The Wednesday 2-29-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - March 1, 2012 - 11:00am
Their was no TPM because O'Reilly had Mitt Romney on to spin out his propaganda, Romney Romney cried that Democratic voters in Michigan, where it was an open primary, came out in force for Rick Santorum because liberals like Michael Moore don't want to face Romney in November and they were playing some mischief with the GOP.
But Santorum also did robo-calls asking Democrats to vote for him, Romney cried about that too, even though he did the same thing years ago.
O'Reilly asked for Romney's response to New York Times' columnist Maureen Dowd's opinion that Obama will win re-election handily because the Republican players have damaged each other so much.
Romney said this: "I recognize that down the road we're going to get attacked by a billion dollar Obama machine and in some respect, this toughens us up a bit and gets the attacks out there...hopefully we'll be able to regain the strength once we have a nominee."
Romney also addressed the claim that he's a rich guy out of touch with mainstream America by saying he's not the man the left-wing press portrays him to be. And of course O'Reilly agreed with him and basically kissed his ass. Even though Romney is a rich guy who is out of touch with the average working man.
It was pathetic to watch O'Reilly interview Romney, because he supports Romney, he wants him to be President, and he likes him. It was a softball interview all the way, and O'Reilly should be ashamed to call himself a journalist.
Then Dick Morris was on to give his Super Tuesday predictions, saying this: "Romney has not done well in the South so he'll struggle in Georgia, Oklahoma and Tennessee. He has to win Ohio. He'll definitely win Vermont and Massachusetts. He should win in Idaho, Alaska and North Dakota, but it'll be tight in those three states."
O'Dummy said that Romney's big advantage next week is that he can compete in all of the states because he has the money and the resources to do it, whereas the others do not. Morris then urged Republican voters to listen to the message Democrats are sending them, saying this: President Obama has effectively endorsed Santorum, indicating this is the guy he'd prefer to run against in November.
And then of course the biased hack Dick Morris denied that the GOP field is being weakened by all the attacks against each other. He maintained that it's a good idea to get the attacks out now because it makes them old news by the time Obama hits them in the general election. By example, he mentioned how Obama got clobbered with the Jeremiah Wright stuff in primary season, but it was old news by November 2008.
Then O'Reilly had Dennis Kucinich on. Kucinich asserted that the markets are being manipulated, with oil companies driving prices up at the expense of the consumer. Frustrated, O'Reilly wondered why Obama isn't doing anything about this, yeah because he is a partisan hack who wants to join in with the GOP by slamming Obama over gas prices when he has nothing to do with it.
Kucinich's Ohio GOP primary prediction: Too close to call with a slight edge to Romney, who will be favored in the northern part of the state, while his opponent Santorum will be favored in the southern part of the state.
Then Gretchen Carlson & Margaret Hoover were on to discuss a new study conducted by the National Academy of Sciences that found wealthy Americans are more likely to behave unethically than regular folks.
Hoover explained the different scenarios the study examined, saying this: drivers in flashy, expensive cars are more prone to cutting off other drivers and pedestrians; higher paid office workers are more apt to take candy specifically reserved for kids. After Carlson voiced doubt about the legitimacy of the study, O'Reilly proclaimed that wealthy Americans, in general, have a sense of entitlement.
Then they talked about Angelina Jolie's appearance at the Academy Awards: O'Reilly said he noticed she looked emaciated and worried about the message she's sending to young women. Both culture warriors agreed that her figure was startling and applauded the Factor for talking about this issue.
And I would say yes she did look a little skinny, but it's none of your business so report some real news and leave her alone.
Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because he is a comedian on to make jokes about liberals and that is not news.
And finally in the last segment O'Reily had the crazy far-right loon Ann Coulter on to talk about the Republicans.
When asked if she agrees with Sen. John McCain that the GOP candidates attacks against each other are hurting the party, Coulter said yes, that they're depleting resources and energy that Romney will need to run against Obama. She also said that people are grasping at straws in their criticism of Romney.
O'Reilly countered that Romney has to be aware that anything he says can and will be used against him. He claimed the general election will involve class warfare if Romney gets the nomination, saying the former governor must be ultra-careful of the rich guy label.
In her support of Romney, Coulter said that if the worst they have on Mitt is these statements that get taken out of context, then Republicans are in good shape. So O'Reilly compared the race to the 1980 faceoff between Carter and Reagan. With that historical perspective, he offered this advice to Romney: "If he wants to win, he just has to tell the folks what he can do that Obama can't."
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
The Tuesday 2-28-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 29, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Rich liberals trying to re-energize the Occupy movement? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: As we predicted last fall, the Occupy Wall Street movement has diminished greatly. That's because the good people who were in the movement fled when the loons took over. Enter Ben and Jerry, the Vermont ice cream guys who are committed left-wingers.
They are organizing a bunch of like-minded people to raise money to pay far-left agitators. That's dangerous because, as we've seen in cities like Oakland and New York, people get hurt. But apparently Ben and Jerry don't care. Occupy is not a genuine protest; it's a fabricated operation designed to create as much chaos as possible to demonize the capitalistic system.
Also, there's no question that Ben and Jerry want to reelect Barack Obama, and they believe putting people in the streets screaming against Republicans will help the Democratic Party. Talking Points believes the opposite, that the crazier the Occupy movement gets, the more people turn against the left-wing agenda.
If Ben and Jerry are paying agitators and those people kill someone or destroy property or commit violent crimes, can Ben and Jerry be held legally responsible? And if the Occupy movement was really strong and speaking for the regular folks, why would you need to pay people to participate? We've invited Ben and Jerry on the program but - shockingly - they have declined.
O'Reilly is a joke, last fall he said the Occupy movement was dead, done, over, and then it continued for another 5 months, but he acts like he predicted it would die out now, which is just laughable.
Then Newt Gingrich was on to talk about his dream of getting gas prices down to $2.50 a gallon. Which is funny for 2 reasons, first it is impossible to do it, and second he will never be the President so his insane plan will never be put in place. Even if he could do it, the plan would take 3 to 5 years, if not longer, so what good does that does us now.
Gingrich said this: "My point is very simple. By any reasonable analysis of supply and demand, if we decided to maximize production, if we use offshore and federal land, we would in fact have a dramatic increase in American production and prices would come down. A real effort to create American oil would crowd out more expensive oil."
And even O'Reilly questioned Gingrich's faith in the law of supply and demand, saying this: "This has been the warmest winter in a decade and there's plenty of oil in the United States right now. But the price goes up every single day because of stuff going on overseas."
Then Karl Rove was on to predict the results of the Michigan and Arizona vote. Rove said this: "Arizona is probably over with 20 delegates in the Romney camp, but Michigan is going to be close. Romney will pull it out because there is low turnout today and 184,000 people voted early. There were more than 100,000 absentee ballots in the mail by the time of Rick Santorum's wins in Minnesota, Missouri and Colorado. That's a big chunk of the vote and that will give Romney a slight advantage."
Rove also suggested that most reporters are hoping for a long, drawn-out battle, saying this: "The media is rooting for Obama to win, so anything that looks like it complicates the Republican contest is what they want."
In the next segment O'Reilly had Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes on to talk about a YouTube video to promote "African Americans for Obama," the President advised blacks to talk up his candidacy "in your faith community."
Crwley said this: "I can't be 100% sure that they're violating the law yet, but they're certainly coming right up to the edge. If the campaign decides to go into these churches with money and volunteers and if they start involving themselves directly in these churches, that's a clear violation."
Colmes said this: "I wish he wouldn't do this - I want churches out of politics and politics out of religion. That being said, congregants can do whatever they want, but when clerics do it they're speaking on behalf of the church and that's when you have a problem."
What sad is that George W. Bush did the very same thing during his re-election campaign, and yet O'Reilly never said a word about it and had no problem with Bush doing it.
Then O'Reilly had the far-right Obama hating loon Lt. Col. Ralph Peters & Col. David Hunt on to talk about how some U.S. military personnel mistakenly burned some Korans in Afghanistan, and all hell broke loose.
Peters said this: "We won the war but we have lost the peace. We lost it by setting ridiculously ambitious goals and trying to turn Afghanistan into a little America. We are telling our troops to respect Afghan culture but Afghans are shooting our officers in the back of the head. We hit an absolute low point when White House spokesman Jay Carney blamed Bush for this week's problems."
Hunt said this: "Once we took the country and it turned into a counter-insurgency, you can't define it by win or lose. Right now we are not having success - it is not a safe country yet and it won't be for another ten years." Then Lis Wiehl & Kimberly Guilfoyle were on to talk about the Pennsylvania Judge Mark Martin dismissed a case against a Muslim man arrested for attacking an atheist who dressed as a zombie version of Mohammed for Halloween.
Wiehl said this: "The judge said there was a lack of evidence, but if you look at the video there is very good evidence. The Muslim man even told a cop, 'Yes I hit him because I had to do something for my religion.' The judge has gotten into trouble because he scolded the atheist and told him he would be dead if he had done this in a Muslim country."
Guilfoyle declared that Judge Martin's message was way out of line, saying this: "This was inappropriate, that is not the rule of law in this country. We don't go by Sharia law! This is a First Amendment issue and the atheist had an absolute right to do this."
And finally in the last biased right-wing segment of the night Charles Krauthammer was on to look past Tuesday's primaries in Michigan and Arizona.
Krauthammer said this: "The overall dynamic is that Romney is in control. It's a marathon and he has the resources - he's the tortoise, slowly but surely. But this points to how weak a candidate he is - he should not have to struggle in Michigan to beat Rick Santorum, who came out of nowhere. He's just not fluent in 'candidacy.' He's a good man and I think he'd make a good president, but he is not a good candidate."
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
Gingrich Tells FEC To Get Lost & Leave Him Alone By: Steve - February 29, 2012 - 10:00am
UPDATE - 2-29-12: Gingrich was a guest on the Factor Tuesday night and O'Reilly did not ask him one question about the FEC letters.
And O'Reilly reported on all of it this week, haha, wrong! O'Reilly has not said a word about any of it, even though it looks like Gingrich is violating campaign laws.
Gingrich's campaign basically told the FEC to drop dead, Bloomberg reported. Despite warnings that the campaign has failed to follow disclosure laws, Gingrich's campaign treasurer responded to the FEC (a month late) by saying that the campaign thinks "no further itemization is required."
The Gingrich campaign has a tendency to generalize when filing finance disclosure statements, citing, for example, more than $88,000 in reimbursements to Newt Gingrich in January for what they said was "travel."
The expense was part of what was characterized by the Washington Times as "$220,000 in mystery money" paid to top Gingrich staff. And as the Los Angeles Times noted, the Gingrich super-PAC (Winning Our Future) has also been paying very impressive fees to long-time Gingrich aides who run the super-PAC.
The exchange of letters between the FEC and Gingrich campaign treasurer Lisa Lisker offers a compelling exhibit of the contempt with which people at the Gingrich campaign regard it.
On Sept. 22, 2011, the commission sent Lisker a letter pointing out the campaign's failure to follow the law and telling her (in bold text) that a failure to respond to the letter by Oct. 27 "could result in an audit or enforcement action."
You can gauge the level of terror this threat instilled by the date of Lisker's two-paragraph reply: Nov. 29. Lisker replied that the Gingrich campaign had concluded that "no further itemization is required" for the expenses and so none was forthcoming.
Having informed the commission that she could not care less about its preoccupation with campaign finance details, Lisker concluded, "Thank you for bringing these items to our attention."
The FEC sent Lisker another letter on Feb. 17 requesting "information essential to full public disclosure of your federal election campaign finances."
Any bets on when the Gingrich campaign will reply, maybe never. How about wagers on when the FEC might get around to an "enforcement action"? Maybe never, or after the election is over.
Gingrich is telling them to drop dead because he knows they do not have much power, and anything they try to do can be put off until after the election, so even if they did violate the law they would not be punished until a time when nobody would care because the election will be over.
Santorum Does Not Believe In Separation Of Church And State By: Steve - February 29, 2012 - 9:00am
And here is another reason not to vote for the far-right loon Rick Santorum. Santorum took issue with President John F. Kennedy's famous speech on the separation of church and state on Sunday, telling This Week's George Stephanopoulos that he does not believe the separation is absolute:
I don't believe in an America where the separation between church and state is absolute. The idea that the church can have no influence or no involvement in the operation of the state is absolutely antithetical to the objectives and visions of our country.
WRONG! Religion has no place in the Government, and the Founding Fathers made it clear that no religion should be in the Government at all, ever.
In fact, John F. Kennedy was just one in a long lineage of U.S. presidents, founding fathers, scholars and religious icons who supported absolute separation between church and state.
Even Ronald Reagan, who Santorum has compared himself to, said that "we establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate."
The Monday 2-27-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 28, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Rick Santorum, JFK, Reagan and public policy. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: On Saturday I had the opportunity to see the Reagan Ranch in Santa Barbara County. The late President's house had just a few rooms and no air conditioning, so I was reminded that Ronald Reagan was a modest man who based his public policy and his life on common sense.
The election this year is a lot like 1980 - you have a Democratic President having trouble with the economy and the Republican Party trying to take advantage. Reagan defeated Carter because he spoke clearly, but today's GOP message is muddled because of the hard-fought primary campaign.
Enter Rick Santorum, who is making a major issue over the fact that religious Americans are under siege, and they are. Santorum is criticizing John F. Kennedy, who in 1960 said 'the separation of church and state is absolute.'
The problem for Santorum is that he goes beyond defending people of faith and that's getting him into trouble.
There's no question the Obama administration wants to impose secularism on everybody, even going so far as saying Catholic Church-affiliated non-profit organizations must provide birth control and morning-after pills to employees. That's an intrusion on a religious belief and Ronald Reagan would condemn it.
But Rick Santorum takes it a bit further, saying some policy matters should be decided on what is considered right and wrong in the religious realm. That would lead to anarchy because Americans are very diverse in their belief systems.
If Santorum would simply pull back a bit and say to the federal government, 'Hey, leave religious institutions alone and don't interfere with them,' he would be on the side of the angels, pardon the pun. Secularism is on the march in America and we are not a faith-based country any more.
In fact, if you openly practice your religion you can be mocked in some circles. Talking Points believes President Obama doesn't understand the issue - he is an ardent secular-progressive who believes the federal government should call the shots, whether it intrudes on religious doctrine or not.
That is against everything the Founding Fathers envisioned. But while Rick Santorum is rallying some evangelical voters to his cause, he is making a major mistake in trying to link religious belief with public policy. If Ronald Reagan were alive today, I believe he would advise Mr. Santorum against doing that.
So then O'Reilly had Brit Hume on to assess his Talking Points Memo. Hume said this: "I find the way that Rick Santorum has repeatedly waded into these controversies about church and state to be a bit incomprehensible politically. I don't think it's helping him because to a great many Americans what John F. Kennedy said about the separation of church and state makes a lot of sense."
Hume also said this: "For Rick Santorum to say that 'makes him want to throw up,' I just don't understand it. A man who tries to live his faith is to be admired, but this is the political realm and he is in an election where the major issue is the economy. Yet he is continually caught up in arguments and discussions about these issues. There is a whiff of intolerance about all of this and that is very dangerous in politics!"
No Democratic guest was on to comment. Then O'Reilly had Mary Katharine Ham & Juan Williams were on to talk about Tuesday's vote.
Williams said this: "The polls have it neck-and-neck, but you'd have to say Romney has the momentum. Santorum had a double-digit lead that has evaporated because he is demonstrating extreme intolerance. He has a different vision of America than most Americans."
But Ham claimed that Rick Santorum may be staging a last-minute revival, saying this: "I've been hearing from pollsters that Romney has been losing among all sorts of demographics over just the last day, so this could swing back toward Santorum. As far as Santorum's view of America, he doesn't talk about religion with a sunny-enough message and a light-enough touch."
Then O'Reilly had the moron Factor Producer Jesse Watters on to talk about the Hollywood cleebs as they entered the Academy Awards ceremony. "I think we're kind of pissed off right now as a country," Glenn Close said. Actor James Cromwell hailed the Occupy movement as "the beginning of the revolution" and Michael Moore said this: "I occupied Wall Street before there was Occupy Wall Street."
O'Reilly then asked Watters who the nastiest celebrity was and who was the nicest. Watters said this: "The biggest snub was from Cameron Diaz. She was coming toward me but then she saw the Fox News microphone and turned to her publicist and said, 'Oh, no, I don't do Fox News.'
George Clooney was the nicest - he didn't have to stop and talk to me but he did, and he was good-natured." Then O'Dummy took Watters to the woodshed for referring to the President as Obama, saying this: "Next time, say 'President Obama' or 'Mr. Obama' because we want to be respectful to the office."
And one last thing, P. Diddy gave Watters a hard time and O'Reilly told him to let it slide because he is a big star now because he does a regular segment on the Factor, and that he will be a bigger star than P. Diddy. Which is insane and just laughable, because nobody knows who Jesse Watters is, and he will NEVER be a bigger star than P. Diddy.
Then Bernie Goldberg was on to cry bias about the media reporting on gas prices under Obama. And he used a biased study by a conservative group, the MRC and Brent Bozell.
Goldberg said this: "They found that the three broadcast networks, ran four times as many stories about gas prices rising when President Bush was in office. And the tone was different - today the stories are mostly unemotional, they're about how gas prices affect the economy. But four years ago they were very personal, about how people were having to make decisions between buying food and gasoline. Reporters get more excited about covering bad news if a Republican is in the White House."
Which is insane, because Bush and Cheney are Texas oil men. They let the oil companies and the speculators do whatever they wanted with no threats to investigate them or anything. They even defended the oil companies by saying the free market is working, etc. So the comparison by MRC, Goldberg, and O'Reilly is ridiculous and like comparing apples to oranges.
O'Reilly (the massive partisan hypocrite) accused the mainstream media of overt partisanship, saying this: "It has to be blatant bias if you have the nightly newscasts on ABC, NBC and CBS choosing to do four times as many stories about rising oil prices under a Republican."
O'Reilly also talked about sins of omission, saying it's bias by what they do not report. Which is just laughable, because O'Reilly is the biggest and most biased sin of omission guy in America. He ignores all the bad news about Republicans, so he does the same thing he complains about, and does it more than anyone else does. The whole segment was a biased joke that was not journalism, it was a partisan political attack from 2 biased right-wing hacks.
And finally O'Reilly had the Factor Reality Check, which I do not report on because it's nonsense and not news. It's just Billy by himself putting his right-wing spin on something someone else said. Not to mention most of the time there is no reality check on anything.
In one so-called reality check O'Reilly reported that Angelina Jolie looks slim, then he said the media is ignoring her physical profile. But I watched a few entertainment and news shows on cable and they all talked about how skinny she looked. So I did not see any media ignoring it, in fact, they were all talking about it. Amd how is it a reality check to report she looks slim, where is the check.
O'Reilly even named actor Sasha Baron Cohen the pinhead, for dumping an urn of ashes on Ryan Seacrest at the Oscars. Even though it was a joke, and when O'Reilly is attacked for jokes he does, he tells people to lighten up because it was just a joke. Not to mention Cohen is a comedian, so he gets paid to do jokes, O'Reilly does not.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
Another Presidential Election Poll O'Reilly Has Ignored By: Steve - February 28, 2012 - 10:00am
O'Reilly sure loves to report on polls, except the polls that disagree with him or show bad news for the Republicans like Romney, Santorum, or Gingrich. And what's really funny is that this poll is by the biased right-wing pollster Scott Rasmussen, who is a friend of O'Reilly and a regular guest on the Factor.
Rasmussen Tracking: Romney Drops Below 40 Percent Against Obama
Mitt Romney may have had the best night on the debate stage in Arizona last Wednesday, but Thursday morning wasn't as great -- Romney dropped to 39 percent in Rasmussen's nightly tracking poll of a potential matchup between he and President Obama nationally.
Obama got 49 percent, giving him a ten point lead. The Rasmussen tracking numbers use 500 autodial interviews a night and average the results over three days.
Now if Obama is ahead by 10 points with the biased Rasmussen that is big trouble for Romney, because his polls always add a few points to the Republican.
And on a side note, President Obama now holds single-digit leads over former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum in the key battleground state of Virginia.
The latest Rasmussen Reports statewide telephone survey of Likely Virginia Voters shows Obama drawing 49% support to Romney's 43%. Five percent (5%) prefer some other candidate in the race, while three percent (3%) are undecided.
With Santorum as the Republican nominee, Obama holds a 51% to 43% lead. Five percent (5%) like some other candidate, and two percent (2%) are undecided.
Notice the 2% and 3% undecided, that is also bad news for Romney and Santorum, because it shows that most people have made up their minds about who they will vote for. And they have decided they do not like Romney or Santorum very much.
Now what's really funny is that they do not like Romney because he is not conservative enough, and the do not like Santorum because he is too conservative. In the end though all the Republicans will vote for the Republican nominee, which will most likely be Romney. And then the election will be decided by the Independent voters and women.
Republican Craig James Proves He Is An Idiot About Being Gay By: Steve - February 28, 2012 - 9:00am
And it's not just Craig James, a hell of a lot of Republicans feel the exact same way he does, even though it's an ignorant position. James said it's a choice to be gay, and that God will punish them for that choice.
While I am not a religious person, I find it hard to believe God would have a problem with anyone who is gay. In fact, I would bet everything I have that God would have no problem with any gay person. I would bet that God would judge that gay person on what kind of person he or she is, not on their private sex life that is none of anyone's business.
Texas Republican senate candidates Craig James and Ted Cruz went after former Dallas mayor Tom Leppert (R) for marching in a gay pride parade during a debate Wednesday in an effort to portray Leppert as pro-gay and out of touch with conservative values.
Both men pledged to stay away from gay festivities if elected and James even suggested that being gay is a choice that will be punished by God:
MODERATOR: Are you saying Mayor Leppert is in favor of gay marriage?
CRUZ: What I am saying is that when a mayor of a city chooses twice to march in a parade celebrating gay pride, that's a statement – and it's not a statement I agree with.
JAMES: I think right now in this country, our moral fiber is sliding down a slope that is going to be hard to stop if we don't stand up with leaders who don't go ride in gay parades. I can assure you I will never ride in a gay parade. And I hear what you're saying, Tom, but leaders – our kids out there people need to see examples.
MODERATOR: Do you think people choose to be gay?
JAMES: I think it's a choice, I do.
MODERATOR: It's not in the genes?
JAMES: I think that you have to make that choice. But in that case right there, they are going to have to answer to the Lord for their actions. We should not give benefits to those civil unions.
Earth to right-wing Idiot Craig James, a person does not choose to be gay, it's not a choice. You are either gay or you are not, and you know it. There is no choice, you are born gay, or you are not born gay.
And btw, it's none of your business what any person does in their private sex life. You Republicans claim to support freedom 100%, then you tell people they can not be gay without being punished for it, and you tell women they can not ever have an abortion, even if it's rape or incest.
In both cases it is none of your business, and how the hell is taking those political positions supporting freedom. In fact, it's the opposite. People who tell someone they can not be gay and tell women they can not have an abortion (even though it's legal) are anti-freedom communists.
FEC Warns Gingrich For Paying Himself With Campaign Funds By: Steve - February 27, 2012 - 11:00am
And of course Bill O'Reilly has not said a word about this story, even though it came out 4 days ago on February 23rd. But if the story was about a Democratic candidate he would be all over it like white on rice.
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has sent a second letter to Newt Gingrich's campaign asking them to explain why almost $1 million dollars was paid to a small group of people including the presidential candidate.
The Washington Times reported on Wednesday that Gingrich, members of his staff and several consultants received "questionable reimbursements."
In January alone, a small group of people within the campaign were paid $220,000 on top of their salaries. That figure included the $88,000 Gingrich paid himself for unspecified travel expenses, according to reports filed with the FEC Monday.
The latest FEC filing comes as a shock because Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond told he Times that the campaign would no longer need to reimburse the candidate after finally obtaining a credit card late last year.
And btw, O'Reilly did not report the story about the FEC sending Gingrich that first warning letter over a week ago either. Billy ignores all bad news stories about any Republican, then he has the nerve to cry bias when the real media report it.
