercation, but you continue to say 'murder in cold blood.' That's morally wrong! You're whipping people up by saying that."

Even though O'Reilly did the very same thing in the Casey Anthony case by saying she was guilty, she was then found not guilty and O'Reilly said he still thinks she is guilty.

Then Rory Cooper was on to talk about the Obama ad accusing Mitt Romney of being in the pocket of big oil. And btw, Rory Cooper was a Department of Energy official in the Bush administration, so he is biased to the right.

Cooper said this: "This is so unimaginative. These are the same attacks that you heard leveled at President Bush for eight years, but in 2008 President Obama took more money from oil than any of his rivals. This isn't about money, it's about policy, and President Obama's policies have so failed that he's stuck demonizing opponents."

O'Reilly then pointed out that Mitt Romney and the Republicans have raised far more money from oil companies than Democrats and President Obama in this election cycle, concluding that "big oil wants the GOP to win."

Then Kimberly Guilfoyle & Lis Wiehl were on for is it legal. Walter Bagdasarian was found guilty of posting an explicit threat against President Obama on the Internet, but a federal court later overruled the conviction. Wiehl said this: "The federal court looked to intent. He was making these rants at 1AM, he was drunk, and these weren't deemed real threats."

Guilfoyle said this: "The statute is quite specific and this man willfully wrote and posted this threat. A very liberal judge felt this was appropriate free speech."

Wiehl turned to the case of 26-year-old Cincinnati Bengals cheerleader Sarah Jones, who is accused of having sex with a high school student when she was a teacher, saying this: "There are sexually explicit text messages and she's charged with sexual abuse. But the boy's parents don't want the prosecution to go forward, that's what's so crazy."

Really? And this is real news how?

And finally Charles Krauthammer ended the show with his take on the GOP race and the upcoming Pennsylvania primary, saying this: "Romney should put a ton of money for ads in Santorum's home state, to scare him away or beat him. But all of his speeches and interviews and rhetoric should be about Obama, without a word about Santorum. Today Obama went after Romney by name - the campaign has already started on the other side so Romney has to counter-attack or he'll get defined early."

O'Reilly also asked Krauthammer about Romney's decision to have an expensive renovation done on his beachfront home in California. Krauthammer said this: "It's a huge mistake. Romney has been running for the presidency for six years and he knows about optics - this will be used to build a narrative that he's a patrician and out of touch."

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

O'Reilly Ignored Record Heat Wave For March
By: Steve - April 4, 2012 - 10:00am

Two winters ago O'Reilly reported on the big snowstorms with the biased right-winger Joe Bastardi from Fox, and even made jokes about Al Gore saying Global Warming is real when we had all the massive snowstorms (including a 16 inch storm) during winter.

O'Reilly implied that it proves there is no Global Warming, even though that is ridiculous, and O'Reilly claims to believe in Global Warming. But now when we have record heat in March, O'Reilly is silent. He has not reported on the record heat one time, not once.

The final data is in for the unprecedented March heat wave that was “unmatched in recorded history” for the U.S. (and Canada). New heat records swamped cold records by the stunning ratio of 35.3 to 1.

This ratio is almost off the charts, even with the brutally warm August we had, as this chart from Capital Climate shows.

For the year to date, new heat records are beating cold records by 22 to 1, which trumps the pace of the last decade by more than a factor of 10!

I like the statistical aggregation across the country, since it gets us beyond the oft-repeated point that you can’t pin any one record temperature on global warming. A 2009 analysis shows that the average ratio for the 2000s was 2.04-to-1, a sharp increase from previous decades. Lead author Dr. Gerald Meehl explained, “If temperatures were not warming, the number of record daily highs and lows being set each year would be approximately even.”

Meteorologist Jason Samenow points out just how extreme the heat wave was: “More than 7,700 daily record high temperatures were set (or tied, compared to just 287 record lows), in some cases by mind blowing margins and over multiple days. In several instances in the Great Lakes and Upper Midwest region, morning lows even bested record highs and high temperatures soared above mid-summer norms.”

Many of the countries leading climatologists and meteorologists have looked at the data and concluded that like a baseball player on steroids, our climate system is breaking records at an unnatural pace.

Weather Channel meteorologist Stu Ostro calls the current heat wave “surreal” and explained that “While natural factors are contributing to this warm spell, given the nature of it and its context with other extreme weather events and patterns in recent years there is a high probability that global warming is having an influence upon its extremity.”

Meteorologist Dr. Jeff Masters has said, “this is not the atmosphere I grew up with.” He published a detailed statistical analysis concluding, “It is highly unlikely the warmth of the current ‘Summer in March’ heat wave could have occurred unless the climate was warming.”