Only 1200 People Show Up For Romney Campaign Speech By: Steve - February 27, 2012 - 10:00am
Last Friday, Mitt Romney held an event at Ford Field in his home state of Michigan, which failed to attract enough people to even come close to filling it up.
The stadium holds 65,000 people and Romney rented it out for his speech, so they were clearly expecting a lot of people to show up.
His campaign scrambled to make the event look as full as possible, but they failed, as the photo below shows.
O'Reilly Ignoring Jobs & Economic News Reports By: Steve - February 26, 2012 - 11:30am
If you want more proof O'Reilly is a biased partisan right-wing hack of a pretend Independent Journalist, just look at this.
O'Reilly has ignored all the good economic, jobs, and stock market news we have had over the last few months to a year. Here is a chart of job growth that shows positive monthly job growth every month for the last 13 months going all the way back to January of 2011.
"To show the economy adding this kind of jobs number in a January is amazing," said Kathy Kane, senior vice president of talent management at Adecco Group North America. "As we talk to clients, they're very optimistic about continuing to hold jobs throughout the year but also to increase jobs."
The encouraging news was coupled with revisions to the Labor Department's data, showing the economy added 180,000 more jobs than originally thought in 2011.
Private businesses have been adding jobs consistently since March 2010. In January, they added 257,000 jobs.
But O'Reilly has not said a word about any of it. He has also ignored the fact that under Bush the economy lost 750,000 jobs in the last month he was in office, but just 6 months later (after Obama took over) the economy was adding jobs.
O'Reilly also ignored the fact that the DOW broke 13.000, and that it is up 95% in the last 3 years.
O'Reilly did not even say a word about the January jobs report showing the 243,000 increase in jobs, and the unemployment rate dropping to 8.3 percent.
And the main point here is not just the good economic and market news O'Reilly has ignored - that shows Obama is doing a good job - and that his policies are working. During that same time O'Reilly has been saying Obama is not doing a good job and that the economy is not improving.
Proving that O'Reilly is a partisan right-wing hack who should get his checks from the RNC instead of Fox News. And not only that, he is constantly promoting all the Republicans running for office, especially Romney, and he even defends all the crazy far-right stuff Santorum says.
O'Reilly also ignores all the flip-flops by Romney, but when John Kerry the Democrat ran for President and he flip-flopped on an issue or two O'Reilly had nightly segments slamming Kerry for being a flip-flopper.
Now Romney has flip-flopped on every issue there is, but not once has O'Reilly reported on any of it, or slammed him for it. A search of the Factor archievs found zero mentions of the word flip-flop, none.
This is a fact, O'Reilly is a biased right-wing hack who is constantly promoting and defending the Republicans running for office, while at the same time lying that Obama is a bad President. He implies the economy is not doing good because of the liberal Obama policies.
While the facts show the economy is doing great, the stock market is setting records, and the jobs numbers have been on a positive growth trend for 2.5 years. This is all good economic news, and it proves the Obama policies are working.
But in O'Reillyworld it's all doom and gloom, he makes up his own reality to claim the country is going to hell because of the deficit. But the economic experts say you will always run higher deficits during a recession, and then once the economy recovers the deficit will go down.
O'Reilly also claims the deficit is the #1 issue facing the country today, but the people disagree, in a recent Gallup poll only 8% of the people said they even care about the deficit, the economy and jobs were #1 and #2, the deficit came in 4th at 8 percent.
O'Reilly just makes it all up to try and politically hurt Obama and to help the Republicans, while at the same time claiming to be an impartial Independent Journalist who has nothing against President Obama.
The facts show that O'Reilly uses his show to slam Obama every night, he almost never has anything good to say about him. And as the old saying goes, with friends like O'Reilly Obama does not need any enemies. It's ridiculous, it would be like me saying I have nothing against O'Reilly, as I slam him every day in my blog.
Romney Slams Santorum For Bill He Supported By: Steve - February 26, 2012 - 11:00am
Here is some classic Mitt Romney, in the Thursday night Republican debate Romney slammed Santorum for voting for the no child left behind bill. When Romney himself supported the bill at the time.
Santorum was challenged by Romney on multiple pieces of his record at Thursday night's Republican presidential debate, but his answer to why he voted for No Child Left Behind drew the most criticism.
Santorum said this: "I have to admit, I voted for that, it was against the principles I believed in, but you know, when you're part of the team, sometimes you take one for the team, for the leader, and I made a mistake."
Then on the campaign trail Friday, Romney was all over Santorum's "take one for the team" apology:
ROMNEY: He talked of this of being 'taking for one the team.' I wonder which team he was taking it for.
My team is the American people, not the insiders in Washington, and I'll fight for the people of America, not special interests.
He talked about voting for No Child Left Behind, even though that was against his principles.
To begin with what Romney said is laughable, because he team is the wealthy, not the average American working man. His team is the top 1% that make millions and billions of dollars a year, and his team are the big money guys on wall street, because that is where he gets all his money from.
While slamming Santorum as a Washington insider, Romney forgot to mention his own support for the law, which he highlighted as an example of where he disagrees with many conservatives in a 2008 interview on Hannity & Colmes:
ROMNEY: I'd say that not all conservatives line up with me on a few of the positions I have. For instance, I support having a Department of Education. I support No Child Left Behind.
I think it's improving our schools. I agree that we need to give more flexibility to states in applying it, but I support it.
Here is the deal on Romney, he is a liar and a massive flip-flopper. He takes whatever position he thinks will make him look better at the time. And if anyone votes for him to be the President they are a fool.
If you are a conservative and you vote for him you are even a bigger fool, because he is a moderate and he will let you down big time if he ever wins the White House.
More Details On The High Gas Prices By: Steve - February 26, 2012 - 10:00am
When the dishonest O'Reilly and his Republican friends tell you Obama is to blame for high gas prices, show this blog to them.
As the improving economy has robbed conservatives of their chief talking point against President Obama, they've turned to rising gas prices as the next problem to pin on the president. Including Bill O'Reilly, who claims to be a non-partisan Independent
Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) instructed fellow Republicans to embrace the gas-pump anger, while Rick Santorum claimed Obama is intentionally pushing up prices to cut carbon emissions. Which is the exact same lie O'Reilly is putting out too.
Newt Gingrich released a 30-minute video about how the Obama administration is so anti-oil they have forced the price of gas to go up.
But the fact is there is no truth to claims that Obama has curbed U.S. oil production and driven up gas prices. As NPR reported Wednesday, the number of drilling rigs in U.S. oil fields has quadrupled under Obama and domestic oil production hit an 8-year high in 2011. And for the first time in 60 years, the U.S. is now a net fuel exporter.
Not to mention oil demand was actually down 4.6 percent last week over last year, while the supply of gasoline has increased since a year ago. So why are gas prices so high? As McClatchy;s Kevin Hall explains, there is a systemic problem: oil speculation.
Energy futures markets serve a legitimate role in helping producers (like oil companies) and big end users (like airlines) hedge against price volatility, but lately, they have been taken over by Wall Street speculators who never intend to actually use the fuel they're betting on. Hall wrote this:
Historically, financial speculators accounted for about 30 percent of oil trading in commodity markets, while producers and end users made up about 70 percent. Today it's almost the reverse.
A McClatchy review of the latest Commitment of Traders report from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates oil trading, shows that producers and merchants made up just 36 percent of all contracts traded in the week ending Feb. 14 while speculators who will never take delivery of the oil made up 64 percent.
Finally, after many delays by the Republicans who tried to block it, the government board responsible for regulating commodity futures markets finalized a rule in October to limit speculation, a power it was given by the Dodd-Frank Wall street reform law.
But the rule will not go into effect until next October, as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) needs to collect one year of interest data first.
The Republican party and the financial industry are fighting the new rule, but Wednesday the CFTC took action against a company in a different market, providing an example of how the energy regulation can effectively work.
The Friday 2-24-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 25, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: America lacking leadership. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Last night I ran down a number of crucial areas where American leadership is lacking. The main point is that President Obama's leadership is lacking in a number of areas, the gas situation being the latest.
But the Republican candidates have not seized the advantage because they are squabbling over minor issues. Mitt Romney has not shown enough leadership to make millions of Americans comfortable with him. He has been caught up in his past, defending his record in Massachusetts, but what we really need are candidates who will look to the future.
Right now there are three areas of great concern. Gas prices are at their highest level ever in February and, as we've been reporting, the oil companies are sending products overseas. Muslim jihadists are on the march again - in Afghanistan some soldiers made a mistake and burned Korans while cleaning up and now Afghan militants are running wild.
This infuriates me - after ten years and nearly 2,000 Americans dead, we should expect more from the Afghan people. On the debt front, predictions are that if President Obama is reelected the national debt will rise to $20 trillion by 2016. Even those who support Barack Obama are having some doubts about his leadership.
If you vote for the President this time around, you are again voting on 'hope' that his policies will finally begin improving the country. Leadership is the key to getting this country back to prosperity; the question is whether any of these guys in either party have what it takes?
What a joke, and as usual O'Reilly is spinning out right-wing garbage. O'Reilly claims Obama is lacking leadership, except it's nonsense. The country is doing better, the economy is recovering, jobs are coming back, the stock market just broke 13,000, and O'Reilly ignores it all to talk his right-wing doom and gloom.
What O'Reilly is doing is partisan hack propaganda, he is talking down the economy because he does not want Obama to win re-election. And when Democrats did the same thing to Bush during his stay in the White House, O'Reilly called them un-American traitors, now he is doing the exact same thing. O'Reilly is a right-wing propagandist, who pretends to be a non-partisan Independent journalist.
Then the far-right Charles Krauthammer was on, and even he disagreed with O'Reilly's crazy idea that Obama should tell the oil companies to stop their exports.
Krauthammer said this: "You're saying that the President should be telling the oil companies that they can't sell to China. Your logic is that 'we the people' own the land and the President has the right to bring in the oil companies. But in some cases the oil companies own the land and it is their oil. And if they are leasing the land, there is a contract with the government. The contracts are the law of the land and the President can not order anybody to do anything."
Krauthammer also talked about Santorum's recent slide, saying this: "Santorum is stumbling - he had the initiative and the momentum but he squandered it. He's the man who says 'I'm the real conservative,' and yet in explaining all the votes he took in the Congress to enlarge the government he says, 'I'm a team player.' If he's trying to appeal to the Tea Party, that's not what they want."
Then Leslie Marshall and Janine Turner were on to talk about California sending condoms out to kids in the mail.
Marshall said this: "I like some of the things in this nanny state. I think bike helmets and no smoking in public places are good ideas, but I'm not 100% on the condoms. As a mom, I have a problem with it for kids 16 and under."
Turner said this: "The liberal-progressive agenda didn't sit real well with my traditional values. It's government gone wild and they get to pick and choose the things they like. I'm done with it."
O'Reilly complained that "California is now being regulated to death, the overall philosophy is that government knows best."
Then John Stossel was on to talk about if prostitution should be legal. But here is my question, who cares what the crazy right-wing loon John Stossel thinks, other than O'Reilly, answer: NOBODY!
Stossel said this: "America is overregulated. Are we free or not once we become adults? Who owns our bodies? These ladies say 'I own my body and who are you to tell me that I can't rent it out to some guy. In the parts of Nevada where prostitution is legal there is no disease and no violence."
And btw, for once Stossel is right about something, but of course O'Reilly disagreed.
O'Reilly claimed that state-sanctioned prostitution would not be a good idea, saying this: "Even if you legalize prostitution, heroin addicts and people with AIDS wouldn't be allowed to ply their trade and they'd still be out on the street doing what they do because they're desperate. So you're not really solving anything."
That's not the point O'Dummy, the point is that in America (a so-called free country, land of the free and home of the brave) a woman over 18 should have the FREEDOM to do whatever she wants with her body. And the fact that prostitution is illegal does not stop one woman from selling her body if she wants to. So your point is stupid and unrealistic.
Then Geraldo was on to talk about an Alabama Judge that let 34-year-old Gabe Watson go free, he was accused of drowning his wife during their honeymoon in Australia.
Geraldo reported that the Judge tossed the case without letting the jury hear the evidence, saying this: "99 times out of 100, the judge lets it go to a jury so the man or woman can be tried by their peers. But my initial outrage has been tempered now that I've read the case. The judge's decision had to do with the fact that the jurisdiction for this case was Australia. The only crime committed in Alabama was that this was a conspiracy to get the insurance money and the prosecution's case was very weak."
And of course O'Reilly questioned whether our justice system has gone off the rails, saying this: "Based on O.J. Simpson, Robert Blake, Casey Anthony and this case, would I be wrong to draw the conclusion that it's easier to get away with murder in the United States right now than it ever has been?"
Yes you would be wrong, yes more get away with Murder now, but there is a reason for that that has nothing to do with O.J. or Robert Blake, etc. FBI figures show that the homicide clearance rate, as detectives call it, dropped from 91 percent in 1963 -- the first year records were kept in the manner they are now -- to 61 percent in 2007.
Law enforcement officials say the chief reason is a rise in drug and gang related killings, which are often impersonal and anonymous and thus harder to solve than slayings among family members or friends. So yes you are wrong O'Reilly.
Then Lou Dobbs was on again to talk about gas prices, and as usual they just used the segment to slam Obama. Lou Dobbs agreed with O'Reilly that President Obama should call in the bosses of major oil companies.
Dobbs said this: "It's a great idea, for any leader to bring the principle actors together and say, 'This is what you're going to do.' It's called jawboning and it's been done throughout this nation's history, but the unfortunate part is that we have a president who is incapable - he lacks the standing with the business community and as a leader to successfully carry that out."
O'Reilly then tried to claim that the price of oil is a national security issue, saying this: "It's really a national security issue and that's why I'm urging President Obama and Congress to get involved to some extent."
What a joke, it's NOT a national security issue, it's a monetary issue. It's all about paying too much for gas, moron. And it has nothing to do with President Obama.
And finally in the last segment O'Reilly had the Factor producer Jesse Watters on, where he spoke with some upscale people on Rodeo Drive.
Watters returned from his outing sporting a bright yellow tie and looking like a genuine 'one-percenter.' Watters said this: "This tie is from Bijan, and it costs $950. It comes with a pocket square but I didn't use the pocket square tonight because you told me if I did you'd burn it on the set."
O'Reilly agreed that a matching pocket square would have been grounds for dismissal, saying this: "This is not a pocket square program. Hume and Goldberg get away with it, but not you - you're a man of the people."
Are you kidding me O'Reilly? Are you for real? To begin with who cares if he has a pocket square or not, nobody but you. And how the hell is he a man of the people when he is buying a $950 tie? The people would not spend $950 on a tie if their life depended on it.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense. And if you want another example of why I call the pinheads and patriots nonsense, here it is.
On Friday O'Reilly named the Model Tyra Banks a patriot, for what you ask, because she simply graduated from Harvard's management program for business executives. How the hell does that make her a patriot.
DOW Breaks 13,000 Twice But O'Reilly Ignored It By: Steve - February 25, 2012 - 10:00am
Not only did the DOW break 13,000 last week, it broke 13,000 two times, and yet not once did O'Reilly even mention it. Even though it was a milestone and one of the biggest news stories in America.
A google search on "DOW breaks 13,000" has 3.7 million results, but in O'Reillyworld it's a non-story because it makes Obama look good. And btw folks, when the DOW broke 10,000 under Bush O'Reilly reported it and promoted it. He even said it shows that Bush is a good President and he measured the economy by how the stock market was doing.
But now that the DOW went over 13,000 under Obama O'Reilly totally ignored it, he does not say it's a measure of how the economy is doing, or how the President is doing, proving once again his right-wing bias and his double standards.
And not only did the DOW break 13,000 for the first time since the 2008 financial crisis Bush caused, the market is up 6.26% year to date, which O'Reilly also ignores. But when the DOW drops in a day or two O'Reilly reports that, while never reporting the gains.
The DOW is currently at 12.982.95, so it barely dropped back under 13,000 when it closed on Friday. Here are some other facts you never saw reported by O'Reilly, and never will:
-- In the last month the DOW is up 1.77%.
-- In the last 3 months the DOW is up 12.67%.
-- In the last 6 months the DOW is up 12.51%
-- In the last year the DOW is up 7.58%
Now look at this: In the last 3 years the DOW is up 95.91%, yes you heard me right, the DOW is up 95.91% OVER THE LAST 3 YEARS!
But you never hear a word about this from O'Reilly, ever, not once. So if it goes up to 10,000 under Bush it's a miracle to O'Reilly, he says it shows the economy is doing well and that Bush is doing a good job.
But when it goes up 95% in 3 years and goes over 13,000 under Obama O'Reilly ignores it all, he does not report any of it and ignores the entire story. And that's not all, he also totally ignored the January jobs report that showed 243,000 new jobs were added, and the unemployment rate fell to 8.3%. Which is the lowest since February 2009.
Remember this, O'Reilly used to say that the falling stock market (under Obama) shows that wall street hates Obama and his policies. But the falling market was only a temporary blip on the radar, on the majority of the days O'Reilly ignored the market when it went up. He only reported on the down days.
And this is all clear evidence that Bill O'Reilly is a biased, partisan, right-wing hack for ignoring all this economic and stock market news.
The Thursday 2-23-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 24, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Is the GOP in good or bad shape? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: I was going to analyze last night's Republican debate for you this evening, but then I said why, why waste your time? It was more of the same... Apparently CNN last night forgot about oil prices, which is the big issue for the American consumer.
Right now we're headed to five dollars a gallon by the end of summer, maybe six... As the Factor has been reporting, the oil companies are selling products that originate in America overseas because they can get more money in China and other places.
That's the primary reason we're paying more for gas - because our domestic supply is being diverted to other countries so the oil companies can make more money. President Obama does not know what to do about this, and again it is a leadership situation. We the people own America and 12 miles of the ocean surrounding it.
The government just administers the land; it oversees what happens to this country's topography. The feds allow the oil companies to drill. They just can't do it on their own. They must have permits.
Therefore, President Obama and Congress have a perfect right to regulate where the oil discovered and refined in the United States goes because it is the property of we the people... Right now, all the polls say that President Obama defeats the Republican nominee, no matter who it is but those polls are fluid.
The President is obviously not nearly as attractive to voters as he was four years ago, but in order to defeat Barack Obama, an excellent campaigner, the Republican Party will have to knock off the nonsense. The GOP candidate will have to go right after the President...and tell the American people why his leadership is harming the country.
As usual O'Reilly is mostly wrong, because the primary reason gas is high is because of greedy oil companies and corrupt oil speculators. The supply of oil is not the problem, it's the corrupt oil speculators bidding up the price of oil to make the rich even richer from the stock market price being rigged. Supply is up and demand is down, so there is no reason for oil to be $103.00 a barrel, it's all a scam by the oil speculators to make the rich richer.
Then Laura Ingraham was on, and of course she agreed with O'Reilly that Republicans are missing opportunities to frame the issues in these debates. She said Rick Santorum had his moments last night, but he was on the defensive too much. She also thought Romney benefited from Ron Paul going after Santorum as much as he did.
Ingraham also said that the reason the debates are falling flat is because the media outlets running them are not in the Republican candidates' corner. Which is ridiculous, and even O'Reilly said that it's not the media's fault; the candidates can answer however they want, but they're just sitting on their hands.
Earth to Ingraham, the reason the debates are falling flat is because they have had too many of them, 20 debates is 10 too many, and the people are bored with hearing them say the same thing over and over, a full 8 months before the election.
Ingraham said the Republican Party has to be more adept at guiding the conversation to real issues that affect Americans, like gas prices. O'Reilly talked about why Americans are disengaged and only 4.5 million people watched the debate last night, saying this: "The only way to get their attention and win the election is to come up with solutions to problems like oil prices and Iran."
Then Kirsten Powers & Mary Anne Marsh were on to talk about Obama and gas prices. Marsh said the President needs to call the oil company CEOs into his office and tell them that if they can't figure out how to make gas prices go down, they need to face the American people and tell them why they're jacking up prices and making record profits during a recession.
Powers denied that President Obama is doing nothing about the problem, claiming he supports drilling. O'Reilly then jumped in to object, saying permits are down to half of what they were under President Bush. And Billy also said it doesn't matter how much we drill if the oil companies send their product to China.
O'Reilly even questioned the President's leadership on the issue, but both women predicted that in the next few weeks, we will see President Obama doing something about high gas prices.
Then Larry Sabato & Scott Rasmussen were on to talk about a new Rasmussen poll in the key states of Florida, North Carolina, Ohio and Virginia that shows Romney and Obama tied at 44%, while Santorum would have the edge in the head-to-head matchup, 47% to Obama's 46%.
Without reporting that the Rasmussen poll is biased to the right, while also ignoring all the other polls that have Obama beating every Republican, no matter who it is.
Rasmussen stated that he doesn't foresee any big swings in polling coming up. He said while Republicans are reluctant to embrace Romney, they're also reluctant to embrace anyone else. Sabato anointed Romney the winner of last night's debate, and said he now expects the former Massachusetts governor to edge ahead in Michigan and Arizona.
So then of course O'Reilly brought it back to the President, even though it was a segent on Republican polls, O'Reilly said he was wondering why the Republicans aren't exploiting Obama's leadership problems. Rasmussen pointed out that polling shows Americans are unhappy with the leadership in both parties.
Then Margaret Hoover & Gretchen Carlson were on for the culture warriors nonsense. On Jay Leno O'Dummy hammered the subculture of drugs and alcohol in this country, and said we need to start telling kids how bad it is. And here's proof: a new study out of the Dartmouth Medical School shows that teens who watch movies featuring alcohol are twice as likely to start drinking as those who don't watch those films very much.
Gretchen said we should we now reconsider restrictions on alcohol placement in movies. Which is ridiculous, and even O'Reilly said censorship never works; the solution, in his opinion, is for the media and celebrity role models to make PSAs delivering the message that getting stoned is stupid.
O'Reilly is calling for more public service spots, even though it has been proven that they do not work, and it's a waste of taxpayer money. Proving he is an idiot.
The California Department of Public Health is now sending condoms to some kids in certain counties. The federal program allows kids ages 12-19 to order a package of condoms online. And of course the 3 right-wing culture warriors were mad as hell about it.
Hoover said this: "I'm paying tax dollars in New York so that a kid in Kern County, California can get 10 free condoms a month in the mail so his parents don't know. That's nuts!"
O'Reilly said that this sort of thing is the new trend in America and that soon taxpayers will be footing the bill for people to go to Club Med.
And finally Megyn Kelly was on to talk about the U.S. Supreme Court who will decide whether the University of Texas should be allowed to take race and ethnicity into consideration when making admissions decisions.
Kelly said this: "This could potentially wipe out the use of affirmative action in college admissions. Nine years later, the Court looks very different than it did when it last heard an affirmative action case." She also thinks Justice Kagan will recuse herself.
So then O'Dummy claimed to have sympathy for anyone deprived of a college education based on race, but he does not think the white student who filed suit in this case should be unfairly treated to right a historical wrong.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
O'Reilly Not Reporting Most Americans Oppose GOP Platform By: Steve - February 24, 2012 - 10:00am
Here is some more news O'Reilly is not telling his viewers, that polls show most Americans oppose what the Republican party want to do.
During an appearance on Fox News Sunday, House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) would not explain why the public rejects large parts of the Republican agenda and instead blamed Democrats for opposing it.
Asked why a recent New York Times/CBS News poll showed that 67 percent of Americans favor raising taxes on millionaires to reduce the deficit, and that 80 percent oppose cutting Medicare, Cantor could only say this: "It is unfair that these individuals who want a better life and want more jobs and higher pay are not getting it."
Cantor also said this: "What is not fair is that we are holding back the economy to grow because you are having Barack Obama working with the Democrats in the Senate, Reid and others, who are saying no to every time we want to grow the economy."
Which is just madness, because it's the Republicans who are holding the economy back from growing even more. They have voted against every jobs bill, stimulus bill, and any bill that would add jobs.
Then they put out spin and talking points that the economy is not growing more because of Obama and the Democrats, which is a 100% lie, it's pure propaganda. They are hoping the people are stupid enough to believe their spin.
And O'Reilly is helping them by putting out the same talking points the GOP does, proving once again that O'Reilly is a big part of the right-wing propaganda machine.
The Wednesday 2-22-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 23, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Gas industry defends itself. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: We began covering the skyrocketing oil prices last Friday with Lou Dobbs. He was candid, saying that because of the mild winter there's plenty of oil and gas in the USA, but prices are much higher because the oil companies are shipping their products overseas.
Measured in dollars, oil products are now America's largest export, worth $88 billion a year to the oil companies. With working Americans getting hammered by stagnant wages and huge unemployment, this is yet another punishing situation for the folks.
If the Obama administration wanted to, it could ask Congress to raise export taxes on the oil companies to encourage them to sell their products here. The feds could exert some control if they wanted to, but they don't.
Why? Well, Republicans generally don't want to inhibit the oil industry and Democrats generally want high gas prices so folks switch to other modes of transportation and embrace alternative energy. This is part of the 'global warming' deal, but who gets hurt by all the politics? You do!
The cartels overseas and the oil companies here set the prices based on what they can get anywhere in the world, so we can expect prices to continue to go higher until the oil companies believe they are going to be held accountable. Then they'll back off, just a bit.
O'Reilly is an idiot, because if Congress raised export taxes on oil companies to encourage them to sell their products here they would just raise the prices here to make that extra money. The oil speculators are rigging the game to make a few people and the oil companies richer, and that is a fact.
The answer is to regulate the oil speculators and stop them from raising the price of oil when it should be going down. And btw, O'Reilly keeps saying Obama and the Democrats want high gas prices. Which is totally insane, because if gas prices are high it hurts his voting base and they will not vote for him, then he loses in November. I do not know one Democrat who wants high gas prices to get people to switch to green energy sources, not one.
Then oil industry spokesman Charles Drevna was on, who said this: "We have an ample supply of fuel here in the United States, but this is a global economy and the price is set in the global market - 84% of the price at the pump is dictated by the cost of crude and taxes. That is the no spin - we don't set the price for gasoline any more than the farmer sets the price for a bushel of corn."
Drevna also responded to Lou Dobbs claim that oil companies are exporting too much of their refined products overseas, saying this: "Yes, we are exporting jet fuel and diesel, which is a good thing for the economy. But there is no shortage of fuel in the United States."
O'Reilly said that big oil, in its quest for profit, is harming average folks, saying this: "In 2011 American families paid $840 more for gasoline than in the previous year, which resulted in $92 billion less money going into our faltering economy. The oil cartels and the oil companies are contributing to the bad economy."
Then Dick Morris was on, and he predicted how President Obama will address high gasoline prices. Morris said this: "He'll say the United States is producing a record amount of oil, but that's because of the offshore permits that Bush issued and the fracking that he has no control over."
Morris also said this: "It's possible that the 2012 election will be played out over the next few months with oil price increases, a possible Israeli attack on Iran, the American response, and the closing of the Straits of Hormuz. It's always possible that a president rises to the occasion and shows himself to be a strong leader, in which case Obama could actually win reelection over this. But most likely he'll be pilloried for high gas prices, then when the Israeli thing erupts he'll probably be weak and get blamed for failure of diplomacy."
And btw, O'Reilly said gas was $5.00 a gallon and going to $6.00. While that may be true in New York, it's not here in Peoria. Gas is $3.45 a gallon right now, so it's not $5.00 a gallon everywhere. Morris predicted it would go to $8.00 a gallon, and I am predicting that never happens.
Then O'Reilly said Rick Santorum's religious views have earned him the scorn of the mainstream media, but how will they play with religious Americans? Pastor Robert Jeffress and Father Edward Beck were on.
Beck said this: "It's going to hurt him, because most people are more in the middle. He will need to carry women and Catholics and his stances may be problematic with both - he's to the right of most Catholics."
Jefress (the conservative) argued that Santorum's traditional faith is actually an asset, saying this: "I don't agree with him on every issue, but I admire a candidate who is willing to stand on principle instead of being driven by pragmatism and polls. In 2008, 30-million evangelical Christians sat home and didn't vote because they weren't energized by John McCain. A man like Santorum inspires people who may not agree with him on every issue. He is in the mainstream of what millions of Christians believe, he's not some nut job out there on the fringe."
And btw, O'Reilly let the religious guest who supported Santorum talk for 3 times more than the guest who opposed Santorum.
Then O'Reilly had Factor producer Jesse Watters on to talk about his Venice Beach report asking people who will get their vote. O'Dummy said the responses were predictably mixed, but that some pinheads had never even heard of Mitt Romney or Rick Santorum. And it was not even worth reporting on so I have nothing more to say about it.
Then Dennis Miller was on to talk about gas prices and Whitney Houston, which I do not report on because he is a comedian and this is not news. It's just Miller on to make jokes about liberals, and the whole segment is a waste of time.
And finally in the last segment Juliet Huddy was on for did you see that. She addressed the controversy over Rick Santorum's 2008 speech in which he warned that Satan "has his sights" set on America.
Huddy said this: "Rick Santorum says it's absurd that he's being criticized for that. He says he's a person of faith who believes in good and evil. He made that speech at a Catholic university and he was speaking in the terms you would address that type of audience with. A lot of people like Rick Santorum because he does speak his mind."
Then the highly edited Factor mail, then the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
O'Reilly Defended Rick Santorum On The Jay Leno Show By: Steve - February 23, 2012 - 10:00am
On The Tonight Show Tuesday night, Jay Leno challenged Bill O'Reilly about Rick Santorum's comments on social issues, Leno said this:
LENO: He doesn't like condoms, he doesn't like birth control, I don't understand this anti-gay thing. It doesn't make any sense to me.
So what did O'Reilly do, he defended his right-wing friend of course. O'Reilly said that people should disregard the dopey past comments he has made because he's inexperienced:
O'REILLY: I think people should define their religion and why they believe and what they believe if you're running for president. I think they should do that, but I don't think they should be saying, Well, my religion is better than yours, or anything like that.
Look, Santorum is a guy is who is inexperienced in this arena. He got drawn into a few things. He's made some past comments.
Everybody has dopey past comments, so we have to cut him a little slack. He'd be wise to say, look, I said what I said, now let's get into the economy, and that's where he should go.
How the hell could he be inexperienced, he has been around politics for 30 years, including being a Senator. So the excuse O'Reilly made for this right-wing loon Santorum did not even make any sense.
In fact, O'Reilly seems to think candidates histories should be disregarded entirely, because he also said that Newt Gingrich's conversion to Catholicism made him an entirely different person.
But if the candidate is a Democrat O'Reilly wants to know everything about the person, and reports on every statement the person had made in their entire life. It's bias, hypocrisy, and a double standard from O'Reilly. And btw, I do not want to know about a persons religion, even if they are running for President. Your ewligion should be kept private, and you should practice your religion in private or a church.
Crazy Iowa Republicans Want To Ban All Abortions By: Steve - February 23, 2012 - 9:00am
And not only do they want to ban all abortions, they want to put any doctor who does an abortion in prison for life without parole. This is how insane the Republicans are, because abortion is legal, and it's never going to change. Even if a State passes such a law the U.S. Supreme Court would throw it out because federal law says abortion is legal.
These people are nuts, and they should just shut up about abortion and deal with real issues, like the economy, jobs, health care, etc. To this day I still do not understand why these far-right loons think they have a right to tell a woman if she can have an abortion or not.
Shut up and mind your own business, what a woman does with her body is her business, so get a clue and get over it.
Here is the story from last week: Iowa state Rep. Kim Pearson (R), a freshman Tea Party lawmaker so extreme that she's already drawn scorn from a few fellow Republicans and decided not to run for re-election, introduced a bill that would completely outlaw all abortions.
Among other things, the bill makes it so a doctor that performs and abortion commits feticide -- a Class A felony, which is punishable by life imprisonment without the chance for parole:
The bill even makes attempted feticide, where the fetus does not die, a Class B felony, punishable by 25 years in prison.
Iowans can even be punished for helping someone else perform an abortion, as, "joint criminal conduct shall apply to persons knowingly participating or concerned in the commission of feticide or attempted feticide under this section."
The bill (which would certainly violate Roe v. Wade) was basically just a waste of time when there are real economic problems facing the state.
"House Republicans and their colleagues in the Senate would rather put the lives of women in danger than have a real discussion about how we create jobs and move Iowa forward," Iowa Democratic Party Chairwoman Sue Dvorsky said in a statement.
While the prospects of Pearson's bill passing are low, a state House committee is currently debating a separate anti-abortion measure that would make doctors show a woman sonogram of the fetus before terminating a pregnancy.
This focus on abortion also violates a pledge made by Iowa House Speaker Kraig Paulsen (R) when he said this in November: "We're also not interested in squandering Iowans time on divisive social issues."
And here is my message to the Republicans in America. Mind your own business, stop trying to make abortion illegal, and stop trying to tell women what they can and can not do with their own body. This is America, the land of the free and the brave. But if you make abortion illegal it is not the land of the free for women.
Get a clue and get a life, move on and stop wasting our time with this abortion diversion, you lost and the abortion debate is over, it's legal, accept it and move on with your stupid lives.
The Tuesday 2-21-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 22, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: GOP candidates gear up for big debate. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The four Republican candidates will debate once again Wednesday in Mesa, Arizona, four days before primaries in Michigan and Arizona. Rick Santorum has a slim lead over Mitt Romney in Michigan; in Arizona it looks like Romney is running ahead.
There is no question the race is now down to Romney vs. Santorum, but if Newt Gingrich scores big tomorrow night he could come back. However, it is Romney who is really feeling the heat. If he does not perform well, he is likely to lose Michigan and perhaps even Arizona.
The problem for the Governor is that Gingrich and Santorum might gang up on him Wednesday night. They both need to damage him in order to make progress, so the Governor will be target number one. Some Republicans are worried about Rick Santorum securing the nomination, believing his social positions are out of the mainstream.
There is no question that his straight talk on moral issues has made him a viable candidate for conservative Americans, so it's to Santorum's benefit in the primaries to play the judgmental card. But of course that would be used against him in the general election.
If you want more proof O'Reilly is a right-wing stooge, just look at what he said about Santorum. O'Reilly said his straight talk on moral issues has made him a viable candidate for conservative Americans. Which is just ridiculous, saying that his far-right garbage on social issues is straight talk is a joke. Santorum is a far-right loon, and yet O'Reilly refuses to admit it, because he is a Republican who likes Santorum.
Then O'Reilly had Karl Rove on to preview Wednesday night's debate, and of course no Democratic guest was on for balance.
Rove said this: "If Gingrich and Santorum come out throwing haymakers at Romney, it gives them less control over the outcome and it keeps them from achieving from what they need to do. Each one of them has something they need to accomplish - Santorum needs to come out as an economic conservative and answer questions about his social views; Gingrich needs to get back into the game by being the big visionary; and Romney has to demonstrate that he has passion and conviction about these big issues of the economy and jobs."
O'Reilly said this: "Romney is going to have to define Santorum because Santorum is pulling ahead of him, I think they'll go after each other."
Then O'Reilly had R.T. Rybak, from the Democratic National Committee on to talk about gas prices. Rybak said this: "The President knows just what to do about this. He's been pursuing an 'all of the above' strategy. We need to increase domestic production, we need to limit the amount that comes into this country, and we should allow some new drilling in this country. But we can't put our head in the sand and pretend that all we have to do is just keep consuming. We need more domestic production and on that the President has succeeded."
And of course the biased right-wing hack O'Reilly disagreed, saying this: "You said the President has done a lot, but he has failed because gas prices are at the highest level in history at this time of year."
Which is ridiculous, Obama has not failed because the President has nothing to do with gas prices, O'Reilly himself even said that when Bush was the President. Now he says Obama has failed when gas prices go up, when it's the world oil market, the oil companies, and the corrupt oil speculators that control the price of oil and gas.
Then O'Reilly had Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes on to talk about gas prices. Crowley said this: "Because oil is traded in dollars, inflation and a weak dollar are moving prices, and there is volatility in the Middle East. But also, the overall policy under President Obama has been so bad - he's blocked drilling, blocked exploration and slow-walked permits. Prices will come down if you introduce greater volume from greater domestic production."
And that is just total right-wing lies, none of what the crazy far-right loon Monica Crowley said is true.
Colmes said this: "A lot of this is oil speculation and this is a global market. There's only so much a president can do to control the price of oil."
So then O'Reilly advised Obama to issue a firm edict to the oil companies, saying this: "If you're going to refine in the United States, you sell in the United States. And if you don't, you pay a higher tax to export."
Which is a good idea from O'Reilly, but it's not why gas prices are so high, gas prices are high because the corrupt oil speculators are at it again. They bid up the price of oil to get rich for a few months then they will lower it back down. They do this every year and everyone knows it.
Then O'Reilly had the right-wing loon John Stossel on to talk about Greece's rules for workers. And Stossel used it to slam the minimum wage law here in America. Proving that he is an idiot, just like his buddy Bill O'Reilly.
Stossel said this: "The Greek government says it's illegal to work more than a five-day week, and it's illegal to give someone a temporary job. The result is that people don't get hired and they have 21% unemployment. It's one more reason why the country is a mess."
Stossel also laid out his objection to minimum wage laws, saying this: "You don't need a law to set the minimum wage as long as the worker is free to take the job or leave it. Let the worker and the boss negotiate."
O'Reilly pointed out that American companies are relatively unburdened, saying this: "There's an index measuring how companies are regulated and we're number one in the sense that the government doesn't interfere with private enterprise."
Then Kimberly Guilfoyle & Lis Wiehl were on to talk about a federal judge in Louisiana who has tossed out a state law that bans certain sex offenders from Facebook and other social network sites.
Wiehl said this: "The law was way too broad. It would ban, virtually forever, any sex offender from even going onto Internet job listings or sending emails and text messages to loved ones. The court said the state has an interest in protecting children, but this is too broad."
Guilfoyle said this: "The judge made the right decision in terms of the law, but you want to protect innocent children and this is going to trump that. Governor Bobby Jindal plans to appeal the ruling."
O'Reilly said this: "One of these guys could go on Facebook and say, 'I'm having a big picnic and I want all you kids to come on down.'"
And finally for some insane reason O'Reilly had Glenn Beck on, who had some meetings in Rome last week. Beck said this: "I met with Catholic cardinals from around the world, to talk about the program we have called 'We Are All Catholics Now.' We need to stand with Catholics, Jewish people and anyone who is under attack."
Beck also said this: "While I was there I also met with people who belong to the 'freedom movement' around the world. The left is united and it's time for those who want freedom, faith and equal justice for all to stand together. I think it's important that we do this - if we don't help each other, Europe is going to fall into darkness and the old hatreds will rear their ugly heads."
Then O'Reilly made some stupid joke comparing Beck to the billionaire George Soros, saying this: "I see this as you versus George Soros for world dominance."
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
Crazy Rick Santorum Calls Obama A Phony Christian By: Steve - February 22, 2012 - 10:00am
Crazy comments like this are why Rick Santorum will never be the President, because it's nonsense to begin with, and it's all about firing up the far-right religious crowd to vote for him so he can beat Romney.
Santorum slammed President Obama for theological scrutiny over the weekend, saying the commander in chief believes in some phony theology. ABC News reported this:
The president's agenda is not about you. It's not about you. It's not about your quality of life. It's not about your job.
"It's about some phony ideal, some phony theology," Santorum said to applause from the crowd. "Oh, not a theology based on the Bible, a different theology, but no less a theology."
Which makes Santorum not only a liar, but a crazy liar. In a 2008 speech rediscovered this week, Santorum said Mainline Protestants — about 45 million Presbyterians, Lutherans, Congregationalists, Episcopalians, Methodists and others — are "gone from the world of Christianity as I see it."
And even some conservatives disagree, the conservative Presbyterian blogger John Schroeder wrote this: "Santorum's truly intolerant comments concerning Obama pretty well disqualify him from holding office. It is simply not the president's job to be judging whose theology is correct and whose is not."
The former Obama press secretary Robert Gibbs responded to Santorum's comments saying this: "I can't help but think that those remarks are well over the line. It's wrong, it's destructive."
Gibbs added that while Santorum now claims the comments were not about Obama's character and faith, it's hard not to see them that way when you call someone a phony christian.
The Monday 2-20-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 21, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: High gas prices hammering working folks. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Driving in from Los Angeles International Airport yesterday, I saw gas signs that said $4.50 a gallon. Across the country, we are now paying the highest gas prices at this time of year ever, but President Obama has said little about it.
That's strange because his main focus has been on helping working Americans and redistributing income. Well, what we're really doing now is redistributing money to the oil companies! The President gives working Americans a payroll tax cut, but the extra income goes into the gas tank.
Working Americans and the poor are getting hosed at the pump. Lou Dobbs says there's plenty of gas and oil in America, but to make bigger profits the oil companies are sending their refined products overseas. What is the federal government doing about that? Zero, nothing, nada.
The Obama administration wants the price of oil as high as possible so Americans demand alternative energy, and the oil companies know they can make more money in China so they send the stuff over there. We're getting hammered from both the government and the oil companies.
It's my job to tell you the truth, and right now we are all being taken advantage of by an administration that has an anti-fossil fuel agenda and an oil industry that manipulates the U.S. market. Who's looking out for us? Nobody!
Give me a break, like O'Reilly cares about the working folks. If he actually cared about the working folks he would not support 99% of the Republican positions, and not put out all that right-wing propaganda. And O'Reilly is crazy when he says Obama wants the price of oil as high as possible, that is a lie.
What O'Reilly is doing is pretending to care about high gas prices for the working folks so he can use it to slam Obama, it's pure right-wing propaganda and 100% partisan attack politics.
Then Juan Williams and Mary Katharine Ham were on to discuss it. Williams said this: "You're on to something, when you say the oil companies are gouging us. But how can you say the Obama folks want to raise gas prices? He's a politician, he's running for reelection and he doesn't want the economy to be a drag on his chances. I don't think he has a lot to say about instability in Iraq and Syria, which is a primary force behind driving up these prices."
Ham said this: "Why was the price of gas $1.72 at the start of the Obama administration and why has it gone up? Partly because of his actions and partly because of the Middle East. The left, the media and Barack Obama enjoy high gas prices because they hope it pushes people toward alternative energy."
Then O'Reilly slammed big oil and the traders who speculate on prices, saying this: "It's $70 now to fill the tank. That's not supply and demand, it's speculation and greed!"
Then Brit Hume was on to talk about Rick Santorum, who has snatched the lead from Mitt Romney among Republicans in most national polls.
Hume said this: "The experience of the past, suggests that when Mitt Romney needed to raise his game during debates he's been able to do that - the last victim of that was Newt Gingrich. Polls are tightening and if they continue on their current trend, it appears that Romney has a significant chance of winning Michigan and Arizona."
Hume also talked about Rick Santorum's extremely conservative views on contraception, prenatal testing and abortion, saying this: "Those are not the major issues this election year. In a Republican primary those issues might not hurt him too badly, in a general election with independent voters they would hurt him. Those issues would be general election poison."
Then O'Reilly had the Obama hating partisan right-wing hack Lt. Col. Ralph Peters on to talk about the speculation that Israel will soon bomb Iran's nuclear facilities.
Peters said this: "The Israelis are serious, and there is a fundamental divide between Israel and Washington. For Israel this is about survival, but for the Obama administration this is about kicking the can down the road past the November elections. Israel feels time is running out."
O'Reilly warned that a military strike would have far-reaching consequences, saying this: "If Israel attacks, world oil is going to go crazy, the Muslim world is going to go nuts, World War III may break out. So you give it as much time as you possibly can."
Then O'Reilly had Sean Stone on, who converted to Islam last week in Iran. Stone said this: "Conversion is an interesting word, because I don't believe you can convert from one God to the same God. I've always believed in the same Judeo-Christian God and it's a misunderstanding of Islam to say Allah is a different God."
Stone also said that he has spoken with leaders of Iran's government, saying this: "I was very clear in saying let's stop with this 'down with America' nonsense. They have a problem with the American government and imperialism, but they understood my point of view. I think my being there helped America's image."
O'Reilly reminded Stone that President Ahmadinejad is a rogue actor on the world stage, saying this: "When Ahmadinejad says the Holocaust never happened and that he'd like to drive the Israelis into the sea, you're dealing with a guy who is an extremist and a fanatic. You could be seen as a pawn, someone who is being used."
Then the far-right loon Bernie Goldberg was on to discuss a new study that saysa 53% of babies born to women under 30 are born out of wedlock; for black babies that number is 73%.
Goldberg said this: "The New York Times deserves credit, for making this story the lead on Saturday. Studies consistently show that children born outside of marriage don't do well, and here's an area where the President could use the bully pulpit to try to do some good. But he's made a conscious decision to run for reelection by dividing Americans based on how much money they have in their bank accounts. With all due respect, Mr. President, you ought to tell these women and their irresponsible boyfriends that they need to do their fair share."
And finally in the last segment O'Reilly had the ridiculous Factor Reality Check, which I do not report on because it's simply O'Reilly by himself giving his right-wing opinion of something someone else said. With no guest to counter his spin, so it's not a reality check, it's just Billy's biased opinion with nobody on to balance him.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
O'Reilly & Fox Trying To Help The GOP With Diversions By: Steve - February 21, 2012 - 10:00am
Bill O'Reilly tells us almost every night how he is not a partisan Republican, he also claims to be a non-partisan Independent who has nothing against President Obama, and he even claims to not be a biased Ideologue. O'Reilly has also said he never uses any Republican talking points, and he even told Professor Marc Lamont Hill one time that he might sue him for saying he is a Republican.
But if you watch the Factor every night as I do, you can clearly see that Bill O'Reilly is a liar. Because he does everything he says he does not do. He is as biased and as partisan as any Republican I have ever watched on any tv news show in the 30 years I have been watching the news shows on tv.
O'Reilly is as biased as Karl Rove, Laura Ingraham, Dick Morris, Sean Hannity, etc. They all say virtually the exact same things, and take the same positions on the issues. O'Reilly is as Republican as it gets, and he uses every Republican talking point they have, which proves he is a dishonest so-called journalist. And the rule is if you are caught lying about one thing you can never be trusted to tell the truth on anything.
Let's look at a few big issues, the economy, the deficit, and jobs. O'Reilly takes the Republican position on it, puts out the GOP talking points, and has 90% right-wing guests on to agree with him to make it look like he is right about it. And all the stooges at Fox do the exact same thing.
After weeks of dismissing news that the economy is improving and downplaying concerns over income inequality, Fox News is now trying to pivot the conversation away from economic growth to focus on deficit reduction, even as economists continue to warn that doing so would be bad for the economy. O'Reilly, Hannity, Tucker Carlson, Martha MacCallum and pretty much everyone at Fox haave argued that the debt "needs to be an issue" in the presidential election, and urged Republican candidates to make debt reduction "the issue" in the campaign.
And when a guest with MacCallum (Christopher Hahn) argued that debt reduction could wait until the economy is on firmer ground before making our primary focus deficit reduction, MacCallum said this: "Oh please!"
O'Reilly talks about the deficit almost every night, just last week O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Financial ruin comes from spending more money than you have, yet President Obama continues to do that, opining that he'll eventually decrease deficit spending by taxing the rich. That is a myth - spending is so far out of control that you can't even dent the debt by raising taxes on the affluent.
Unfortunately, many Americans don't even care about this vital issue. To those folks I point to Greece, where over the weekend protesters tried to destroy that troubled country. Why? Because the government is cutting entitlements to save itself from default.
Talking Points believes the American economic machine is still strong, unlike Greece, but there is no question that President Obama's policies are putting our currency at great risk. If the dollar collapses, all of our personal assets will be in jeopardy.
I go back to the facts: America will soon owe more than $16 trillion but Mr. Obama is not making drastic spending cuts. Does that sound like a good policy to you?"
And that is pretty much what O'Reilly says almost every night. But when George W. Bush was the President O'Reilly and Fox sang a totally different tune. Back then they never talked about the deficit, they ignored the debt and in fact, when Democrats brought it up they made fun of them and laughed at talk about the debt.