Climate Central pointed out that given the intensity, duration, and geographical breadth of the heat wave, “this may be an unprecedented event since modern U.S. weather records began in the late 19th century.” They interviewed several top scientists who explained global warming’s likely role in helping to make this extreme event so unique.

Now someone answer this question for me: If O'Reilly actually believed in Global Warming would he make the ridiculous claim that a big snowstorm (during winter) proves that Global Warming is not real, and would he make jokes about Al Gore and the snow amount.

Would a so-called Global Warming believer also ignore the record heat wave story in March?

The answers are no, no, no, and no.

That's because O'Reilly is a biased right-wing fraud, who is lying when he says he believes in Global Warming. His reporting, and non-reporting prove it. Think about this, all the other news shows reported it, O'Reilly and Fox News are the only so-called journalists that ignored the story. But if we had a 16 inch snowstorm (during winter when it is supposed to snow) O'Reilly and his idiotic right-wing friends declare there is no Global Warming.

The Monday 4-2-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 3, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: A decisive week for the GOP. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Tuesday is the Wisconsin primary - polls show Mitt Romney leading Rick Santorum by seven points. If the Governor does win it's pretty much over and the Republican Party can shift into trying to diminish President Obama. The polls won't matter until the debates next fall; that is where the election will be won or lost.

The three debates will be heavily watched and if Mr. Romney can hold his own he is likely to defeat President Obama. That's because Mr. Obama's leadership is in question - the economy is still shaky, oil prices are hurting working Americans, and the President's vision of an entitlement state funded by wealthy Americans is controversial.

But Governor Romney has problems of his own - he's perceived as being out of touch with the regular folks, he has not been able to convince conservatives he's one of them, and his personality is kind of laid back.

This is the most important election of our lifetimes because it offers a stark contrast between big government income redistribution and small government self-reliance. But all the bloviating in the world won't matter until those debates next fall.
Now that is some big time right-wing spin, O'Reilly said this: "If Mr. Romney can hold his own he is likely to defeat President Obama. That's because Mr. Obama's leadership is in question - the economy is still shaky."

Really? Not! Only Republicans are questioning the leadership from Obama, and the economy is not shaky, it's doing great and getting better. O'Reilly just will not admit it or report it. And nt only that, the market is over 13.000 and experts predict it could go to 14.000. O'Reilly ignores it all to spin for Romney, who will not win if the economy stays on the path it is right now.

Then O'Dummy had Brit Hume on to come up with some questions he would like to pose to President Obama. Hume's first question for the President was this: "You said today, sir, that it would be unprecedented for the Supreme Court to overturn your health care reform law. Would it not be equally unprecedented for Congress to force people to buy a commercial product?"

On another subject Hume said this: "Can you identify any indication that Iran, as a result of sanctions that have been imposed, has backed away from its nuclear weapons program?"

And finally Hume asked this: "Can you explain under what foreign policy principle you gave assistance to the rebels trying to overthrow Qadaffi in Libya, but have declined to provide such assistance to the rebels trying to overthrow Syrian leader Assad, who poses a much more direct threat to American interests?"

Then Juan Williams and Mary Katharine Ham were on and they both predicted Tuesday's vote in Wisconsin. Williams said this: "Romney will win, and I've been right on every prediction I've given you this primary season. But is Santorum going to quit because of this? No! He's going to hang in because he wants to be on the ticket, he wants to be VP."

Ham agreed that Romney will be celebrating Tuesday night, saying this: "I think he'll win, but by less than the consensus polling - Santorum has outperformed his polls in a few other states. This is good ground for Romney and he's actually pulling some of those Tea Partiers and evangelicals toward him."

And then for some insane reason O'Reilly had the far-right loon Ann Coulter on, who is a staunch Mitt Romney supporter, and she said Romney should not pick Senator Marco Rubio as his running mate.

Coulter said this: "I love Rubio, and he should run for president in eight years, but I don't think he would be the ideal vice presidential candidate because he's very young and the non-Fox media is going to go after him like gangbusters. It's good to have someone who has been tested and attacked, and if we're only picking Rubio because he's Hispanic, I'm opposed to that on principle. That's pandering!"

Coulter gave her VP nod to Arizona Senator John Kyl, saying this: "He's appealing, he's not scary on TV and he's the fourth most conservative Senator."

Then O'Reilly told Coulter that Romney will probably not heed her advice, saying this: "Rubio will get the invitation, but whether or not he takes it is another thing. The indicator to me is that he is now crafting legislation on immigration."