Now when we have a Democratic President in the White House it's suddenly the most important issue facing America today. Which is a flat out lie folks, because the latest Gallup poll says that only 8% of Americans even care about the debt. With other polls having that number at 2% and 4%, but O'Reilly and Fox still cry about it every night and tell you it is an important issue with the American people.
This is flat out dishonest journalism, and nothing but 100% right-wing propaganda. And O'Reilly does it as much (if not more) than any Republican in America. Not to mention, he is doing it on the #1 rated cable news show, so a lot of people see his lies. Making him a hero in the Republican party, as he claims to not be a Republican.
How much more dishonest can you get, not much, so O'Reilly is one of the biggest right-wing spin doctor liars in America. It's laughable to claim to be an Independent, while spewing out right-wing talking points non-stop. And yet, that is exactly what O'Reilly is doing.
And btw, Economists warn that debt reduction should wait until the economic recovery is on firmer ground. Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, explained that prioritizing the deficit now makes no sense:
BAKER: There are no businesses that are going to hire additional workers because the government laid off school teachers or firefighters and we cut back spending on food stamps. Businesses hire more workers when they see more demand for their product.
All of these actions that reduce the deficit, either on the spending or tax side, translate into less demand and therefore less employment. In short, those who want to cut the deficit now are lobbying for fewer jobs and higher unemployment.
And the tactic of shifting the debate away from jobs and economic growth to fixate on debt is nothing new at Fox. In the spring of 2010, while economists were arguing that more needed to be done to reduce unemployment and help grow the economy, Fox News insisted that debt was "our number one issue."
It's not just economists who say it is not the time to shift attention away from economic growth. Voters overwhelmingly say that jobs and the economy should be the #1 issue of this year's election, not the debt.
Voters are also saying that the economy is moving in the right direction, rather than the wrong direction; and they are more likely to say that the Republican Party is moving in the wrong direction.
All of which explains why O'Reilly and Fox are trying to move the debate in a different direction. It's a diversion trick to focus you on the debt, because the economy is doing better and jobs are coming back.
And O'Reilly is leading the debt charge for the GOP, as he claims to be an impartial Independent journalist. When only 8% of the people even care about it, which makes O'Reilly the most biased and dishonest so-called journalist in America.
O'Reilly & Fox Lie That Obama To Blame For High Gas Prices By: Steve - February 20, 2012 - 10:00am
Here is more proof that Bill O'Reilly is a big part of the GOP propaganda operation. Blaming President Obama for high gas prices, and making the ridiculous claim that it is his fault that gas prices are up 90% on his watch. On 2-9-12 O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: On the energy front, the administration wants alternative energy to take the place of fossil fuels. The feds have invested more than $90-billion in 'green' research, some of it totally down the drain like the Solyndra situation.
Also, oil production is being discouraged and the pipeline from Canada has been shut down. The result - gas prices have increased by 90% of Mr. Obama's watch.
And that's not all, almost every night O'Reilly blames Obama for the price of gas. When he knows that is dishonest, because on past shows O'Reilly has even admitted that oil speculators are the reason oil and gas prices are so high. But now that the price of gas is being used to do political damage to Obama by the GOP, O'Reilly has jumped on that bandwagon as fast as possible.
As the employment outlook improves, Fox News is advising Republicans to focus on blaming President Obama for rising gasoline prices -- a claim with no relation to economic fact.
On at least six occasions last week, Fox News pushed the GOP talking point that gasoline prices have almost doubled (increasing 83% or 90% or 91%) since Obama took office in January 2009.
The claim was also promoted by the Drudge Report and CNSNews, as well as the Senate Republican Conference. Fox falsely suggested that Obama's energy policies are to blame for the increase in prices, without explaining that gas prices were so low in January 2009 because the recession cut demand.
[The O'Reilly Factor, 2/9/12][CNSNews.com, 2/14/12] [Drudge Report, 2/14/12][Senate Republican Conference, 2/15/12][Fox & Friends, 2/15/12][Your World with Neil Cavuto, 2/15/12][The Five, 2/15/12][Special Report, 2/15/12][Fox & Friends, 2/16/12]
While ignoring the fact that gas prices were over $4.00 a gallon during the Bush years, and not once did O'Reilly or Fox blame Bush for the high gas prices. In fact, when Democrats accused Bush and Cheney of letting the oil and gas companies inflate the prices, O'Reilly and Fox defended them saying the President and the Vice President have nothing to do with the price of oil or gas.
In fact, gasoline prices dropped greatly in late 2008 in the midst of a massive recession. The Washington Post wrote this in February of 2009: "The Overwhelming Cause Of The Collapse In Oil Prices Has Been The Faltering World Economy." The price of oil was at $39.00 a barrel then, not it's over $100.00 a barrel.
So oil and gas prices were really low, then they went up as the oil speculators took advantage of the economy getting better under Obama. So the 90% increase claim is just ridiculous, because Obama had nothing to do with it.
And now the facts, the experts say speculation and refinery closures are currently pushing the prices up. Here is a quote from a February 14th Bloomberg Businessweek report:
The current run-up in prices comes despite sinking demand in the U.S. "Petrol demand is as low as it's been since April 1997," says Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst for the Oil Price Information Service.
"People are puzzled by the fact that we're using less gas than we have in years, yet we're paying more."
Kloza believes much of the increase is due to speculative money that's flowed into gasoline futures contracts since the beginning of the year, mostly from hedge funds and large money managers.
"We've seen about $11 billion of speculative money come in on the long side of gas futures," he says. "Each of the last three weeks we've seen a record net long position being taken."
Refineries have also been getting squeezed by higher crude prices over the past several months, forcing some of them to shut down rather than operate at a loss, says [equity analyst Jason] Stevens."
And yet, the stooges at Fox are saying the GOP should blame Obama for gas prices, here are a few examples.
2-16-12 -- Steve Doocy: "Gas Prices Are An Opportunity To Disrupt Positive Economic Narrative."
2-15-12 -- Steven Hayes: Republicans Should "Point To The President's Role In Causing These Gas Prices To Go Up."
2-16-12 -- On the February 16th Fox & Friends, Juliet Huddy asked if rising prices are "enough to derail Obama's return to the office." Eric Bolling replied: "Well it better be. What else matters? How much we pay for a gallon of gas. How much we pay for a loaf of bread."
2-15-12 -- Pat Caddell: Gas Prices Are "A Perfect Issue" For The GOP.
2-15-12 -- A.B. Stoddard: Rising Gas Prices "Will Be A Good Talking Point For Republicans."
2-16-12 -- Doug Schoen: Gas Prices Could Prevent Obama From "Benefitting From The Drop In The Unemployment Rate."
All that is a lie folks, and O'Reilly is doing it too, in the last week or two O'Reilly has blamed Obama for the high gas prices 4 or 5 times. When they all know it's a lie, they do it anyway because they are trying to help the Republican party make the people think Obama is to blame.
Which is pretty sad, because the people will not fall for it, they are not that dumb. All it does is show how biased and dishonest they are at Fox, and it simply makes them look like fools. And yet, they do it anyway because that is what dishonest partisan right-wing hacks do. And the great so-called Independent Bill O'Reilly is leading the charge, even though he claims to be an impartial non-partisan.
Santorum Beating Romney In His Home State Of Michigan By: Steve - February 19, 2012 - 11:00am
Santorum is leading Romney in Michigan, Romney's birthplace, according to a new poll from the Detroit News. The results showed that Santorum is up 34 percent compared to Romney's 30 percent.
He is beating Romney in his home state, even though Romney is outspending him 30 to 1, which shows how much the conservatives hate Romney, especially in Michigan.
And O'Reilly has not said a word about it. But when Gore ran for President and he was losing his home state to Bush, O'Reilly and Fox went wild reporting that a million times a day. Not only that, O'Reilly said that if Gore can not win his home state he does not deserve to be the President.
Proving once again how biased to the right O'Reilly is, and what massive hypocrisy and double standards he has when it comes to Republicans and Democrats.
More Good Economic News O'Reilly Has Ignored By: Steve - February 19, 2012 - 10:00am
The number of people seeking unemployment benefits fell to the lowest point in almost four years last week, in the latest signal that the job market is steadily improving.
Applications for benefits dropped 13,000 to 348,000 -- well below analysts expectations. And btw, it was the 4th drop in five weeks.
But if you watch the Factor for your news you would not know any of this info, including the January jobs report info, because O'Reilly has not said a word about any of it.
O'Reilly ignores any and all good news on the economy, jobs, and the stock market. Because it not only is good political news for President Obama and the Country, it shows that O'Reilly was wrong when he said the liberal economic policies from Obama are not working.
Now if this was happening with a Republican in the White House O'Reilly would be shouting from the rooftops about it, and saying it shows what a great job the President is doing. I know that because he did it when Bush was in the White House.
When Bush was in office O'Reilly reported and promoted any good economic or jobs news, and did it often, always giving Bush credit. Now that Obama is n charge O'Reilly ignores all the good economic news and never gives Obama any credit for it. While at the same time saying the debt is the big issue and saying the liberal Obama policies are a failure.
Democratic Women Boycott House Contraception Hearing By: Steve - February 19, 2012 - 9:00am
Thursday morning, Democrats slammed the House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) for preventing women from testifying before a hearing examining the Obama administration's new regulation requiring employers and insurers to provide contraception coverage to their employees.
Republicans oppose the administration's rule and have sponsored legislation that would allow employers to limit the availability of birth control to women.
Ranking committee member Elijah Cummings (D-MD) had asked Issa to include a female witness at the hearing, but the Chairman refused, arguing that "As the hearing is not about reproductive rights and contraception but instead about the Administration's actions as they relate to freedom of religion and conscience, he believes that Ms. Fluke is not an appropriate witness."
Cummings, along with the Democratic women on the panel, took their request to the hearing room, demanding that Issa consider the testimony of a female college student. But Issa insisted that the hearing should focus on the rules alleged infringement on religious liberty, not contraception coverage, and denied the request.
So Congresswomen Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) walked out of the hearing in protest of his decision, citing frustration over the fact that the first panel of witnesses consisted only of male religious leaders against the rule. Holmes Norton said she will not return, calling Issa's chairmanship an autocratic regime.
Issa also dismissed the Democrats woman witness as a college student who does not have the appropriate credentials to testify before his committee.
The Friday 2-17-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 18, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Will Santorum's birth control stance hurt him? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: This has not been a good week for Senator Rick Santorum and it's not really his fault - he simply told the truth but did so in a way that will hurt him. One of Santorum's big donors is a man named Foster Friess, a conservative millionaire investor.
Incredibly, Mr. Friess went on MSNBC to talk about contraception, where he joked that 'back in my days they used Bayer aspirin for contraception, the gals put it between their knees.' Senator Santorum says Mr. Friess doesn't have any power in his campaign, but that's not going to stop MSNBC and other left-wing media from hammering him.
Everybody knows the majority of the American media wants to reelect Barack Obama, so why are Republican candidates and their supporters giving the opposition machine guns? Talking about the private behavior of Americans is a no-win situation, so Rick Santorum should have never said that birth control has led to a 'dramatic increase in sexually transmitted diseases.'
The majority of American voters have no interest in politicians talking about private stuff and Mr. Santorum's private view is never going to be accurately represented. If Rick Santorum does secure the Republican nomination, he will be portrayed as a Puritan witch hunter, a fanatical religious guy, a member of the Inquisition. That's how the liberal media will tag Santorum, and to uninformed voters it could do him damage.
Wow O'Reilly, that was some great spin job. Why don't you just join the Santorum campaign staff, because that TPM you just put out sounded like his Campaign manager wrote it. Santorum is a far-right pro-life idiot, and his views are way out of the mainstream. The only reason you defend him is because you are also a far-right pro-life Republican, except you do not have the integrity to admit it.
Then O'Reilly had Janine Turner and Leslie Marshall on to discuss it. And of course the right-wing Turner agreed with O'Reilly, saying this: "I agree with you, that this is a very difficult situation for Santorum. I think he's a principled conservative and a compassionate man, but it's getting lost in the translation. I bristle when I hear this kind of thing because it alienates a lot of people and I like him."
Marshall said this: "If you're running for President it's very transparent and he has to say what he believes. But the perception is that he's trying to push his lifestyle and religion on everyone else. That's how he's coming off, especially to female voters."
Then O'Reilly had Lanny Davis on to slam Media Matters, but Davis turned it on O'Reilly and showed what a biased hypocrite O'Reilly is for calling to have their tax-exempt status revoked, by pointing out that he says nothing about Brent Bozell's Media Research Center.
Davis said this: "If they're not allowed to be ideological, then they ought to be deprived of their tax-exempt status. But the law has to be applied equally - Brent Bozell's Media Research Center has a point of view and criticizes liberal media and Democrats, but I never heard you say we should deprive Brent of his tax exemption. You have to be even-handed."
Not to mention, Media Matters also goes after Democrats once in a while, but O'Reilly ignores that because it would ruin his spin that they only go after conservatives. Mostly O'Reilly and the right are just mad at Media Matters for exposing their bias, hypocrisy, and their propaganda for the GOP.
Then O'Reilly did an entire segment (by himself) just to slam President Obama and lie about his policies. O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: I believe the President does not understand macroeconomics, he does not realize the danger he is putting the nation in jeopary by running up trillions of dollars in debt.
I am well aware that some of you believe the President is spending on purpose in order to reinvent the economic system in a socialistic way.
But the evidence points to the fact that Mr. Obama simply does not believe the massive debt is going to come back to bite him. Harry Truman was not a brilliant man, but he was very effective because he had common sense. Same thing with Ronald Reagan.
So while President Obama may be Woodrow Wilson's intellectual equal, his economic policies are simply not working.
Are you for real O'Reilly, what a joke. Look around jerk, the Obama economic policies are working, you just refuse to report on it or admit it. I could write a thousand word report showing what is working, unemployment is going down, the stock market is up, jobs are coming back, and on and on.
But in O'Reillyworld none of that is happening. And that segment is 1000% proof that Bill O'Reilly is a lying, biased, right-wing hack who hates Obama and lies about him to make him look bad. If we had this economy under a Republican President O'Reilly would praise him as if he was a miracle worker.
Which Obama was, look at the economy and the jobs numbers the day Bush left office 3 years ago, and look at it now. O'Reilly ignores all that to put out right-wing propaganda, then he has the nerve to slam other news sources as biased, when he is more biased than any of them.
Then O'Reilly had Geraldo on to talk about drugs and violence in Mexico, which I will not report on because it is not happening in America and I could care less about it. I care about what is happening in America, not Mexico.
Then O'Reilly had the far-right Lou Dobbs on to talk about why gas prices are so high. Which is just ridiculous, because Dobbs is a partisan analyst, why not have an actual gas price expert on, instead of a paid Fox News stooge.
Dobbs said this: "Jet fuel and diesel and gasoline, would normally be in abundance right now, but it's being shipped overseas. We're exporting fuel and what is left is going up in price because there is sufficient demand. This is also true in home heating oil - there's a 10% decrease in demand because of the warm winter, but these fuels are being exported overseas. We are now part of a world market and we are competing with demand in China, Europe and Latin America."
Which is a small part of it, but most of the increased cost is due to the oil speculators who are bidding up the price of oil. Back in 2011 it was even reported that oil speculators made $50 million dollars by manipulating the price of oil. And they are doing it again, but Dobbs never said a word about it.
And finally in the last segment Greg Gutfeld and Arthel Neville were on for dumbest things of the week.
Gutfeld (who is a little man himself) picked Rosie O'Donnell, for admitting she is afraid of little people, saying this to O'Reilly: "For little people everywhere, this is the story of the year. You wouldn't know because you're a tall angry man and you look down on people like me because it's easy to look down on people like me."
Neville picked the Army program that has some trainees wearing fake breasts and bellies, saying this: "This is a pregnancy simulator. They're trying to understand what it's like to be pregnant because they're learning to teach pregnant soldiers fitness classes."
O'Dummy picked singer Tony Bennett, who responded to Whitney Houston's death by calling for the legalization of drugs.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
O'Reilly Lies About What Liberals Want Again By: Steve - February 18, 2012 - 10:00am
This is getting old, as usual O'Reilly was caught lying that liberals want the country to be like Havana, or Moscow, or Berlin In The 1930s, which is just insane. Here is what the crazy O'Reilly said:
Folks that is crazy, and only a far-right loon would even say such a thing. America is not going to turn into Havana or Moscow or Berlin in the 30's, and liberals do not want that. It's just more right-wing propaganda from O'Reilly, the man who claims to be a non-partisan (fair and balanced Independent) who has nothing personal against President Obama.
And if you believe that he is an Independent I am Bill Gates, it's ridiculous. O'Reilly is as Republican as it gets, and he uses right-wing talking points as often as Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, or any other Republican. O'Reilly is a right-wing hack, and it's dishonest for him to deny it, proving you should never believe anything he says.
The Thursday 2-16-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 17, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Why the media won't tell you the true story about Whitney Houston. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: This morning on the Today Show, Matt Lauer and I got into it over how the media is covering the death of Whitney Houston. Lauer claimed the media consistently detailed her erratic behavior; I said we in the media wink at drug use.
There is a report today that says 10% of American kids are currently living with an alcoholic parent; that's seven-and-a-half million subjected to that horror. And when you add drug use to the equation, millions more kids are affected. So where is the media on this? Nowhere!
We either completely ignore the situation or glorify the party life. Why? Because the secular press doesn't like to make judgments about personal behavior. That stems from the 1960's - do your own thing! Whitney Houston's 'own thing' killed her, and her 18-year-old daughter watched her mother's drug-fueled activities for most of her life.
The media in America is largely cowardly, politically correct, and unconcerned about the nation's children. Here's some more straight talk: Once children enter the world of intoxication, their childhood is over, they're never the same. But as a country we are now embracing the 'medical marijuana' ruse, a quasi-legalization scam. Where is the national media's reporting on that? Nowhere, man!
What an idiot, the media reports on alcohol and drug abuse all the time, they even have a few reality shows about it. Like Dr. Drew and Intervention, etc. So O'Reilly does not have a clue what he is talking about. I see reports on alcohol and drug abuse all the time, and I barely watch the news on tv, so O'Reilly is wrong.
Then O'Reilly had Professor Marc Lamont Hill on, who said this: "80% of people incarcerated for drugs, are not big-time dope dealers, they're small-time drug users. This is a serious medical issue that needs to be treated with a medicalized response as opposed to a criminalized response. We don't want to have prisons filled with crack addicts and heroin addicts, I'd rather have treatment. Whitney Houston had a medical problem, a drug addiction that the media made light of."
And of course O'Reilly took issue with Hill's assertion about drug crimes, even though Dr. Hill is right. O'Dummy said this: "You don't get sentenced to prison for using, you must sell or possess a certain amount to be charged with a felony. This is a violent crime that enslaves people."
What a total idiot, drug use and selling drugs in not a violent crime. My God O'Reilly is just stupid.
Then Karl Rove was on, and Billy asked him why the White House, despite Rick Santorum's recent surge, continues to target Mitt Romney.
Which is one of the dumbest questions O'Reilly has ever asked, and I think he did this segment just to give Santorum some air time on his show to help him. The answer is because they do not think Santorum is going to win, they think it will be Romney, and so do I.
Rove said this: "They've invested a lot of time and money in doing this, so why not continue to demonize the guy? And second, they may have concluded that Santorum has risen rapidly, but people who rise rapidly tend to fall rapidly. They also may be saying that they have enough on Santorum that if he becomes the nominee they'll have time to focus on him."
Rove also said this: "The next debate is important for all of them - Santorum has to use it to keep the momentum going, Gingrich has to use it to get back in the game, and Romney has to have a strong night. Michigan is up for grabs."
Then O'Dummy had Monica Crowley & Alan Colmes on to cry about Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters, who called her Republican colleagues John Boehner and Eric Cantor demons.
Colmes said this: "That's wacky and it's not called for. It's literally demonizing the other side and I don't think it serves any purpose. She does not represent Democrats, she represents herself, and there are angry haters on both sides."
Crowley said this: "She's a bomb-thrower and she's probably trying to rally the liberal base to come out because the Democrats do have a serious base problem. We've had Democrat after Democrat use this kind of inflammatory language, but if it had been a Republican calling President Obama or Maxine Waters a 'demon,' all Hades would be breaking loose."
And that segment is just more proof of the O'Reilly bias, because he never does any segments on the crazy and insulting things Republicans in Congress say about liberals and Democrats.
Then the culture warriors Margaret Hoover & Lauren Green were on to talk about marijuana and children, with nobody from the other side of the issue on for balance, making this segment a one sided and biased joke of a debate.
Billy said that a new study found that one in fifteen U.S. high school students smoke marijuana every day. Hoover said this: "It's never too early, and I actually think you should begin in kindergarten. Explain to them that people are going to offer them things that may affect the way they behave and that's not okay. Talk to kids and make them comfortable opening up to you."
Green said this: "You have to show your outrage. You can tell them a lot of facts about marijuana, but it's not going to get through to them unless your approval means more to them than what the drug means."
Earth to right-wing idiots, marijuana is not harmful, and nothing a parent says to a kid will stop them from smoking it, so get a clue you morons.
Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about the North Carolina Supreme Court, who is hearing a case involving school officials who found drugs hidden inside the bra of a 15-year-old girl.
Kelly said this: "They have to determine whether the search was reasonable under the circumstances. This is a 15-year-old girl in an alternative school for kids with disciplinary problems. They did find prescription pills on her, but that's irrelevant in determining whether they had grounds to search her in the first place. They made all the students go through this, and that's a problem. I think this will be thrown out."
Kelly also reported on a similar case in Georgia involving a 13-year-old boy, saying this: "He was forced to strip down to his underwear, in front of three other students. This one is going to get thrown out, too, because the U.S. Supreme Court has set the standard pretty high for school administrators to prove they have the grounds to do this."
And finally in the last segment O'Reilly had the Factor News Quiz with Martha MacCallum & Steve Doocy, that I do not report on because it's not news.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots waste of time.
New Poll Has Obama Beating ALL Republicans By: Steve - February 17, 2012 - 10:00am
And of course O'Reilly has ignored it, because he wants people to think the GOP loons have a chance to beat Obama. I will say it right now, Obama is going to beat whoever the GOP runs against him, unless the economy falls off a cliff and we go back into a new recession, it's all about the economy and jobs.
Here is part of the story from yahoo.com:
According to a new CBS/New York Times public opinion poll that illustrates the political benefits of a steady stream of positive economic news.
In hypothetical match-ups, Obama bests Rick Santorum 49 percent to 41 percent, Mitt Romney 48 percent to 42 percent, Ron Paul 50 percent to 39 percent, and former House speaker Newt Gingrich 54 percent to 36 percent, according to the survey, which was conducted from Feb. 8 to Feb. 13. The margin of error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
I say go Santorum go, and go Gingrich go, because if the GOP picks either one of those far-right partisans they will lose badly. And even if they do sell out and pick Romney he still loses to Obama unless the economy suddenly gets worse.
Unemployment Claims Drop To 4 Year Low By: Steve - February 17, 2012 - 9:00am
One of the big news stories out Thursday was the number of Americans filing for new unemployment benefits unexpectedly fell to a four-year low last week.
So what did O'Reilly report on Thursday, haha, not that unemployment report that's for sure. Because it's more good news for Obama, so O'Reily ignored it like it never even came out.
O'Reilly did a TPM on Whitney Houston, had a segment asked why the Obama campaign is ignoring Santorum and focusing on Romney, cried about Maxine Waters calling Republicans Demons, talked about Marijuana and children, discussed a school that was caught strip-searching a teenager, and had the stupid Factor news quiz with 2 morons from Fox News.
O'Reilly also ignored the story about GM making record profits of $7.6 Billion dollars in 2011. And that's not all, here are some more economic details O'Reilly has ignored.
Initial claims for state unemployment benefits dropped 13,000 to a seasonally adjusted 348,000, the lowest level since March 2008, the Labor Department said.
Economists polled by Reuters had forecast claims rising to 365,000. The four-week average of new claims, seen as a better measure of labor market trends, was the lowest since April 2008.
In a separate report, the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank said its business activity index rose to 10.2 this month from 7.3 in January as orders and shipments jumped.
In addition, order backlogs are rising and factories are taking a bit longer to make deliveries.
"We are not seeing much indication that growth has slowed from the fourth quarter of 2011 to the first quarter of 2012," said Gus Faucher, senior economist at PNC Financial Services in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
For now, the run of solid data continues. The Commerce Department reported that housing starts rose 1.5 per cent to an annual rate of 699,000 units last month, beating economists' expectations for a 675,000-unit pace.
Starts were boosted by multi-unit buildings, reflecting growing demand for rental apartments as Americans move away from homeownership. Permits for future home construction rose 0.7 per cent to a 676,000-unit pace in January.
Home building is expected to add to economic growth this year for the first time since 2005.
The data and rising hopes for a deal on a second bailout package for Greece buoyed US stocks, with the broader Standard & Poor's 500 index touching a nine-month high.
And O'Reilly never says a word about any of it, ever, not once. Instead he spends all his time on tabloid garbage and social issues like abortion, the deficit nobody cares about, Whitney Houston, etc.
It's called a diversion, O'Reilly uses this nonsense to divert your attention away from how good the economy is doing, because it all makes Obama look good, and proves O'Reilly was wrong about the Obama policies.
The Wednesday 2-15-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 16, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Government intrusion? Preschooler told that her lunch wasn't healthy enough. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: In Raeford, North Carolina, a 4-year-old girl brought her lunch to school - a turkey and cheese sandwich, a banana, apple juice and chips. A school official believed the meal violated USDA guidelines, so school authorities gave the girl additional food - chicken nuggets - and charged her mother a buck-and-a-quarter.
Last week I reported that the Obama administration's expansion of the federal government is intruding on everybody's lives. The feds are controlling health care delivery, energy delivery, even telling religions what kind of birth control devices they have to pay for. Social engineering is simply getting out of control! There's no question that liberal Americans want a Colossus in Washington to tell us how to live.
They want to regulate income, education, what kind of car you drive, how you heat your house, what kind of food you eat. The sad part is that most Americans have no clue because the liberal media will not report what's happening. Americans better begin to wise up.
I have nothing personal against Barack Obama, but the President certainly is a 'nanny state' champion, and right now he is leading in the polls. So Americans are basically saying, 'we're okay with the nanny state, we want four more years of it.' Believe me, if this continues, you're not going to recognize this country in four years.
This was not Government intrusion, it was one idiotic school official at one school. And O'Reilly used it to slam liberals and their liberal Government laws. When even liberals think what the school official did was wrong. I am a liberal and I think it was wrong, so how the hell is this the fault of liberals, it's crazy.
Earth to Bill O'Reilly, it's not a liberal deal, and you are a right-wing idiot. Not to mention those USDA guidelines were also passed by Republicans, jerk. And you are lying when you say you have nothing personal against Obama, because you hate him and oppose everything he does.
Then O'Reilly had David Callahan from the liberal Demos think tank on to discuss it. Callahan said this: "This is not the nanny state. Almost every state has enacted school nutritional guidelines and the public wants them. These rules came from democratically elected legislators. Any place you see the so-called nanny state, you see legislators making these rules. This is not about government out of control; this is about what the voters want."
And of course O'Reilly ignored him and said that government is running amok: "Barack Obama, your guy, is creating a bigger and bigger government to regulate how we live. You and your organization want government to tell you what to do, but that's not what America is all about!"
As usual O'Reilly is lying about what Obama wants to do, Obama does not want the Government to control our lives, he just wants to help the poor and make the rich pay their fair share until the economy recovers. O'Reilly says he is not a Republican spin doctor, but then he puts out the exact same talking points propaganda as the Republicans, which makes him a Republican.
Then Dick Morris was on to talk about Rick Santorum's surge in Republican polls and Mitt Romney's concurrent slide.
Morris said this: "It particularly matters because the polls are bad for Gingrich, which means Santorum will probably have a one-on-one with Romney, who has never been able to win a majority. But now that Obama is up in the polls, Republicans will stop futzing around with an 'ideal' candidate and will go for a guy who can win in November. Romney obviously has a better shot of getting the independent voters."
So then O'Reilly slammed Morris for calling ABC's George Stephanopoulos a "paid Democratic hit man:" "If I were Stephanopoulos, I would slap you with the biggest lawsuit in the world. You're accusing him of being on the take for the Democratic Party. You can't say he's on the take!"
Yeah because Morris has no proof, he said he thinks it is true, with no evidence it is, so O'Reilly hammered him for saying it with no proof. But if he did have the proof O'Reilly would love it and report it 24/7 on his show.
Then the far-right Bay Buchanan was on to talk about her candidate (Romney) inability to connect with many Republican voters.
Buchanan said this: "Mitt Romney won most of the primaries, and he was second in most others. Rick Santorum did a smart thing by going to three states that were 'beauty contests' where no one else was playing. He won them, he got national attention, and his numbers are now up. But let's see if he can hold that bump. There is nobody that can beat Mitt Romney, he is on the path to the nomination!"
O'Reilly reminded Buchanan that Romney is having trouble on his right flank, saying this: "Conservative Americans are suspect of Governor Romney. When he says he's a conservative, he doesn't feel genuine and that's why he's not breaking through. If he loses the Michigan primary he's in trouble."
Then O'Reilly had the Factor producer Jesse Watters on, who paid a visit to last week's Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. Watters actually got some righties to compliment President Obama.
Herman Cain: "He gave the okay to take out Osama bin Laden." Oliver North: "He's unified the conservative movement." Michele Bachmann: "He's a pretty good singer." Mike Huckabee: "He's a much better role model as a husband and father than he is as a president."
Watters then had a CPAC summary, saying this: "I signed autographs, people took pictures, and my ego was huge. But then I went home and my wife told me to take out the garbage. I got knocked down a couple of pegs."
Notice O'Reilly did not slam any of the far-right loons at CPAC, or call them far-right loons, as he did when the left had a similar meeting for the liberals in America last year. O'Reilly even ignored the fact that a white power racist spoke at CPAC, proving once again how biased to the right he is. Billy and Watters acted like the people at CPAC are regular Americans, when they are far-right loons.
Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because Miller is nothing but a has-been comedian who is only on to make jokes about liberals.
And finally Juliet Huddy was on for the total waste of time did you see that, she watched footage of the father who, disgusted with his daughter's Facebook comments, took out his .45 and blew away her computer.
Huddy said this: "He posted this on Facebook, and it has 200,000 views. It's become an Internet sensation - it's a bit of daddy vigilantism and he spoke to her in the language she would understand. I think it was great and I think the daughter got a little lesson."
Really? It's ok to give his daughter the message that if you do not like what your child is doing shoot it with a gun, you are screwed up Huddy. And btw folks, even O'Reilly said the Father went too far.
Huddy also weighed in on singer Nicki Minaj, whose "exorcism" performance at the Grammy Awards was widely interpreted as anti-Catholic. Huddy said this: "I don't think she was mocking the church. I didn't get it, nobody in the audience got it, but I don't think she was attacking the Catholic Church."
What the hell? How does she know nobody in the audience got it, that's pure speculation that O'Reilly says he does not allow. But he allowed Huddy to speculate that nobody in the audience got it. Oh yeah I forgot, Republicans are allowed to speculate, only liberals are not.
And btw folks, O'Reilly had one liberal guest on the entire show, and the rest of the time it was all right-wing guests all the time. Proving once again that Billy is nothing but a right-wing propagandist who gives every right-wing loon in the country a forum to spin out their talking points.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots. Here is another great example of why the pinheads and patriots is ridiculous and a total waste of time.
Wednesday's Patriot was The Pekingese dog named Malachy who won Best in Show at the annual Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show. Yes, O'Reilly actually named a dog a patriot for winning a stupid dog show.
Gallup Poll Proves O'Reilly Wrong On The Deficit By: Steve - February 16, 2012 - 10:00am
On the Tuesday Factor show, as usual O'Reilly was spinning the facts on what the American people care about the Federal Deficit. And not only did O'Reilly wildly inflate the importance of the deficit to the American people, he had two right-wing hacks (Charles Krauthammer & John Stossel) on to spin it with him.
O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama wants voters to believe that massive federal spending will improve their lives and that he will tax the rich in order to make free stuff available.
The polls show that about half the country is buying that and it will take a very strong counter-argument from Mr. Obama's opponent to defeat him in November. Free stuff is a powerful lure, no question about it."
And now the facts on the Federal Deficit from a February 9th Gallup Poll, the facts that O'Reilly ignores.
Quotes From Gallup:
Overall, 71% of Americans mention some economic issue as the most important problem, an increase from 66% in January.
The economy in general (31%) and unemployment (30%) are the two specific problems mentioned most often, as they have been each month since December 2009.
The actual question they asked was "What do you think is the most important problem facing the Conutry today" and here are the results.
1) Economy - 31%
2) Jobs - 30%
3) Dissatisfaction with Government - 16%
4) Federal Deficit - 8%
5) Healthcare - 6%
6) Lack of Money - 5%
7) Education - 4%
8) Immigration - 4%
9) Moral Decline - 3%
Notice the 2 big issues O'Reilly is constantly talking about (Deficit & Immigration) are only at 8% and 4%, proving that O'Reilly is not only wrong when he says the Deficit is a big concern to a lot of people, it proves he is out of touch with the American people.
O'Reilly is a nothing but a right-wing hack who puts out propaganda for the GOP by reporting on the issues most Americans care nothing about. While ignoring the jobs and economic reports that show an improvement, because it makes Obama look good. Instead of reporting the facts and what the people care about, O'Reilly spins out right-wing propaganda and refuses to report any good news that makes Obama look better.
The Tuesday 2-14-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 15, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Are we becoming a welfare nation? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama's new budget is financially outrageous - it adds $1.3 trillion in new deficit spending and doesn't cut very much. Mr. Obama apparently believes the massive federal debt is not going to harm the country any time soon.
Also, he's calculating that the American voter has changed into a person who wants free stuff from the government and is willing to sacrifice some freedoms in order to get it. And the President may be right.
I believe some Americans are simply saying, we don't want to pay the price, we'd rather spend our time on texting, tweeting, gaming, creating our own little worlds.
We are not willing to study hard, we don't want to learn a trade, we don't want to go to a demanding college, it's far easier to devote our time to leisurely pursuits and let the government take care of us.
That kind of mindset is taking root in this country and that's why we're seeing the huge divide between the progressive party, the Democrats, and the traditional party, the Republicans.
President Obama wants voters to believe that massive federal spending will improve their lives and that he will tax the rich in order to make free stuff available.
The polls show that about half the country is buying that and it will take a very strong counter-argument from Mr. Obama's opponent to defeat him in November. Free stuff is a powerful lure, no question about it.
And Obama is right, notice that O'Reilly does not quote any polls about what the people think of the debt. That's because almost nobody cares about the debt right now, because we need to add the debt to get the economic recovery we want.
O'Reilly does not mention that in the most recent Gallup poll only 8% of the people even care about the debt, and in the ABC News/Washington Post Poll only 2% care about the debt, or the fact that once the economy recovers more the debt will go down. The number one issues is the economy, number two is jobs, then health care, the deficit comes in 5th place at 2 percent.
O'Reilly ignores all that to spin out this right-wing propaganda that everyone really cares about the debt, when in fact almost nobody cares. It's all right-wing propaganda to make Obama look bad, when he is just doing what the economic experts say he should do to get the economy going better, then his plan cuts the debt in the future after the economy is going better.
Then the far-right Charles Krauthammer was on to discuss the debt, saying this: "I don't think you're right in saying President Obama doesn't believe that debt is important. The debt commission he appointed said it's a mortal danger to the country, and all you have to do is look across the Atlantic at the meltdown of the entire social democratic experiment in Europe. Athens is in flames; this is what happens when you pile on debt."
Krauthammer also said this: "And what does President Obama do? He adds another $1.3 trillion. In the first two years of his presidency he said we have to spend like crazy because the economy was in bad shape; now he says the economy is strengthening so we have to keep spending. He will always say we have to keep spending."
Earth to Krauthammer, the economic experts are telling Obama to keep spending to get the economy to recover, then the debt can be reduced in the future after the economy is better, idiot!
Then the far-right Laura Ingraham was on to talk about how the so-called 'Santorum surge' has affected the GOP race. Ingraham said this: "Mitt Romney was campaigning as Mr. Fix-it, but now he's delivering speeches rooted in social conservatism. Santorum's appeal right now is largely among blue-collar working class voters. He's driven home the message about reviving manufacturing and stressing his blue collar roots."
O'Reilly reported that the GOP establishment is still rooting for Romney, saying this: "Republican bigwigs are saying that if Santorum gets the nomination, then there will be an ideological conservative against a populist liberal. They want a more moderate guy like Romney because they think he can get the independent votes."
Then the far-right John Stossel was on, who compared the federal balance sheet to a family budget. Which is just ridiculous, because a family budget does not have to pay for a military or help the poor who have no money, etc.
Stossel said this: "Suppose you make $24,700 a year, but you spend $37,900. That puts you $13,200 in debt and you already have $153,500 in old credit card balance. So you say 'I have to make cuts' and you tighten your belt and save $385. If you add eight zeroes to all those numbers, that's what you get for America! This is insane and we're going over the cliff because of it, just like Greece."
O'Reilly even laughed at Stossel's figures, saying this: "You look at these numbers and say my family would never do that, that's insane! But that's what the country is doing."
Then O'Reilly had Dr. Brian Russell & Dr. Julie Holland on to talk about the death of Whitney Houston, which I will not report on because O'Reilly is an idiot on issues like this. What good does it do to trash her after her death, no good in my book, let the woman rest in peace idiot.
Then O'Reilly had Lis Wiehl & Kimberly Guilfoyle to talk about Whitney Houston's doctor. Wiehl said this: "There were six prescription drugs found in her hotel room, and if it's shown that one doctor prescribed those drugs knowing that she was a drug abuser, he or she could be looking at manslaughter charges."
But Guilfoyle argued that Houston's physician is probably not in legal jeopardy, saying this: "A doctor has a moral and ethical responsibility, especially with a person like Ms. Houston who has had persistent trouble. But legally it's different - is it incumbent upon the doctor to investigate every single patient? The attorney general can investigate, but I'll bet nothing happens. I don't think anyone is going to go to jail."
And finally O'Reilly had Marian Salzman & Robin Hazelwood on to discuss the Sports Illustrated swimsuit model (Kate Upton) who O'Reilly used to show photos of her in a bikini. The funny part is all through the show O'Reilly promoted the segment with video of her in a skimpy bikini 5 or 6 times. As he said he was only reporting on her because she is an example of a business story, hahaha, what?
Are you kidding me O'Reilly, you only did it to get ratings you lying pervert. What a joke, just admit you did it for ratings you dishonest hack.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
Republican Shows How Insane They Are Over Obama By: Steve - February 15, 2012 - 10:00am
Now this is a perfect example of how crazy and dishonest Republicans are when it comes to President Obama. For 3 years the Republicans have blamed Obama for the economic problems, even though most of it was caused by Bush and what he did from 2000 until 2009.
So they blamed Obama for the economy for 3 years, so that means now that the economy is improving they give him credit for it right? Haha, of course not, because they are dishonest partisan idiots.
Since President Obama took office in January 2009, Republicans have been quick to heap blame on him for every bit of poor economic news, no matter how large or small. In recent months with jobs numbers improving and signs that the economy is rebounding becoming more evident, the same Republicans have not been as quick to praise Obama.
Richard Mourdock, the Republican Senate candidate in Indiana who is in a primay contest against Sen. Richard Lugar (R), took a similar tack this week at CPAC, saying that while Obama's policies were responsible for making the economy worse early in his term, the recent improvement has occurred in spite of Obama's policies:
KEYES: If the economy does continue to improve over the next few months, is that something you'd be willing to give President Obama credit for, or not?
MOURDOCK: The American economy is incredibly resilient because Americans are incredibly resilient. It won't be because of President Obama when we see recovery, it will be in spite of President Obama.
He wants to add more and more layers of government, more and more government sector unions.
Those are killing our economy. And while it's possible we might see some recovery, it would be doing a whole lot more if we were rolling back the size of government.
The Mourdock stance is common in the GOP, because Mitt Romney took a similar view following the January jobs report, as did House Speaker John Boehner.
The facts, tell a different story. The Obama stimulus bill, despite Republican claims, has been a success, and since its implementation, the economy has added jobs for 23 consecutive months. The auto bailout, another favorite Republican target, has also worked, saving thousands of jobs and returning American automakers to profitability for the first time in a decade.
If anything, the economy is improving in spite of the best efforts of the Republicans Mourdock is trying to join in Congress. Republicans have targeted positive economic programs that benefit the less fortunate (like food stamps and unemployment insurance) for spending cuts, all while blocking other Obama proposals (like the American Jobs Act) that experts say would have had a positive effect on the nation's economic recovery.
Obama saved us from a depression in 2009 with his stimulus bill, since June of 2009 we have had positive job growth, and now the economy is recovering and the hard truth is that Republicans are putting partisan politics ahead of being honest with the American people.
From 2000 until 2009 Bush and the Republicans ruined the economy and almost put us into a new great depression, so Obama turned it all around and they do not want to give him any credit for it.
All they want to do is cry about the debt, when most of that debt is from the Bush tax cuts they all voted for. And when they were adding to that debt they said the debt does not matter, but suddenly the debt does matter when a Democratic President is in the White House.
Which is just more proof how dishonest the Republicans are, and if anyone votes Republican against Obama in November, they are insane and voting to hurt the country. Because if the Republicans get control of the White House and the Senate they will do the same thing Bush did.
Let the corporations and wall street do whatever they want again, and we will be right back to where we were when Bush left office in 2009, up a creek without a paddle. Wake up America, look at what the Republicans do, they help the wealthy and the corporations to screw over the rest of us, with policies that make the poor poorer and the rich richer.
And btw folks, O'Reilly does the very same thing, especially when it comes to the stock market. When the market has a down day O'Reilly blames Obama, but when the market has up days O'Reilly never says a word and does not give Obama any credit for those up days. Not to mention the stock market is up more than it was down in 2011, and yet O'Reilly never reported that, all he did was report the market when it was on the down days.
The Monday 2-13-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 14, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Obama unveils new budget with massive deficit. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama has unveiled his new budget, which calls for $1.3 trillion in deficit spending. Financial ruin comes from spending more money than you have, yet President Obama continues to do that, opining that he'll eventually decrease deficit spending by taxing the rich.
That is a myth - spending is so far out of control that you can't even dent the debt by raising taxes on the affluent. Unfortunately, many Americans don't even care about this vital issue. To those folks I point to Greece, where over the weekend protesters tried to destroy that troubled country.
Why? Because the government is cutting entitlements to save itself from default. Talking Points believes the American economic machine is still strong, unlike Greece, but there is no question that President Obama's policies are putting our currency at great risk.
If the dollar collapses, all of our personal assets will be in jeopardy. I go back to the facts: America will soon owe more than $16 trillion but Mr. Obama is not making drastic spending cuts. Does that sound like a good policy to you?
And as usual all of that is pure right-wing propaganda, that ignores the fact that 3 years into the Obama presidency the economy is turning around, jobs are coming back, unemployment is dropping and the stock market is over 12,000 and doing well.
O'Reilly ignores all that to talk about the debt that only 8% of the American people even say they care about. Not to mention O'Reilly never talks about the fact that a lot of that debt is from the Bush tax cuts, that Bush caused the 3 year recession, or that the Obama policies are working.
Instead he cries about the debt that nobody cares about, and ignores all the good economic news because it makes Obama look good. And btw folks, when Bush was in the White House O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends said the debt does not matter. Even Dick Cheney and O'Reilly said it, O'Reilly used to even make jokes about Democrats who complained about the debt.
Then the 2 stooges from Fox Mary Katharine Ham and Juan Williams were on. Williams said this: "We're going to grow our way out of this problem, This economy was in a far deeper recession than anyone knew and even the most aggressive deficit hawk doesn't say Obama could have cut the deficit during that period."
Ham said this: "This is his chance to put forth his vision in sort of a fantasy world where he doesn't have to count on this passing. His vision is that even if he gets to jack up the tax rates as much as he wants, he still can't come close to paying for what he wants."
And the biased dishonest hack O'Reilly said this: "President Obama has not kept his promise to cut the deficit in half and this budget increases the debt by $1.3 trillion!"
Which is a lie, because it cuts the debt by $4 Trillion over 10 years, O'Reilly is just looking at the first 2 or 3 years of it, and that is dishonest.
Then Brit Hume was on who was asked if President Obama has been damaged by the feud with the Catholic Church over birth control. Hume said this: "My sense about this issue, is that while the President may have fired up some of his base by guaranteeing 'free' contraception to all, the intensity of the issue is on the side of those who are worried about religious freedom. I think that will continue to haunt the President."
Hume also said this: "People don't know they want or need a particular benefit, but once it arrives they begin to make use of it and plan their lives around it. Taking it away is the hardest thing in politics, much harder than going to war or raising taxes."
Then the totally insane Glenn Beck was on, who has been warning his crazy Internet viewers that there is an escalating war on religion by President Obama. Which is just insanity, and yet O'Reilly put this loon on the air anyway, even though he disagreed with him. Beck said Obama is doing this to cause riots in the streets, which is just laughable.
Beck said this: "There is a war, and it's not just on faith, but also on conscience. There's an attack telling us exactly what to believe and what to do. Why should the Catholic Church have to pay for someone's abortion pills? That violates everything you might believe in. Faith is under attack and we have to stand together."
So then the crazy O'Reilly said that progressivism and religion are natural enemies, saying this: "Secularism attacks organized religion because in order to advance things like abortion and gay marriage you have to diminish the opposition."
Then the far-right Tucker Carlson was on to lie about Media Matters. Carlson said this: "They get their money from big Democratic donors, and they have been colluding with the White House. The head of Media Matters, David Brock, met with the President's advisor Valerie Jarrett in the White House."
Carlson also said this: "The line we had from someone who worked at Media Matters was, 'We basically write their prime time at MSNBC.' It's dishonest, it's collusion that takes place behind the scenes and viewers don't know it."
Then O'Reilly slammed MSNBC for relying so heavily on Media Matters, saying this: "MSNBC pretty much takes whatever Media Matters puts out, which is propaganda, and they just throw it on the air."
And that my friends is right-wing lies. Because Media Matters is a fact-checking outlet, all they do is quote people directly with transcripts, video, audio, or all three. Yes they do it mostly to O'Reilly and Fox, because they are putting out most of the lies in the media. Not to mention it's laughable for O'Reilly to say it's propaganda, when 99% of what he does, and what Fox does is real propaganda for the right.
Then Bernie Goldberg was on to put out more lies about Media Matters. Goldberg said this: "This is about corruption. This is an organization that masquerades as a 'media watchdog' but is actually a political assassination organization. When they have ties with mainstream journalists and the White House, that's a problem."
O'Reilly also asked Goldberg to analyze coverage of the controversy involving religious organizations and birth control. Goldberg said this: "When this story broke, it took CBS News ten days to report anything, and it took ABC and NBC seventeen days. There are certain things that are in the blind spot of liberal journalists - when it's important to them and their liberal friends it gets coverage right away; when it doesn't fit into that category they don't even know it exists."
What a load of garbage, earth to Goldberg Media Matters simply quotes people at Fox and then reports the truth about what they said. You, O'Reilly, and Tucker just do not like it because they bust you for your lies and spin, so you trash them. Show me something they reported that is not true, prove you are right, oh yeah, you cant.
And when the January jobs report broke O'Reilly never reported it at all, to this day he has still not reported on it. So he is as biased as anyone, and yet he complains about bias from Media Matters. O'Reilly and Fox are propaganda central for the Republican party, so for them to complain about propaganda is ridiculous.
Then O'Reilly had an entire segment on the death of Whitney Houston. Which he used to go on a crusade about keeping all drugs illegal, even though the drugs she was on were legal. Frankly it was pathetic, and O'Reilly is a massive idiot.