Then O'Reilly talked about the Trayvon Martin shooting getting wall-to-wall media coverage, O'Reilly had this view: "So far the media has tried and convicted George Zimmerman on television. There's something very disturbing about a criminal case being adjudicated in the media and being exploited by some members of Congress. Rather than allow investigators time to put together a rock solid case, these people are voting 'guilty' before the evidence is even presented."

"To be fair, circumstantial evidence shows Mr. Zimmerman was far too aggressive in stalking the teenager, who had a perfect right to be there. But Al Sharpton saying that black people are 'under assault' in America is grossly irresponsible. The media has made the Trayvon Martin killing even worse, if that's possible, by making it difficult for law enforcement to come to an objective conclusion. If Mr. Zimmerman is not arrested, there will be racial violence in this country, and everybody knows it."

Now that's funny, and O'Reilly is a joke, just read this e-mail he got that explains his hypocrisy.
John Eitzen, Decatur, AL: "Hey, Bill, it is truly ironic that you mention MSNBC as having a vested interest in seeing Zimmerman punished because they've found him guilty on the air. Wasn't that true for you in the Casey Anthony case?"
And finally O'Reilly had the Factor Reality Check, which I normally do not report on because it's just more spin from O'Reilly with no guest to counter his bias. But I will report one because it is so funny, and it shows what a hypocritical idiot O'Reilly is.

O'Reilly took aim at a New York Times reporter, saying this: "Sometimes enough is enough, and Check has reached that point with Times media reporter Brian Stelter, a very liberal guy who allows his ideology to bleed into his reporting."

"He wrote that Rush Limbaugh is 'weakened' and the Radio Factor was a failure. But Limbaugh remains number one in the nation by a huge margin, and we asked Stelter who is saying the Radio Factor was a failure. He says 'media analysts,' but which ones? When I retired from radio talk in 2009 we had more than 400 stations; it was among the most profitable radio programs in the country and I was offered millions to keep doing it."

"So here's some advice for Brian Stelter: Northwestern has a good journalism program, they will teach you to source articles and deal with facts. They'll also teach you to keep your ideology out of your reporting."

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Two Big News Stories O'Reilly Has Ignored
By: Steve - April 3, 2012 - 10:00am

Recently O'Reilly and Bernie Goldberg both complained about BIAS at other cable news networks for news they ignored that was bad for Democrats. O'Reilly and Goldberg called it sins of omission.

Which is funny because O'Reilly does the very same thing, except he ignores all the news that is good for Obama and the Democrats, while also ignoring all the news that makes the Republicans look bad.

Here are two examples:

President Obama is opening up a comfortable lead over Mitt Romney in key swing states on the strength of growing support from women. Obama has a 9 point lead over Romney in the swing states that will decide the election. But you never hear a word about any of this from O'Reilly, not Monday night, not ever.

A USA Today/Gallup poll shows that in one month, President Obama's support among women has jumped more than 10 percent, and he now leads the likely Republican nominee Mitt Romney by a more than 2-1 margin.

The stock market had its best first quarter in 14 years this year, prompting analysts to raise their outlooks for the year. Some on Wall Street are now predicting that stocks could rise 10 percent more before the end of the year, pushing the Dow to an all-time high.

And if you watch the Factor every night as I do, you would know that O'Reilly did not report that news, and that he never reports on the market anymore now that it's doing good and it makes Obama look good.

But when Bush was in office if the market even went up a 100 points O'Reilly reported it and even gave Bush credit for it. Now that it's over 13.000, and up 6000 points since Obama got elected O'Reilly never says a word about it, let alone give Obama any credit.

Now get this, when the market goes down O'Reilly reports it and blames Obama, but when it goes up he does not report it or give Obama any credit for it. And if that is not 100% right-wing bias and propaganda I'm Donald Trump.

Fox Promotes Doctored Audio Of Supreme Court
By: Steve - April 2, 2012 - 10:00am

O'Reilly complains about bad journalism, but here is the worst kind of journalism you can do and O'Reilly never said a word about it, because it was right-wing bias and done by his own network Fox News.

Bloomberg News is reporting that a Republican National Committee Web ad uses "edited audio from U.S. Supreme Court oral arguments to attack President Barack Obama's health-care law." The Bloomberg article details the problems with the ad:
In a spot circulated March 28, the Republican National Committee excerpts the opening seconds of the March 27 presentation of Obama's top Supreme Court lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, in which he is heard struggling for words and twice stopping to drink water.

"Obamacare," the ad concludes, in words shown against a photograph of the high court. "It's a tough sell."