And btw, not one Democratic guest was on the entire show, it was all right-wing spin by all right-wing guests. How the hell is that fair and balanced, at least one Democratic guest should have been on to discuss Media Matters, but O'Reilly did not have any, none.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and thelame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
Obama Budget Cuts Debt Adds Jobs & Republicans Still Oppose It By: Steve - February 14, 2012 - 10:00am
And of course O'Reilly is opposed to it because he is a REPUBLICAN, even though he says he is a non-partisan Independent. O'Reilly agrees with the REPUBLICANS on 99% of the issues, and yet he still tries to make us believe he is an impartial Independent, which is just laughable and shows how dishonest O'Reilly is.
How can we believe anything he says when he will not even tell the truth about being a Republican.
Now this is how screwed up O'Reilly and the Republicans in Congress are, Obama put out a budget that cuts the debt by $4 Trillion over 10 years and adds millions of new jobs and the Republicans are still opposed to it.
Economists estimated that the United States needed $2 trillion in immediate investments just to bring its infrastructure up to date, and with borrowing costs low and the nation's unemployment rate still high, such investments would allow the country to fix its crumbling roads and bridges while also putting unemployed Americans back to work.
President Obama is attempting to take advantage of that opportunity by releasing a budget that takes billions of dollars in war savings and pours them into infrastructure investments and job creation programs.
Obama laid out his budget proposal, which includes the Buffett Rule to raise taxes on millionaires and aims to cut the deficit by $4 trillion over the next decade on Monday. The budget includes billions in spending on infrastructure programs, worker training, and higher education investment, all in attempts to create jobs and help the nation's economic recovery:
The president will propose using half of the money from ending Americas two foreign wars to subsidize investment in infrastructure as part of his request for over $800 billion in multi-year spending on job creation and transportation.
The Obama budget also includes funds for worker training to prepare American workers for open jobs through community colleges and other avenues and invests in higher education to make Americans "the most skilled workers in the world" in the future, Obama said.
But the Republicans have already opposed multiple attempts to invest in infrastructure spending and create jobs, as they fought efforts to include infrastructure measures in the stimulus bill, they fought a 2010 attempt to pass a large-scale infrastructure bill, and blocked the American Jobs Act last fall.
Multiple Republicans have already announced their opposition to this budget.
Now Obama's budget may not be perfect (it cuts spending from areas that need investment and it includes less revenue than bipartisan plans like Simpson-Bowles) but considering the tough budgetary environment, it is a step forward on the road to economic recovery.
And while the President is trying to make jobs and the economy better, the GOP continues to promote budgets that force massive spending cuts, that would kill the nation's economic recovery and put America on a path that economists say increases the likelihood of another big recession.
House Republican In Denial On Birth Control By: Steve - February 13, 2012 - 11:00am
After reading this (if you are a woman) and you vote for any Republican you are nuts. Congressman Tom Price (R-GA) said this when discussing birth control for low-income women on Friday, that "not one" woman doesn't have access to contraception in the United States.
Price, who serves as the fifth ranking Republican in the House, made the comments Friday morning at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C. Like virtually all Republicans in Congress, he opposes the recent Obama administration rule requiring employers and insurers to offer birth control at no cost.
Price, who is a medical doctor by trade, was asked what he would say to low-income women who can't afford birth control if it's not covered by their insurance policies. Price responded by denying their very existence, saying this:
PRICE: Bring me one woman who has been left behind. Bring me one. There's not one. The fact of the matter is, this is a trampling of religious freedom and religious liberty in this country. The president does not have the power to say that your First Amendment rights go away. That's wrong.
In fact, there are tens of millions of women in the United States who have struggled to afford or don't have access to contraception. A recent Hart Research survey found that one in three women voters have struggled to afford prescription birth control, including 55 percent of young women aged 18 to 34.
Fortunately, the Obama administration has moved to help these women by requiring insurers to provide birth control at no charge, a move that Price vehemently opposes.
And btw I found one myself, Amber French is just one of the women that Price claims do not exist. She wrote this on her blog: "Before I found a good gynecologist that was willing to take my financial situation into consideration (college student, minimal work income, zero insurance). I definitely was unable to afford it, and I know tons of other ladies in similar boats."
New Hampshire Republicans Want To Kill Worker Lunch Breaks By: Steve - February 12, 2012 - 11:00am
Yes you heard me right, now the insane Republicans in New Hampshire want to pass a law saying corporations do not have to give their workers a lunch break. And even though it will most likely never pass, what good would it do, it will not increase the workers output, in fact it would most likely make them mad and they would do less.
New Hampshire's GOP legislature has come up with all manner of absurd bills recently, including a proposal making public school curriculum optional, another to prevent police from protecting domestic abuse victims, and even a measure mandating that new laws be based on the Magna Carta.
Some of the GOP lawmakers have even proposed doing away with the law that requires employers to give their workers time off for lunch, under the rationale that all employers will simply grant lunch breaks out of the goodness of their hearts:
"This is an unneeded law," Republican state Representative Kyle Jones said. "If I was to deny one of my employees a break, I would be in a very bad position with the company’s human resources representative."
Jones also said this: "If you consider that this is a very easy law to follow in that everyone already does it, then why do we need it? Our constituents have already proven that they have enough common sense to do this on their own."
Earth to Kyle Jones, I worked at International Paper for 17 years from 1978 until 1995 and they do not give you any time off unless they have to. In fact, they dropped our lunch time from 30 minutes to 20 minutes in one contract and it did them no good at all, because it did not increase production, and in most cases it decreased production because people were mad about losing their 30 minute lunch so they just took more bathroom and smoke breaks then if they had left us the 30 minute lunch break.
The bill's sponsor, state representative J.R. Hoell, argued that companies failing to provide lunch breaks would be shamed over social media, thus rendering the law unnecessary. "If they are not letting people have lunch, they could put it out though the news media, though social media. I don't think that abusive behavior would continue, the way communications are today," he said.
Of course, not every employer can be counted to to follow even the easiest of requirements to look after workers health and rights. Back in 2005, Walmart was forced to pay $172 million for denying workers their lunch breaks.
Pyramid Breweries Inc. settled a case in 2008 for $1.5 million. Just a few months ago, California ordered Embassy Suites to pay workers tens of thousands of dollars for forcing them to skip breaks.
"The fact that in 2012, I would be even sitting in front of the Labor Committee talking about eliminating the lunch hour is outrageous," said Mark MacKenzie, New Hampshire's state AFL-CIO representative.
"People should at least be able to be given the opportunity to eat." Fortunately, the bill does not seem too appealing to most of the New Hampshire legislature, and the state House's labor committee adjourned yesterday without voting on it.
Crazy Santorum Says Obama Will Execute Religious People By: Steve - February 12, 2012 - 10:00am
And this lunatic just won 3 Republican primaries. Not to mention, O'Reilly never reports any of this crazy talk because it makes the Republicans look bad.
Santorum continued to slam President Obama for his so-called war against religion during a town hall in Texas Wednesday night.
Rick Santorum, who has spent the last several days criticizing the government's requirement that insurers provide contraception coverage and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal's decision striking down Prop 8 - accused the administration of crushing religion and setting the United States on the path towards executing religious people by decapitation:
SANTORUM: They are taking faith and crushing it. Why? Why? When you marginalize faith in America, when you remove the pillar of God-given rights, then what's left is the French Revolution.
What's left is the government that gives you right, what's left are no unalienable rights, what's left is a government that will tell you who you are, what you'll do and when you'll do it. What's left in France became the guillotine.
Ladies and gentlemen, if we follow the path of President Obama and his overt hostility to faith in America, then we are headed down that road.
Now that my friends is crazy right-wing propaganda, Santorum even knows what he is saying is ridiculous, but he says it anyway to fire up the religious right, in the hopes of getting them out to vote for him so he can beat Romney. Which is never going to happen, so all it does is make him look like a Glenn Beck wannabe nut.
The Friday 2-10-12 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review By: Steve - February 11, 2012 - 11:00am
Laura (far-right hack) Ingraham hosted for O'Reilly and her TPM was called: Conservatives vs. moderates in the GOP race. The crazy and biased right-wing loon said this:
INGRAHAM: On the Today Show this week Matt Lauer asked me if conservatives will put their ideology aside and focus on electability. Understandably, the Romney campaign hopes voters choose pragmatism and experience over conservatism; Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich believe true conservatism and electability go hand in hand.
Many conservatives seem worried about this divide and that the GOP is about to blow its opportunity to defeat President Obama. But I think all this anxiety is a bit misplaced. Let's not forget that in 2008 Democrats were divided between those who wanted to stick with the Clintons and those who wanted to go with Obama.
Now it's the GOP that has its own very important issues to decide. Unfortunately, there have been too many distractions over things like Herman Cain's personal life or Newt Gingrich's space policy. It's way past time for the remaining candidates to have serious, respectful discussions about the real differences that divide them.
Tea Partiers have to realize that a lot of establishment people are patriots who are just trying to build a better country; the establishment types need to see that many Tea Partiers are sophisticated enough to understand today's political realities.
So if each side learns to get past the stereotypes and take the other side more seriously, I think the GOP will be stronger, and the candidate it finally selects will then have a real chance to win in November.
Earth to Ingraham, no matter who wins the GOP nomination Obama will beat them if the economy continues to improve, unemployment keeps going down, and jobs keep coming back. All the things you and your right-wing friends refuse to talk about. Obama will beat them, specially if Gingrich or Santorum win, but I still say Romney will win and Obama will beat him too, unless the economy suddenly takes a turn for the worse.
Take note that a few months ago O'Reilly, Ingraham, and everyone on the right were saying it's the economy stupid. That if the economy does not improve Obama is done, but if it does he will win a 2nd term. Now that the economy is improving they refuse to even talk about it, instead they use social wedge issues as a distraction tactic. Think about it folks, the Republicans are not even talk about the January jobs and economic report. All they want to talk about is birth control, and gay issues.
The rest of the show was the usual right-wing propaganda from Ingraham, so I will not report on it. She had 4 or 5 guests on who she talked over and yelled at telling them how she was right about everything. It was like watching a show the RNC would put on the air, which frankly was not much different then when O'Reilly is hosting. O'Reilly leans 98% to the right and Ingraham leans 100% to the right.
Then Ingraham did the lame as ever pinheads and patriots, and it was really lame. Ingraham named the Republican moron Michele Bachmann a patriot for making jokes about how stupid she was on the campaign trail. Bachmann said this: "I learned where John Wayne was born, I learned the day that Elvis Presley was born, and I learned to never forget the three things that you learned."
So how in the hell does that make you a patriot? About all it does is show what an idiot she is, and what a far-right loon Ingraham is for naming her a patriot for admitting she is an idiot.
O'Reilly Has It All Wrong About Planned Parenthood By: Steve - February 11, 2012 - 10:00am
If you want more proof that Bill O'Reilly is nothing but a dishonest, lying, right-wing hack of a pretend journalist, here it is folks. Not only is he slamming the Prop 8 ruling that the gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional, which only conservatives are doing, after saying he is not a conservative. Now he is lying about Planned Parenthood, again.
Raising questions about whether he will continue to donate money to the Susan G. Komen Foundation, Bill O'Reilly once again downplayed the role that Planned Parenthood for America plays in providing cancer screenings for millions of American women. O'Reilly said they do not do much as far as breast cancer screenings and prevention, and that their primary business is abortion. When the facts show that only 3% of what they do involves abortions.
Contrary to O'Reilly's claim that Planned Parenthood "doesn't really do much" in the area of breast cancer prevention, Planned Parenthood doctors and nurses provide nearly 750,000 breast cancer screenings annually.
According to their 2009-2010 Annual Report, "cancer screening and prevention" combined with other women's health services account for almost 25% of their total services.
O'Reilly also pushed the discredited claim that grants given to Planned Parenthood by Komen are used to fund abortions. In an open letter to Komen CEO Nancy Brinker, The Washington Post's Sally Quinn noted that "not one penny" of the money the Komen Foundation has granted to Planned Parenthood "went toward abortion":
QUINN: It is clear, despite what you told Mitchell, that you were under enormous political pressure -- and had been for some years -- from conservative donors to cut your ties to Planned Parenthood.
This was because some of its money (about 3%) goes to fund abortions.
Nevermind that of the $680,000 or so given to Planned Parenthood last year by your organization, not one penny went toward abortion. It was targeted to breast cancer screening for low-income and uninsured women.
In the past five years Planned Parenthood has, with your funds, been able to provide 170,000 breast exams and thousands of referrals.
These are the facts, which show that Bill O'Reilly is lying, even after he said he is not a conservative, when the attacks are only coming from conservatives, and he also said he never reports anything without fact-checking it first.
This is public information that anyone with a computer can find, and yet O'Reilly still lies about it and his entire staff is worthless if they do not check for the facts. Now after reading this nobody should ever believe anything O'Reilly says again, and understand that he is nothing but a right-wing hack of a biased journalist that makes it up most of the time.
The Thursday 2-9-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 10, 2012 - 11:30am
The TPM was called: Are we losing freedom in America? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Millions of Americans are angry because the Obama administration is forcing them to buy government mandated health insurance. Also, the feds want us to pay a huge amount of estate tax, intruding on family legacies. And now freedom of religion is in question because the Obama administration is ordering religious-based institutions to cover birth control in their insurance plans.
Whenever you impose anything there is an intrusion, you are being told what to do. That is why the Supreme Court is hearing the Obamacare controversy - at issue is the government attempting to control the health care industry. If Obamacare stands, your freedom in the health care area is much less than it used to be. On the upside, about 40-million Americans will get health care, much of it subsidized by the taxpayer.
On the energy front, the administration wants alternative energy to take the place of fossil fuels. The feds have invested more than $90-billion in 'green' research, some of it totally down the drain like the Solyndra situation. Also, oil production is being discouraged and the pipeline from Canada has been shut down. The result - gas prices have increased by 90% on Mr. Obama's watch.
And finally, there is the birth control situation. The Catholic Church doesn't believe in birth control, but the Obama administration says church-affiliated insurance plans have to cover birth control pills and even the morning after pill in some cases. That is an enormous intrusion on religion. It is clear the President believes he is absolutely correct in putting forth federal mandates that affect all of our lives. Do you feel the way Mr. Obama does? We'll find out in November.
And the most ridiculous part of that right-wing propaganda is blaming Obama for higher gas prices. Which is something only a right-wing hack would do. Gas prices are higher for many reasons, and none of them have anything to do with Obama. Mostly it's just greedy oil companies wanting to make as much profit as possible, and taking advantage of the people that have to buy gas to live on.
Then O'Dummy had Laura Ingraham on, who of course agreed with O'Reilly because she is also a right-wing hack of a pretend journalist. And of course no liberal was on to provide any balance.
Ingraham said this: "This says that abortifacient drugs, sterilization and all manner of birth control should be paid for by all employers in the United States. There are some reports indicating that there was a gender difference in the White House, with Valerie Jarrett and Kathleen Sebelius on the side of 'women's rights,' which is a hilarious way of framing it. This is about freedom and I think President Obama miscalculated. He is going to have to walk this back and I believe it will happen probably late on a Friday."
O'Reilly agreed that President Obama has painted himself into a political corner, saying this: "The government is supposed to stay out of religion! For a guy who knows Catholics voted for him in 2008, he has to know this is a loser. I believe he's going to retract himself on this."
Then Wayne Besen was on to talk about CNN's Roland Martin, who was suspended for tweeting comments that were seen as anti-gay. Besen said this: "He should have been taken off the air, and he should be fired for what he said. I think his tweets gave license for people to justify harming gay, lesbian, bisexual and transsexual people. He has a history of making anti-gay remarks."
O'Reilly also reported that Martin, whose tweets involved an underwear commercial starring soccer player David Beckham, is proclaiming his innocence, saying this: "I think Roland Martin is a moron, but he says he is being persecuted for mocking soccer players and soccer fanatics, not gays."
Then Gretchen Carlson & Margaret Hoover, the 2 right-wing culture warriors were on to talk about how some (Republican) moms are taking issue with an anti-obesity campaign in Georgia.
Carlson said this: "Some of these moms say we should feel sorry for kids who are fat, and that this will further stigmatize them. I was a chubby kid, I struggled with my weight every day, and I say thank God they're doing an ad like that. This is a life-threatening issue for our kids, who are getting fatter and fatter."
Hoover said this: "These moms got together and they have generated 23-million impressions on Twitter. Their message is that this is shaming kids and that is not a motivator for becoming skinny."
So then O'Dummy said this: "Some people put on weight easier than others, some people are lazy, and some people just want to be fat. We don't have a right to intrude unless it intrudes on us, and it does in the health care industry."
Then for some crazy reason O'Reilly had his producer Jesse Watters on to report on sex week at Yale University. Which I will not report on because this is not the kind of news a so-called hard news show should be reporting on. It's tabloid garbage to get ratings from O'Reilly's perverted viewers and I refuse to report on it.
Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about the prop 8 ruling. Now that a judicial panel has overturned California's ban on same-sex marriage, Kelly looked ahead to a possible showdown in the Supreme Court.
Kelly said this: "I don't know whether this is going to wind its way up to the Supreme Court, because these judges crafted a pretty narrow opinion. It's not a broad-based opinion saying the Constitution affords gays a fundamental right to marry - that would make its way to the Supreme Court, but this is very limited."
Then O'Dummy complained about judicial activism, saying this: "The judges basically overturned the will of the people for no reason."
Which is funny, because when judges overturn the will of the people and O'Reilly agrees with them he never says a word. But when he does not like a ruling, suddenly it's judicial activism, which is ridiculous and shows the hypocrisy and double standards from O'Reilly. And he only calls it judicial activism when so-called liberal judges make a ruling, he never says it when conservative judges make a ruling.
And finally Martha MacCallum & Steve Doocy were on for the totally lame Factor News Quiz, that I do not report on because it's ridiculous and not news.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
Crazy O'Reilly Blames Obama For The Price Of Gas By: Steve - February 10, 2012 - 11:00am
Now I have seen everything, on the Thursday night Factor show (the insane right-wing hack) Bill O'Reilly blamed President Obama for the gas prices. O'Dummy said this:
O'REILLY: On the energy front, the administration wants alternative energy to take the place of fossil fuels. The feds have invested more than $90-billion in 'green' research, some of it totally down the drain like the Solyndra situation.
Also, oil production is being discouraged and the pipeline from Canada has been shut down. The result - gas prices have increased by 90% of Mr. Obama's watch.
And now the facts, here are the main reasons the price of gas is so high, and President Obama has nothing to do with it.
1) The price of oil. Geoffrey Styles from the energycollective.com website wrote:
The most-watched oil price in America, the one for West Texas Intermediate crude (WTI), is no longer representative of the broader US oil market, at least for now. The best domestic grade to follow at the moment is probably Louisiana Light Sweet (LLS), which is of similar quality to WTI but not subject to the persistent transportation bottleneck at Cushing, OK.
It tracks closely to UK Brent crude, which has largely taken over the role of global oil price indicator. The "spot" price of LLS was $119 per barrel today February 10th, accounting for 94% of the price of prompt gasoline futures on the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX) today.
And the $16/bbl increase in LLS since February 9, 2011 explains nearly 80% of the increase in the wholesale gasoline price over that interval. So while refinery outages might be having some impact, particularly in the local and regional markets served by the affected facilities, they are not the main show, nor is speculation in gasoline futures, the effect of which beyond the New York area covered by the NYMEX contract should be rather attenuated.
Styles also wrote this: "Despite relatively weak demand. Many analysts attribute oil's strength to worries about Iran's threat to close the Strait of Hormuz as the sanctions noose tightens, along with rumors that Israel may be preparing to strike Iran's nuclear sites on its own this spring."
And this: "But as with any such risks, they will either manifest or they won't, and the more time that goes by without these feared events occurring, the less influence they are likely to have in propping up oil markets, absent a surge in underlying demand due to a strengthening global economy."
Now look at what he said, and notice that he never once mentions President Obama, he does not even mention the Obama administration or any of their policies. That's because he is an Independent (non-political) oil price expert, not a partisan political hack on the Fox News Network pretending to be an impartial journalist.
The only people who blame Obama for gas prices are idiots like O'Reilly, because Obama has nothing to do with the world price of oil, the oil speculators decide that price. And about a year ago O'Reilly even admitted the oil speculators were causing the price of oil to be so high.
Now that it's getting close to the 2012 election for President, O'Reilly is suddenly blaming Obama for gas prices to hurt him politically. When he knows it is not true, he is just doing it to try and hurt Obama and help the Republican. Proving once again that O'Reilly is nothing but a partisan right-wing hack of a pretend journalist.
O'Reilly Ignores More Good News On The Debt Reduction By: Steve - February 10, 2012 - 10:00am
Here is another story on the debt going lower that of course O'Reilly has totally ignored, because it makes Obama look good, and destroys his propaganda that the liberal policies from Obama are adding to the debt and killing the economy.
When in fact it's the opposite, the economy is improving, jobs are coming back, and the debt is going down. Here is the story:
Tuesday the CBO reported that the budget deficit fell sharply in January, from $50 billion a year ago to $27 billion last month. The improved numbers were attributable to higher tax collections from individuals and lower outlays.
January's numbers bring the total deficit reduction to around $70 billion for the first four months of fiscal year 2012, which began on October 1.
January U.S. receipts were up about $9 billion, or 4 percent from a year earlier, largely because of higher withholdings of individual income and payroll taxes, CBO said.
And on top of ignoring this debt report, O'Reilly has still not said a word about the January jobs report that came out last Thursday on February 2nd. He is ignoring all the good financial news in America, because it makes Obama look good, and it proves O'Reilly was wrong when he said the liberal policies of Obama are killing jobs, and ruining the country.
The Wednesday 2-8-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 9, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Santorum sweep is a major chink in Romney's armor. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Rick Santorum won the votes in Minnesota, Colorado and Missouri last night, certainly a good showing for him and a poor showing for Mitt Romney. It's pretty much the same old story - conservative voters don't seem to trust Governor Romney.
The other thing we learned today is that most Americans are not even following the presidential race very closely; according to Pew Research, just 29% of Americans say they are paying close attention. That helps President Obama because everybody knows him but not the Republican candidates.
According to the same poll, cable news is now the primary choice for election coverage. So here's what all this means: President Obama is not really being challenged at the moment, Mitt Romney is still ahead and most likely to win the nomination, but he may be seen as a weak choice, at least at first.
Also, the Fox News Channel is the go-to place for election news - we are dominating, beating our cable news competition across the board. The Factor defeats all the other cable stations combined at 8 PM. And finally, with nine months to go before the vote, the picture we see today is not the picture we'll see next November. Things are going to change, drastically.
Yes the Factor beats all the other cable news shows in the ratings, but who cares, it's fricking cable. And O'Reilly is lying, because the network news shows all beat O'Reilly, even CBS news. And they had higher Republican debate ratings than Fox News too, so O'Reilly is nuts when he says the Fox News Channel is the go-to place for election news.
When the actual Presidential election is here most people will get their news from CNN and the big three networks, not Fox News. Only Republicans go to Fox, because they agree with their biased opinions. O'Reilly never makes it clear that if you take his show off the Fox network nobody would watch it. The Sunday Fox news show with Chris Wallace is last in the ratings every week, because it's not on the Fox news channel.
Then Dick Morris talked about the significance of Rick Santorum's three-victory night, saying this: "It's very important and reshapes the entire race. It's important that Santorum defeated Romney in all three contests, but far more important that he defeated Gingrich - in Minnesota he finished something like 25 points ahead. Santorum and Gingrich are locked in a semi-final to go against Romney in the finals and now Santorum is beginning to pull ahead of Gingrich, who has had so many negatives dumped on him."
O'Reilly said this: "I don't know if we can dismiss Gingrich, who will really be tenacious on Super Tuesday in the southern states."
Then Fr. Jonathan Morris & Rev. Debra Haffner were on to talk about how some right-wing Americans object to the Obama administration's decree that religious-based organizations must offer contraceptives in their health insurance plans.
Haffner said this: "We believe the President should and will hold firm, so that women who work for Catholic hospitals and students who attend Catholic universities will have birth control as a core preventive health care service."
But of course Fox News Father Jonathan Morris outlined why he and many other Catholics are upset, saying this: "This is not an issue of contraception, this is a question of religious liberty. The Obama administration is saying it believes that contraception provision by Catholic employers is more important than an institution's right to religious liberty. We are going down a path that is very sad."
And you know O'Reilly agreed with the right-wing Father Morris, because he said the Obama administration should reconsider its mandate: "The Catholic Church is saying this goes against their teachings and there are a million clinics around that will give free contraception. The church has a right to make its own rules and the government does not have the right to go in and usurp those rules."
Then O'Reilly had some right-wing loon from the Heritage Foundation on to spin about how many people get Government money and benefits. And of course nobody from the left were on for balance.
Bill Beach said this: "We all ought to be worried about this, because these programs are the main drivers of our big debt crisis, and as the population of recipients grows the debt grows with it. Part of this is the bad economy, but most of it is the decisions made during the Bush and Obama years to vastly expand government programs."
Beach also said this: "If we get to the point where our electorate is voting for more benefits during a fiscal crisis, this country is going to face difficulties like it hasn't faced since the 1860's."
O'Reilly said this" "In 2000, 55-million Americans were getting assistance and it's now 67-million. In twelve years we're up by 12-million people!"
Really? So what! In 2000 the country was doing great and there was no recession. Then Bush ruined everything in 8 short years, so more people are getting assistance now and most of it is because of Bush, but O'Reilly blames it all on Obama, which is ridiculous.
This is the Bush recession, and most of those 12 million people are getting assistance because of what Bush did to the economy and jobs. O'Reilly acts like the Obama policies have caused it, which is just insane.
Then O'Reilly had Tonya Reiman and Dennis Miller on in back to back segments. Which I do not report on, because she is a body language loser, and Miller is just a has-been comedian who is only on to make jokes about liberals.
And finally Juliet Huddy was on for did you see that, she talked about Planned Parenthood in the area of breast cancer. Huddy said this: "They don't do mammograms, but they do preliminary screenings. A lot of women use Planned Parenthood as their one-stop shopping."
Huddy then watched a clip from a new movie that depicts Osama bin Laden as a zombie, saying this: "This is about Osama bin Laden coming back in zombie-like form. It's offensive to me because I don't find Osama bin Laden funny - he was the mastermind behind thousands of killings. This will probably go right to DVD."
So why even talk about it, all you 2 morons did was give the movie a million dollars in free publicity, idiots! Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
New Poll Has Obama With A Clear Lead Over Romney By: Steve - February 9, 2012 - 10:00am
According to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, President Obama holds a clear lead over GOP frontrunner Mitt Romney.
By a 2-1 margin, Americans said the more they learned about Romney, the less they liked him - which is most likely a function of the overwhelmingly negative primary campaign the candidate has waged against his fellow contenders.
The same poll also shows that 68 percent of the American people think the tax code favors the wealthy, including 56 percent who strongly believe so, while two-thirds think Romney is not paying his fair share in taxes.
The Tuesday 2-7-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 8, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: More fallout from the Chrysler Super Bowl ad. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The controversy continues over Clint Eastwood's Super Bowl commercial paid for by Chrysler. The ad says Detroit and America in general are on the comeback trail because we all helped out when the financial collapse hit. Reports are the Obama campaign is very happy with the spot, but conservatives like Karl Rove are not, saying it supports government bailouts.
Let's take a look at what happened: In September 2008 President Bush signed into law a program that authorized $700 billion to bail out failing American companies; the feds are still owed about $100 billion from the TARP program. Chrysler received $4 billion from President Bush, another $7.2 billion from President Obama, and still owes $1.3 billion to the feds which, incredibly, it does not have to pay back.
Mitt Romney says he would have allowed the car companies to fail, while President Obama is touting their recovery as a significant achievement. Talking Points believes that Presidents Bush and Obama did the right thing by propping up some major American corporations that were about to go under.
However, it should now be mandatory that all private companies that receive taxpayer dollars pay them back. Chrysler should not be strutting around celebrating its recent success while still owing the taxpayers more than a billion dollars. Also, Mr. Obama should be much more humble in touting the success of an economic comeback that was borne on the backs of the working folks.
American workers saved the economy, not President Obama and Congress, and now it should be payback time. Spending discipline must be imposed, let's stop the irresponsible nonsense in Washington.
What a load of right-wing garbage, to begin with Clint Eastwood said the ad was not political. The fact that Romney said he would let the car companies fail is proof he is an idiot who should not be President. And President Obama had a big influence on saving the economy, with his stimulus bill and the policies he put in place.
O'Reilly claims Obama had nothing to do with it, which is just ridiculous right-wing propaganda. Not to mention, O'Reilly is still ignoring the January jobs report because it makes Obama look good.
Then O'Reilly had Karl Rove on, who strongly objected to the Eastwood/Chrysler ad. Because he is a right-wing loon, Rove said this: "The Obama campaign immediately began tweeting messages, saying this ad hails the success of our bailout program. That put the ad completely in a political context, which is what I really object to. The White House jumped into the middle of this and made it controversial by their actions - it is stupid for them to have done, it again makes the White House look like a bunch of cheap Chicago pols."
Even O'Reilly said that Clint Eastwood is an innocent bystander, saying this: "He had no idea that some people like you were going to interpret this as a pro-TARP ad."
Then Alan Colmes & Monica Crowley were on. They talked about how the Obama administration is in hot water (with the right-wing loons) after ordering religious-based organizations to offer birth control, the morning after pill, and sterilization in their health insurance plans.
Crazy Crowley said this: "This is a complete violation, of Catholics and Christians most fundamental religious beliefs. As I have said repeatedly, Barack Obama is a pure leftist ideologue, a man who sacrifices as little ideologically as possible for his agenda."
Colmes said this: "If he were an ideologue, he wouldn't have compromised on health care and a whole bunch of other issues. They did not anticipate the firestorm here because 95% of Catholic women have used birth control, and they didn't anticipate the push back from the hierarchy of the church."
O'Reilly advised the Obama administration to "let the Catholic Church and the other churches have an exemption."
Then O'Dummy had Kimberly Guilfoyle & Lis Wiehl on to cry about a federal three-judge panel that has nullified California's Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage.
Wiehl said this: "The judges said voters don't matter, if those voters take away a benefit from a group of people without a legitimate reason to further a state interest. These judges found no legitimate reason that people shouldn't be allowed to marry."
Guilfoyle said this: "Many people view this, correctly I believe, as stripping the will of the voters. The people of California voted and it wasn't even a close vote."
Then O'Dummy predicted that Prop 8 will eventually be upheld, saying this: "This will go to the Supreme Court and the court will rule in favor of the state having the right to regulate marriage."
Then the crazy John Stossel was on to talk about First Lady Michelle Obama, who has been urging young Americans to eat healthier foods. Stossel said this: "She's doing the right thing if she wants to do jumping jacks and run around the White House, but when she gets her husband involved, that's government. They are using millions of your dollars and government force, and it doesn't work! All these government programs have been in effect for years and people are fatter than ever."
But even O'Reilly said that Mrs. Obama may actually be saving tax dollars, saying this: "We're paying the medical bills for many people who have eaten irresponsibly for their entire lives, so I say Michelle Obama is doing a good thing. I want the federal government and the states to encourage people to eat better."
And finally Charles Krauthammer was on to evaluate Gingrich's claim that he is the only real conservative still in the GOP race. Krauthammer said this: "Gingrich has a great history as a conservative hero, and I think he's instinctively a conservative. But his problem is that he is undisciplined and comes up with all kinds of ideas, some of which are non-conservative. A lot of conservatives worry that if he were president he'd wake up once a week with an idea that might not be conservative."
Krauthammer also evaluated Mitt Romney, saying this: "He's a guy who admits that he was a businessman and out of the political arena for most of his life and then became more conservative. There's nothing wrong with that - Ronald Reagan started out as a liberal Democrat - but it's true that he doesn't have fluency with the language and ideas of somebody who has been marinating in conservative politics for thirty years."
O'Reilly said this: "Rick Santorum is probably the only one left that you could put the word 'conservative' on pretty much down the line."
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense. Here is another great example of why I call the P&P nonsense, on Tuesday O'Reilly named an animated M&M a patriot for going on Fox & Friends, saying this: "The animated M&M candy that engaged in some witty early morning repartee with the triumvirate on Fox & Friends. "
O'Reilly Calls Ellen Attacks A McCarthy Era Witch Hunt By: Steve - February 8, 2012 - 10:00am
Here at www.oreilly-sucks.com I normally spend 99.9% of my time slamming O'Reilly for his right-wing bias, his double standards, his hypocrisy, and his pure stupidity, but for once I am going to praise him for what he did.
On the Monday Factor show Bill O'Reilly stuck up for Ellen DeGeneres in a segment about the One Million Moms proposed boycott of JC Penney, which has named the openly gay comic and talk show host their spokesperson.
O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: If you remember with the McCarthy era, in the 50s and they were trying to hunt down communist sympathizers and not let them work and put them.
What is the difference between McCarthy era communist blacklist in the 50s and the million moms saying, Hey, JC Penney and all you other stores don't you hire any gay people, don't you dare. What is the difference?
O’Reilly’s guest, the crazy far-right loon Sandy Rios was on to defend the boycott and explained that since DeGeneres has "chosen to act out her lesbian lifestyle and marry her partner, people that believe that marriage is between a man and woman and children should not be exposed to propagandized in homosexuality have a moral problem with that."
Rios also said this: "It's disturbing to them. They are trying to say to JC Penney please don't do that."
And here is what I would say to Sandy Rios, get a clue and respect the rights of Ellen to do whatever she wants (in her private sex life) without some right-wing nuts going after her and JC Penny. If you don't like it do not shop there, and mind your own business.
And btw, JC Penney has said that it has no plans to break ties with DeGeneres and has issued a statement saying this: "we share the same values as Ellen."
So all this does is show that Sandy Rios and the so-called million moms are hate filled right-wing idiots who simply do not like Ellen because she is gay. Which is just wrong, and nobody should be attacked or smeared simply because of their sex life, as long as it's legal. It should be a private matter anyway, so it's none of their business if she is gay or not.
Frankly I am shocked O'Reilly is on the right side of this issue, for once he is acting like a smart man who respects the rights of all people. But somehow I am also guessing this may be the only time I ever agree with O'Reilly on anything.
The Monday 2-6-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 7, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: A tale of two Super Bowl interviews. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: NBC's Matt Lauer interviewed President Obama for just six minutes a few hours before the Super Bowl. The President said his policies are improving the economy and he's watching Iran very closely. Last year I interviewed the President before the game; we talked for about 14 minutes and the tone was very different.
One interesting part of last year's interview was Egypt - President Obama said he was confident that Egypt would have 'a government that we can work with as a partner.' That confidence was not well founded; Egypt now says it will put 19 Americans on trial on totally trumped-up charges and the USA is threatening to suspend the $1.3 billion in aid we give them.
But there's no question that President Obama is in a better position today than he was last year. Jobs will most likely define the race unless the Republican challenger can define the danger of America's massive debt in a way that will get the attention of the voters.
The debates will mean everything this year as independents try to decide who to support. Talking Points expects one of the closest elections in the nation's history.
O'Reilly is crying about the interview, when it was far better then the one he did last year, and much more respectful. O'Reilly was a disrespectful right-wing hack, and he cut the President off about 15 times, which a journalist should never do.
And notice that O'Reilly has still not even mentioned the January jobs report that shows a big improvement in the economy, a drop in unemployment, and a lot of job growth, because it makes Obama look good so O'Reilly is totally ignoring it. And btw, O'Reilly never mentioned it in the entire show, for the 2nd show in a row.
Then Brit Hume was on to talk about President Obama. Hume said this: "Two or three months ago, he had reason to be worried. The economy was weak, job growth was poor. But job growth has begun to accelerate a little and that's the number we watch the most when you're looking for the outcome of a presidential election. So the President has some reason to be confident, and he can't help but be heartened by the spectacle of the Republican candidates tearing themselves apart."
Hume also thinks that Mitt Romney has been extremely effective in attacking his remaining rivals, saying this: "Romney has raised his game on the negative side, but for a lot of Republican voters the question is whether he can raise his game on the positive side and convince the many Republican voters that have doubts about him that he is one of them."
What is so funny is that O'Reilly, Fox News, and all of the far right loons love Newt Gingrich, but they know he can not beat Obama, so they are going to sell out and nominate Romney just because he has a better chance to beat Obama. Then I predict Obama will beat Romney anyway, because jobs are coming back and the economy is improving.
Then Juan Williams & Mary Katharine Ham were on to discuss the Republican Congressman Pete Hoekstra, who is airing a (racist ad) with an Asian actress thanking Democratic incumbent Debbie Stabenow for helping the Asian economy with her big spending.
Williams said this: "It's a satirical ad and to me it is silly, with this woman portrayed as some kind of Charlie Chan character. This is supposed to be a serious issue but this didn't seem worthy of Pete Hoekstra - it creates problems for him and crosses a line."
Ham even agreed that the spot does Hoekstra more harm than good, saying this: "It is not a smart ad, and whenever you delve into something that is going to get a racial conversation started you're not in a good situation. This is a serious issue and you can talk about China without doing this."
And shockingly O'Dummy made it unanimous, saying this: "There's a gleeful Asian woman who is speaking broken English, which is a cliche. I don't know if that's a good thing to do."
Then O'Dummy had Peter Shankman & Mike Paul on to cry about the Clint Eastwood ad that basically thanked Obama. But if he did it to a Republican President O'Reilly would love it and have no problem with it.
Clint Eastwood appears in a TV spot for Chrysler in which he declares, "It's halftime America, and our second half is about to begin." So some Republicans have accused Eastwood of shilling for President Obama. Paul said this: "To me this was a classic 'thank you' ad, saying thank you, President Obama, for bailing us out. This was about branding."
Shankman dismissed that notion, saying this: "Last year an ad with Eminem started the 'Detroit is on its way back' movement. That was a very successful ad and Detroit said let's do it again."
So the great? O'Reilly concluded that Clint Eastwood is inadvertently mired in a left-right dispute, saying this: "Eastwood did a good thing, he's trying to say America is coming back and we'll work our way out of it. But now he's caught in the political wars and getting hammered as an ideologue."
Then the crazy far-right loon Sandy Rios was on to talk about the conservative organization "One Million Moms" who wants JCPenney to fire spokesperson Ellen DeGeneres because she is openly gay. With nobody from JCPenny or the left on to debate it.
Sandy Rios said this: "This is not about Ellen DeGeneres, it's about mainstreaming something that is not acceptable to Christian and traditional family people all over the country. Ellen DeGeneres has chosen to act out her lesbian lifestyle, while JCPenney is supposed to be middle America, the place where families shop. They're trying to say to JCPenney, please don't do that."
And even O'Reilly was not buying that spin, and said that "One Million Moms" is out of line, saying this: "They are asking a private company to fire an American citizen based upon her lifestyle. I don't think that's the spirit of America. This is a witch hunt that shouldn't happen."
After watching the coverage of last week's dispute involving the Komen Foundation and abortion provider Planned Parenthood, Bernie Goldberg was on, who accused the mainstream media of letting its bias show. But remember this, Goldberg is a far-right hack who hates the mainstream media, and even calls them the lamestream media, so he is hardly an impartial guest.
Goldberg said this: "A lot of reporters, don't know pro-life people, they don't travel in the same universe. They need to understand that people who live between Manhattan and Malibu are Americans too and their values should be respected."
And btw, how the hell does Bernie Goldberg know who they know and who they do not know.
Goldberg also slammed the anti-gay sentiment among some conservative groups, saying this: "There's something that needs to be said. There is a strain of bigotry running through conservative America and it goes against gay people. That has to leave the conservative movement."
Then O'Dummy said this: "I think the bigotry against pro-life people is way more than the bigotry against gay people, particularly in the media where very few people respect the pro-life position. When you boil it down, what do the pro-life people want? They want to save babies!"
Which is just laughable, because it's about more than just saving babies. I guess O'Reilly forgets about all the pro-life loons that kill abortion doctors for performing a legal medical service. While there are no pro-choice people killing anyone who is pro-life. Not to mention, they are trying to impose their religious views on women and pro-choice people, instead of just minding their own business.
Abortion is legal, and these far-right loons try to stop it anyway, with murder sometimes, and O'Reilly acts like it's not happening.
And finally O'Reilly had his ridiculous Factor Reality Check, that I never report on because 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.
Professor Krugman Knocks Down Jobs Report Spin By: Steve - February 7, 2012 - 10:00am
The right-wing spin doctors at Fox News are already spinning the January jobs report that was very good news for the country, the economy, and President Obama. And I am sure O'Reilly would be spinning it too, if he was not ignoring the report because it makes Obama look good.
Paul Krugman wrote an article with details on the facts, that de-bunk the right-wing spin from Fox and the right. Here are some quotes from his article:
Recent facts have not been kind to the political right. A better-than-expected jobs report; a renewed focus on inequality, driven both by CBO research and by the gift of Mitt Romney's candidacy. What to do?
The answer is to throw a bunch of bogus numbers at the issues, in the hope that something sticks, or at least that the discussion becomes confused.
First, about that jobs report: all the usual suspects have jumped on the routine BLS population adjustment to claim that the numbers were cooked. The real story here is that the BLS estimates unemployment based on a monthly survey; this tells us what fraction of workers are unemployed.
To turn that into a number of unemployed, the BLS estimates total working-age population; but it updates those estimates only once a year. So there's usually a step up or down in the totals each January, signifying nothing.
Back in the Bush years there were a lot of bogus claims of huge job growth reflecting a step up in the population numbers. Now we have Rush Limbaugh, Fox, etc., claiming that a step down somehow implies fake calculations. Still not true. And the thing that makes this so tiring is that they keep trotting out the same old bogosity, no matter how many times it has been refuted.
Next up, inequality denial. The Census Gini figure hasn't moved much since the early 1990s - but as Jon Chait says, we know perfectly well why: it's because Census numbers are top-coded, that is, cut off at high income levels, and the big gains have come way up the scale.
How do we know that? Partly, just look around: walk around New York's pricier neighborhoods and tell me that inequality hasn't increased. But also, income tax data.
Notice that the rise is almost entirely concentrated in the top 1 percent; even the bottom half of the top 10 percent went nowhere, which tells you once again that this is about the 1 versus the 99, not the top 20 versus the lower class. And yes, the data are overwhelming support for a rise in inequality.
Oh, and Chait tells us that the usual suspects are also rolling out the old "the rich in America pay more taxes than the rich in other countries" thing. Yes - because the American rich are much, much richer.
In a way it's almost a relief to find these guys coming up with new fallacies. Brad DeLong catches the WSJ looking at estimates that federal workers get 2 percent more salary and 48 percent more benefits than private-sector workers - and concluding that this means that they are overpaid by 50 percent.
The important point to make here is that all these bogus numbers are coming from seemingly authoritative sources - Fox News, which is a big organization, the WSJ editorial page, the American Enterprise Institute. You could not imagine a similar level of statistical dishonesty from, say, The Nation, or Washington Monthly, or EPI.
This is what I mean when I say that the left and right aren't symmetric. People of all persuasions lie; but the right has a whole institutional structure of lying that has no counterpart on the left.
Crazy Santorum Compares Drug Cost To Price Of iPAD By: Steve - February 6, 2012 - 11:00am
While campaigning in Colorado, GOP contender Rick Santorum told a sick child and his mother that they shouldn't complain about the exorbitant cost of his medication because some people spend $900 on iPads.
He appeared unmoved by the plight of the family, staunchly defending drug companies right to charge whatever they want.
The candidate also said that the parent and child unjustly felt entitled to get life-saving care at an affordable rate:
GOP contender Rick Santorum had a heated exchange with a mother and her sick young son Wednesday, arguing that drug companies were entitled to charge whatever the market demanded for life-saving therapies.
"People have no problem paying $900 for an iPad," Santorum said, "but paying $900 for a drug they have a problem with - it keeps you alive. Why? Because you've been conditioned to think health care is something you can get without having to pay for it."
The mother said the boy was on the drug Abilify, used to treat schizophrenia, and that, on paper, its costs would exceed $1 million each year.
Santorum said drugs take years to develop and cost millions of dollars to produce, and manufacturers need to turn a profit or they would stop developing new drugs.
Santorum went on to lecture the mother and suggest she should be grateful to the drug companies for saving her son's life. "He's alive today because drug companies provide care," Santorum said.
"And if they didn't think they could make money providing that drug, that drug wouldn't be here."
Which is just insane, because if they can not afford the drug, how the hell is it going to save his life. Not to mention, what does people paying $900 for an iPAD have to do with the cost of a drug a person needs to live.
He also claimed it would freeze innovation if pharmaceutical companies were required to offer their drugs at a reasonable price.
Which is also crazy, because they would just make less profit.
Although Santorum has been a vocal opponent of health care reform, his callous reaction is somewhat surprising given that he himself is the father of a daughter with a rare genetic disorder. But if the Colorado mother thought Santorum might be sympathetic to families in similar situations who happen to be less wealthy, she was sadly mistaken.
U.S. Corporate Tax Rate Drops To 40 Year Low By: Steve - February 6, 2012 - 10:00am
So while O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends continue to cry for lower taxes on the Corporations and the wealthy to turn an economy around that is already turning around thanks to President Obama. It turns out the Corporations are making more money than ever, and paying their lowest share of taxes in 40 years.
And as usual you never hear a word about this from O'Reilly, because it destroys his right-wing spin that taxes are too high for the Corporations and the wealthy, and that it's slowing the economic recovery.
In recent decades, corporate tax revenue has plunged, falling from about 6 percent of gross domestic product in the 1950's to less than 2 percent today, due to a proliferation of corporate tax breaks and the use of offshore tax havens.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, corporate tax receipts as a share of corporate profits have hit their lowest point in 40 years:
Total corporate federal taxes paid fell to 12.1% of profits earned from activities within the U.S. in fiscal 2011, which ended Sept. 30, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
That's the lowest level since at least 1972. And well below the 25.6% companies paid on average from 1987 to 2008.
Even the 25.6 percent share of profits that went to corporate taxes over the last quarter century comes in below the top statutory corporate tax rate of 35 percent.
Meanwhile, corporate PROFITS are currently at a 60 year HIGH, rebounding back to above where they were before the Great Recession hit.
And at the same time corporations are pulling in huge amounts of money, the workers are seeing their wages shrink. Last year, real wages fell by 2 percent, and many employees are also working longer hours and getting more done without raises or overtime pay.
"Part of the reason why business profits are so high is it is a zero-sum game, so labor is on the losing end of that," said Aaron Smith, senior economist at Moody's Analytics.
"Businesses are getting more out of each worker they have."
O'Reilly Lied About Planned Parenthood Again By: Steve - February 5, 2012 - 11:00am
In his Friday night talking points memo the dishonest and biased right-wing hack Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The Susan Komen Foundation funds various enterprises that help detect and fight breast cancer. One of those enterprises is Planned Parenthood, which refers women for mammograms; last year the Komen Foundation gave Planned Parenthood $680,000.
>>>>>> That is a source of controversy because Planned Parenthood is primarily in business to provide abortions, more than 300,000 each year. <<<<<<
Some pro-life folks don't like breast cancer money going to Planned Parenthood, so this week the Komen Foundation said it would stop giving Planned Parenthood money. All hell broke loose in the secular precincts - the pro-abortion lobby went crazy, the Internet was full of hateful posts, and 26 Senators wrote a letter to Komen.
Faced with a nasty controversy, the Foundation surrendered and announced that it will restore the grant. It's true that Planned Parenthood does breast cancer screening, so the Komen Foundation should demand their grants go just for that.
Planned Parenthood is much more than a women's health organization - it is a pro-abortion lobby under the banner of 'reproductive rights.'
And 99% of that right-wing garbage is Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!
In fact, abortion services made up just 3 percent of Planned Parenthood's medical services.
Here are the facts: 38% of what they do is for STD/STI testing and treatment. 33.5% of what they do is contraception. 14.5% is for Cancer screening and prevention. 11% is for other women's health services. And 3% of what they do is for abortions. Yes you heard me right, only 3% goes to abortions.