A review of a transcript and recordings of those moments shows that Verrilli took a sip of water just once, paused for a much briefer period, and completed his thought, rather than stuttering and trailing off as heard in the doctored version put out by the RNC.
On his March 28 Fox News show, Sean Hannity aired an audio clip of Justice Antonin Scalia speaking during the arguments, and another of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Hannity then aired the RNC ad. This left the impression that the RNC ad simply uses a clip of Verrilli to show that he had fared poorly during the arguments.

In reality, as Bloomberg noted, Verrilli's speech was doctored to exaggerate the effect.

Hannity's show airs at 9 p.m. Eastern, and graphics throughout his March 29 show indicated it was airing live. But Hannity didn't apologize for airing the misleading ad. He didn't even mention it.

Even worse, during the show that follows Hannity, On the Record, host Greta Van Susteren aired the RNC ad and discussed it with The Washington Examiner's Byron York -- without ever mentioning that it was doctored.

As Supreme Court expert Tom Goldstein noted on the SCOTUSblog, distortions such as these likely hurt efforts to make the court more transparent:
The Justices now have before them a perfect illustration of the gross distortion that can instantly be made of recordings of their proceedings. What is to stop the same misleading stunt being pulled with the Justices' own oral argument questions and comments? Nothing at all.

The Court made a special exception in releasing the oral argument tape for the health care arguments so promptly, and it probably will hesitate before doing so again. If there were any chance that the Justices would permit cameras in the Court, I do not see happening now.
Leave it to the RNC and Fox News to ruin it for everyone. One special exception is made and they can't resist the temptation to drag it through their political spin machine. Thanks a lot you right-wing idiots. Now the Supreme Court may never release audio of their arguments again.

Fox News Thinks Blacks Are Nuts Over Trayvon Martin
By: Steve - April 1, 2012 - 10:00am

While the controversy over the killing of Trayvon Martin largely skirted partisan politics in its first month, some conservative media outlets saw an opportunity in the case and have spent the latter part of the week alternately smearing Martin, defending Zimmerman, or screaming about the dangers of viewing the case through a racial lens.

The conservative Daily Caller, a purportedly reported and fact-based news outlet, published parts of Martin's life on social media, but only "selected items that reinforce the argument that the victim of the fatal shooting was a menacing figure who might plausibly have been mistaken for a criminal," the New York Times Robert Mackey noted.

They skipped over pictures from prom night or of Martin's friends, cherry-picking shots of Martin giving the finger and wearing fake gold teeth.

Former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough called the vilification of Martin "beneath contempt and disgusting."

SCARBOROUGH: "I guess it's because the President actually said something to comfort the parents, and I guess they just can't handle that."

The Daily Caller even did their best to defend Zimmerman's account that Martin had beat him up, even when new surveillance footage cast doubt on that claim. But perhaps one shouldn’t expect better from an outlet whose top editors stood by a blatantly false report it published last year.

Andrew Breitbart's website attacked Rep. Bobby Rush (D-IL) for wearing a hoodie on the House floor in solidarity with Trayvon, writing a cynical story today headlined, "HOODIE-WEARING GUNMEN KILL 1, WOUND 5 IN BOBBY RUSH'S CHICAGO DISTRICT."

On Fox News, Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and conservative media critic Brent Bozell, like many in the conservative echo chamber, have dwelled on the fact that the fringe New Black Panthers, who have been condemned by everyone, offered a bounty on Zimmerman's head. Hannity and Bozell claimed to have found the real scandal here -- that NBC News edited a 911 tape in a way that portrayed Zimmerman in a poor light.

Overall, the message seems to be, as Fox contributor Tamara Holder told Hannity: "The blacks are also making this more of a racial issue than it should be."

If you listen to Bill O'Reilly and Ann Coulter, you would think we will soon see black lynch mobs on the streets out to get random white people. And O'Reilly (who claims to be a non-partisan Independent) is covering the story in the exact same way the far-right conservative Sean Hannity is, proving he is as conservative as Hannity or anyone on the far-right.



To read the O'Reilly Sucks blog, and get more information about
Bill O'Reilly make sure to visit the home page:
www.oreilly-sucks.com





640-816 dumps - Interconnecting Cisco Networking 642-437 dumps - Implementing Cisco Unified Communications Voice over IP and QoS v8.0 (CVOICE v8.0) 70-680 dumps - TS: Windows 7, Configuring 200-101 - Interconnecting Cisco Networking Devices Part 2 (ICND2) 646-206 - Cisco Sales Expert (646-206)