So abortions are not even close to being their primary business, in fact, it's the lowest percentage of what they do. So O'Reilly was about as dishonest as a journalist could be when he said Planned Parenthood is primarily in business to provide abortions.
And btw, this information is all in the public domain, you can get it right off their own website. So anyone with a computer can go look at it, and yet O'Reilly still got it wrong and lied about it on purpose to make them look bad.
Republican Secretary Of State Convicted Of Voter Fraud By: Steve - February 5, 2012 - 10:00am
But of course if you watch the Factor for your news you would not know it, because not only has O'Reilly never said a word about the conviction, he has ignored the entire story, from the trial to the verdict. While reporting everything about any suspected voter fraud involving Democrats, even when there was no actual voter fraud and nobody was found guilty of it.
When a Republican Secretary of State is actually convicted of voter fraud, O'Reilly is silent. Here is the story O'Reily has ignored, even though he even does a legal news segment every week.
Many Republicans around the country have begun demanding increased voting restrictions in the name of fighting voter fraud. Though actual cases of voting fraud are so rare that a voter is much more likely to be struck by lightning than to commit fraud at the polls, one Republican official in Indiana has proved that lightning can strike himself.
Friday, a jury found Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White (R) guilty on six felony counts of voter fraud, theft, and perjury. The conviction cost White his job, though he plans to ask the judge to reduce the charges to misdemeanors and hopes to perhaps regain the position. What was O'Reilly reporting on Friday, politician predictions on the Super Bowl, and asking Joe Namath about how tough it is to play in the NFL.
In a statement, Gov. Mitch Daniels (R) announced White's deputy will take over on an interim basis:
I have chosen not to make a permanent appointment today out of respect for the judge's authority to lessen the verdict to a misdemeanor and reinstate the elected office holder. If the felony convictions are not altered, I anticipate making a permanent appointment quickly.
But a second court case could ultimately give the job to Democrat Vop Osili, who lost to White in November 2010. A judge's December 2011 ruling - currently on hold, pending appeal - held that due to the voter fraud charges, White's election was invalid. Should that ruling survive the appeals process, Osili would assume the office.
Ironically, White's now-removed 2010 campaign website listed election integrity as among his top concerns, and promised he would "protect and defend Indiana's Voter ID law to ensure our elections are fair and protect the most basic and precious right and responsibility of our democracy-voting."
And btw, In 2005, Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels signed the strictest voter ID requirements in the nation, and Republicans said at the time that it was needed to guard against voter fraud.
The Friday 2-3-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 4, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: Breast cancer organization caves to pro-abortion forces. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The Susan Komen Foundation funds various enterprises that help detect and fight breast cancer. One of those enterprises is Planned Parenthood, which refers women for mammograms; last year the Komen Foundation gave Planned Parenthood $680,000.
That is a source of controversy because Planned Parenthood is primarily in business to provide abortions, more than 300,000 each year. Some pro-life folks don't like breast cancer money going to Planned Parenthood, so this week the Komen Foundation said it would stop giving Planned Parenthood money.
All hell broke loose in the secular precincts - the pro-abortion lobby went crazy, the Internet was full of hateful posts, and 26 Senators wrote a letter to Komen. Faced with a nasty controversy, the Foundation surrendered and announced that it will restore the grant.
It's true that Planned Parenthood does breast cancer screening, so the Komen Foundation should demand their grants go just for that. Planned Parenthood is much more than a women's health organization - it is a pro-abortion lobby under the banner of 'reproductive rights.' That is disturbing to pro-life Americans who may want to donate to Komen.
For me it's a simple equation: Upon my death I don't want to stand in front of God trying to explain how I supported the destruction of a fetus, and I certainly don't want my breast cancer donations to go to Planned Parenthood.
I understand the Komen Foundation is in a tight spot and is getting battered from both sides. But they should have stood firm - Planned Parenthood is too political and too pro-abortion.
And as usual O'Reilly lied again, because abortions are only 3% of what Planned Parenthood does, abortion is not their primary business, and O'Reilly knows it. But he still lies about them because he is a pro-life right-winger who wants to make them look bad.
Then O'Dummy had Janine Turner and Leslie Marshall on to talk about the Komen controversy. Marshall said this: "This is not about abortion, this is about saving lives. The Susan Komen Foundation or any charity can specifically earmark that their funds are to be used for breast cancer."
Turner said this: "They're a private charity and they can do whatever they want, but they were bullied and I think it's a shame that they acquiesced to political correctness. Planned Parenthood doesn't even do mammograms."
And O'Reilly said Komen should demand concessions from Planned Parenthood, saying this: "If I give a donation to the Foundation, I do it because I want to combat breast cancer. I don't want to help abortion in any way and I can't give money to Komen unless I'm assured that doesn't happen."
Then O'Reilly had Karl Rove on to talk about his Super PAC called 'Crossroads GPS,' which raises money for conservative causes. After Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer accused Rove's group of maintaining a $33 million secret fund, Rove was on to say this: "Who is he kidding? This is what the Democrats have been doing for years and this guy now comes out when Republicans start following what Democrats have done!"
Rove also said this: "The money is in U.S. banks and we're going to use it to talk about the major issues of the day. Last year we were involved in the battle over the debt ceiling and we now have ads up talking about Solyndra and the administration's failed policy on 'green jobs.'"
O'Reilly sent an invitation to Senator Schumer, saying this: "He's welcome to come on any time, but he never said a word about George Soros, who spent even more money than you did."
Then O'Reilly had another segment on the Occupy protests. Joe Alioto Veronese, a former member of the San Francisco Police Commission said this: "This is a self-proclaimed military group, that is bent on criminal activity. The Occupy movement was never meant to have this purpose and the founders of the group have abandoned this type of activity. This is a big and dangerous distraction."
Rich Benjamin of the left-leaning Demos think tank defended the larger Occupy message, saying this: "This is a fringe group of the Occupy Wall Street movement and we can not let their activities detract from what Occupy Wall Street is saying. This is a serious movement that is challenging our democracy."
O'Reilly told Benjamin that it's already too late to save the Occupy image, saying this: "The perception is that Occupy Wall Street is a bunch of kooks who want to tear down society."
Then Geraldo was on to say just what government owes the poor. Geraldo said this: "We don't want people nestled on the bottom, sucking on the federal government and having a subsistence kind of existence. You and I come from blue collar families and we were able to pick ourselves up by our bootstraps, and millions of people have done the same thing. We owe a level playing field and we owe opportunity."
Rivera also said this: "I want a father's name on every birth certificate in this country because that's where responsibility begins. And we have to tell inner city dads to pick their pants up, be men, and provide for their children."
So O'Dummy said he was worried that class antagonism is large and growing, saying this: "President Obama has set up a class warfare situation where he's going to portray himself as a champion of the poor and Romney and Gingrich as the mean guys."
Then Lou Dobbs was on to report on the money surrounding Sunday's Super Bowl. Dobbs said this: "It costs $3.5 million for a thirty second ad, and there will be $10 billion in gambling on the game. Seats are going for an average of $4,000 and if you want to be in the luxury box it's $80,000. 600 private jets are expected to land at the airport in Indianapolis. This is the Mardi Gras of media - it's insane to think one sporting event has this kind of impact."
Really Lou? Who cares, and why did we need to know any of that information. How is this news on a so-called hard news show. Especially when O'Reilly ignored the January jobs report that shows the economy is improving, the unemployment rate went down, and the fact that it shows the Obama economic policies are working. O'Reilly ignored it because it makes Obama look good, and it shows he is wrong to say the liberal policies Obama put in place are failing.
And finally O'Reilly had Joe Namath on, who 43 years after engineering a stunning upset in Super Bowl III, spoke about his prediction of a Jets victory prior to that game.
Namath said this: "The pressure was nonexistent, because I knew we were going to win, I was convinced our team was better. But the next morning after I said that, our coach Weeb Ewbank called me over and said, 'What have you done!'"
The often injured Namath also talked about the sport's ever-present violence, saying this: "It's a great sport but our bodies are not designed for the rigors of football. If I had a son I don't know that I'd want him to play football because it takes a major toll on the body and the head."
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense that is not even worth reporting on.
O'Reilly Totally Ignored The Great January Jobs Report By: Steve - February 4, 2012 - 10:00am
And of course O'Reilly ignored the report because it makes Obama look good, and it shows his so-called liberal policies have worked and are still working.
Which is the exact opposite of what O'Reilly has been saying for 2 years. O'Reilly claims the liberal social justice policies from Obama have failed, even when the facts say they are working, and the last jobs report is yet more proof O'Dummy is wrong.
For the first time in several years, we have a very positive employment report. The U.S. economy added 243,000 payroll jobs in January 2012 and the unemployment rate fell to 8.3 percent.
The past several months of data show a labor market that is recovering, and an economy that has been accelerating even as fears of a double-dip recession rose. The main complaint about the report, which isn't really a complaint, is that we need several more months like this to recover all the ground lost in 2008 and 2009.
For those of us who believe the economy is performing better, stronger and faster than spin doctors like O'Reilly and the loons at Fox News, this is something of a vindication.
The Facts: The economy created 243,000 jobs. There was no great post-Christmas season let-down in hiring, as many analysts expected. Strength was across the board. Manufacturing added 50,000 positions. Health care and education added decent chunks of jobs, per usual, but professional services added 70,000 and retail added 10,000 jobs. Average weekly earnings rose a bit, and were up 2.5 percent from January 2011.
The Facts: Pretty much every month, the private sector adds jobs while the public sector subtracts payroll positions. Between May 2010 and January 2012, the public sector cut 1.024 million jobs while the private sector added 2.245 million. The trend continued in January, with the private sector adding 257,000 and government cutting 14,000 jobs.
Yes you saw that right, the Government cut 14,000 jobs, which is crazy to do in the middle of a recession and economic recovery. But that is what the Republicans did, to make the recovery less stronger to hurt Obama politically. And in my book, that makes them borderline traitors.
Add it all up, and there are now 132.4 million people with payroll jobs in the U.S., the highest number since February 2009.
The household survey, in which it calls people at home and asks them questions about their work status, yields the unemployment rate. But it also provides a host of other data, like the labor force participation rate and alternate measures of labor market underutilization - which have remained generally depressing even as the payroll figures have improved.
But for January, the household survey produced some optimistic data. The unemployment rate fell to 8.3 percent. The size of the labor force grew, but so did the number of people who said they were working. In December, according to the household survey, some 140.79 million Americans were employed. In January, the same survey found 141.64 million Americans were employed. That's a gain of 850,000 in one month.
And crazy fools like O'Reilly see these numbers and still claim the liberal policies of Obama are not working. Despite the fact that every Republican in Federal and State office positions are trying everything they can to slow job growth and cut Government jobs, the jobs are coming back and the economy is improving anyway.
Just think how good it would be if the Republicans actually helped Obama to create jobs, instead of doing everything possible to kill jobs for political reasons, because it will make Obama look good. And I would bet the farm if Democrats were doing this to a Republican President O'Reilly would call them un-American traitors.
The Wednesday 2-2-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 3, 2012 - 11:30am
The TPM was called: Romney's 'very poor' gaffe. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The fact that Mitt Romney addressed poor people in a rather businesslike way is now a national issue. He said 'I'm not concerned about the very poor, we have a safety net there and if it needs repair I'll fix it.' Obviously the Governor used a poor choice of words and the left is running wild with it, but so are some on the right.
So let's take a look at poverty in America. Back in 1964 the poverty rate stood at 19% and so the Great Society programs were launched by President Johnson. Since that time more than $16 trillion has been spent on welfare payments to the poor, yet the poverty rate is only down by four points.
Mr. Obama wants a massive federal intervention to redistribute income to the poor; Romney says no, he wants the private sector to create jobs, saying that will lead more people out of poverty. The mistake the Governor is making is not dealing with the true causes of poverty: poor education, addiction, irresponsible behavior, and laziness.
That's right, far left people, some folks are lazy. On the education front, the U.S. spends the highest amount per student in the world with the exception of Switzerland, so if the kids aren't learning it's likely because of terrible family situations or awful teachers, not money.
As for addiction, an estimated 10% of the population is involved with substance abuse. And finally, irresponsible behavior - if you go to prison you're going to have a hard time getting a good job; if you have giant tattoo of a scorpion on your neck, IBM will not hire you.
Personal choices can lead to prosperity or dereliction, and there is usually a reason people are poor in a country that has more opportunity than any other place on earth. It almost always comes back to personal circumstances, and all the government in the world is not going to change that. That's what Mitt Romney, Barack Obama and Newt Gingrich should be talking about.
And btw folks, a 4 point drop is a lot when you are talking about millions of people getting out of poverty. Not to mention O'Reilly is spinning the 4 point drop, because it was better than 4 points until Bush ran the country for 8 years, because poverty rates went up under Bush, but the dishonest O'Reilly never said a word about that. And finally, there are a lot of reasons people are poor, and O'Reilly got most of them wrong.
So what does O'Reilly do next, have a poverty expert on, haha of course not, he had the far-right loon Laura Ingraham on to talk about Romney's gaffe and poverty in America.
Ingraham said this: "Voters increasingly want to hear solutions. We know what Governor Romney was talking about, but nevertheless I think he hasn't marinated himself in the conservative economic philosophy. He was in business and he was doing the Olympics, but he wasn't going back to listen to Ronald Reagan's 1964 speech when he sounded the alarm about government dependency that we were about to trigger with the war on poverty."
The crazy Ingraham also said this: "Mitt Romney is a boardroom problem-solver and a fix-it guy, he's not an ideologue. The best way to help the poor is to lift the economy and unleash free enterprise."
Are you kidding me, we have heard that right-wing propaganda for 30 years, and it has been proven to not work. When the rich get richer they just save it, invest more, or buy more houses, they do not create jobs and lift the economy for the poor.
Then O'Dummy had Nancy Pfotenhauer on to spin for the Koch brothers, with nobody from the left to counter her spin with the facts.
President Obama's aides and their media allies have frequently denounced the conservative billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch. So Pfotenhauer, a spokesperson for the brothers, responded to reports of an Obama "enemies list."
Pfotenhauer said this: "It's pretty clear the President has certain people in his crosshairs, and since 2010 we've seen an orchestrated and sustained smear campaign against these private individuals. At a private fundraiser President Obama made a reference to Charles and David Koch, then his economic adviser told reporters that Koch Industry had not paid its taxes. That was false and malicious."
But during the segment she even admitted she does not believe there is an enemies list, so the entire segment was just laughable, because if someone is spending millions and millions of dollars to beat you of course you are not going to like them. That is not having an enemies list, it's just normal hate against them.
Then Gretchen Carlson & Margaret Hoover were on to cry about an occupy protest once again. They claim some Occupy protesters disrupted an anti-abortion rally in Rhode Island, shouting down a Catholic priest and throwing condoms.
Carlson said this: "The protesters did three things. They chanted so the priest could not say the prayers, they physically bumped a state representative, and they threw condoms up in the air from the balcony, some of which came down on high school girls."
Hoover added that a large police presence kept things from getting totally out of hand, saying this: "The Capitol Police were notified ahead of time because the organizer of the pro-life event had seen something like this happen in Washington the week before. The protesters ruined the event and Occupy Wall Street has taken responsibility."
Billy said he was totally unsurprised by the vulgar display, saying this: "Occupy Wall Street is not an economic protest, it's a far-left social movement designed to attack people with whom they disagree."
And of course as usual O'Reilly has it all wrong, the occupy protests are being held to get this country back on a track to some kind of fairness in pay for workers compared to what the wealthy CEO's at the top make. The workers just want their fair share of the pie, that's all, and O'Reilly just does not get it or report the truth about it. Because he is a dishonest right-wing hack of a pretend journalist.
Then a Factor producer Jesse Watters was on to report on some prominent politicians and invited them to predict the Super Bowl outcome. To no one's surprise, members of Congress from New York and New Jersey are going for the Giants, while New England folks side with the Patriots.
But one prominent politician - Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts - was conspicuously absent from the prediction roll call. Watters said this: "He declined our interview. He called you antagonistic, Bill, and said it's none of your business what he's doing on Super Bowl Sunday." O'Reilly fired back at Fannie-friendly Frank, saying, "I heard a rumor that he's going to give mortgages to all the players on the losing team."
Earth to O'Reilly, get a life man. Nobody cares what any Politicians or what Barney Frank are predicting about the super bowl. Report some real news and stop this tabloid Inside Edition garbage.
Then Megyn Kelly was on again to talk about the Attorney General Eric Holder, who testified Thursday before a Congressional subcommittee investigating the 'Fast and Furious' gun-running sting. This is the story nobody cares about except the right-wing hacks like Fox News, Kelly, and O'Reilly. Kelly said this: "Eric Holder was grilled once again, about what he knew, when he knew it, and where is the accountability for this operation. There is no direct evidence linking him to the approval of the scandal and he says they're still investigating who signed off on it."
So then O'Dummy said that House Republicans seem to be enjoying their ritual bludgeoning of Holder: "This is the sixth time they've called Holder to testify and they want to embarrass him. It's political, but Holder looks like he just doesn't know what's going on in something that is vitally important."
And finally Martha MacCallum & Steve Doocy were on for the totally lame Factor News Quiz, that I will never report on because it's a ridiculous waste of tv time.
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots garbage that is not even worth talking about.
Government Cuts Reduced GDP Last Year By: Steve - February 3, 2012 - 11:00am
Here is a great example of why the Republicans do what they do, everything possible to slow jobs growth and GDP growth to make Obama look bad. And you will notice that O'Reilly never reports on what the Republicans are doing, because he is one of them and he approves of what they are doing.
The Commerce Department reported last week that the economy grew at a 2.8 percent rate in the fourth quarter of 2011, higher than GDP growth has been recently, but still not enough to significantly bring down unemployment.
One of the major drags on growth has been the budget-cutting that has been going on at all levels of government for the past year and a half:
The public sector has been shrinking for the last year and a half — mostly because of cuts in state and local government, with some federal cuts, especially to the military, playing a role as well. In the fourth quarter, government shrank at an annual rate of 4.5 percent.
Over the last two years, the private sector grew at an average annual rate of 3.2 percent, while the government shrank at an annual rate of 1.4 percent.
The combined result has been economic growth of 2.3 percent.
The obvious conclusion is that economic growth (and jobs growth) would have been much stronger over the last two years without government cuts.
Of course, Republicans in Congress have been totally opposed to helping states weather the nation's continuing economic storm, forcing them to resort to layoffs that not only hurt the economy, but leave communities worse off, with fewer teachers, firefighters, and police officers.
Some teachers in Pennsylvania have decided to work without pay, while one school district in that same state decided to use sheep to cut its grass in order to minimize costs. More than half a million public sector workers have lost their jobs in the Great Recession Bush caused.
For those conservatives pushing austerity as a solution to the nation's economic problems, these numbers should come as a bit of a warning, as should the fact that the United Kingdom's austerity program has led it's economy to do worse than it did during the Great Depression.
Crazy O'Reilly Claims He Knows The Cause Of Poverty By: Steve - February 3, 2012 - 10:00am
And of course it's an insane claim right out of the GOP playbook. Billy said the cause of poverty is "Poor Education, Addiction, Irresponsible Behavior, and Laziness."
Yeah that's what we need, a wealthy Republican blowhard with a lame cable tv news show telling us why the poor are poor. I just love how these right-wing idiots (who were never poor) tell everyone why they are poor. There are many reasons people are poor, but O'Reilly is wrong about most of them.
The Wednesday 2-1-12 O'Reilly Factor Review By: Steve - February 2, 2012 - 11:00am
The TPM was called: What's next for the GOP candidates? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll has President Obama's job approval rating at 49%. The President is up in the ratings over the past few weeks, but there is a Gallup poll that is very telling. It says there are only 10 states where Mr. Obama's approval rating is above 50%.
Even in liberal California, just 50.1% like the job the President is doing. Talking Points hates to say this, but the presidential race is likely to be an Obama-Romney contest and it will be waged in just 12 battleground states. President Obama is not over 50% approval in any of them!
If the Republicans can stay on message that Mr. Obama is incompetent in economic matters, the GOP has a better-than-even chance of winning the White House and the Senate. But getting to that point will be very difficult - Democrats will unleash hell on Mitt Romney if he's the guy.
They'll dig up everything he's ever done financially and they'll paint him as a corrupt rich person who doesn't care about the folks. The converse, of course, is true as well. Back in 2008 President Obama said that a $9-trillion debt was 'unpatriotic.'
That quote is being rammed down the President's throat because America has built a $15-trillion debt on Mr. Obama's watch. So you can see how this is going to unfold - it will be very intense.
And here is my prediction, since the economy is improving, jobs are coming back, the stock market is doing well, and gas prices are not too high, Obama will win a 2nd term whether Romney or Gingrich is the GOP winner.
Then Dick Morris was on to predict Newt Gingrich's next move after being trounced in Florida. Morris said this: "There's a fight between his head and his heart. His head is going to tell him to go positive and sketch out a positive vision for America, but his heart is going to say 'I'm going to get even with that son of a gun, I'm going to go after him.'"
Morris also said this: "Romney has taunted Gingrich and I think Gingrich is now like a bull in a bullfight - he's enraged and ready to charge. That's why women in Florida voted for Romney over Gingrich by 19 points - he was angry and women turned against him." So then O'Dummy had a somewhat different analysis, saying this: "You say Romney baited Gingrich, but I don't see it that way. I don't think he sat down with his advisors and said 'I'm going to make him lose his composure.'"
Then Monica Crowley & Alan Colmes were on to talk about President Obama's approval rating being below 50% in 12 battleground states.
Colmes said this: "He has to get out there, and explain in simple language what he has done and how he has helped the American people. And he has to get the progressives to vote."
Then O'Dummy had some ridicule for Colmes, saying this: "He's got to get out there?? Those are the dumbest words I've heard in months! Has he been cloistered in the basement for three years? Did you even think about this segment at all, Colmes?"
Crowley said that President Obama is facing an uphill battle: "The fact that he is underwater in so many key states is not good, but he's going to raise about a billion dollars and he has the power of incumbency. The problem for Obama is that the most politically toxic element is the unemployment number. The American people have seen the direct result of his disastrous economic policies."
Which is just laughable, because since July of 2009 (6 months after Obama took office) there has been positive job growth every month, and 1.9 million new jobs have been created. The only negative job growth under Obama was in the 1st six months of his presidency, before his policies kicked in, and those six months of job losses were credited to Bush. Except with the dishonest Republicans like Crowley who try to blame it on Obama.
Then Charles Krauthammer was on to talk about Gingrich. Krauthammer said this: "What he needs to do is what he did Tuesday night, when he had a whole different demeanor. There was no whining, and there was no playing the victim. He had just sustained a 15-point shellacking and he started talking about all the executive orders he's going to pass in his first hours as president. It's as if he had won! On one hand it was near-delusional, but on the other hand it had kind of a charm to it with his doggedness."
O'Dummy suggested that Gingrich's rough manner is a double-edged sword, saying this: "Sometimes his anger works for him, when he directs it toward the media or anti-Christian people, but at other times it doesn't work for him. When he plays the victim voters don't like him."
Then Kimberly Guilfoyle & Lis Wiehl were on to talk about how Mitt Romney's campaign is running an ad that uses NBC's Tom Brokaw anchoring a report on Newt Gingrich's ethics violations in 1997. Brokaw and NBC are demanding that Romney cease and desist, but Guilfoyle and Wiehl said Romney does not have to do that.
Wiehl said this: "Tom Brokaw does not have the law on his side. They can argue copyright infringement, but there's something called 'fair use' that says you can re-broadcast a small portion of a broadcast as long as it's not meant for private commercial gain."
Guilfoyle agreed that Mitt Romney's campaign is well within its rights, saying this: "They're not using the entire broadcast, they're just taking a small portion of it and the courts have allowed this. Tom Brokaw can take this to court but he will lose under the 'fair use' doctrine. It's an effective ad."
Then O'Dummy had Dennis Miller on, which I do not report on because Miller is nothing but a has-been right-wing comedian who is only on to make jokes about liberals, with no liberal comedian on to make jokes about conservatives for balance.
And finally O'Dummy had Sarah Palin on, who advised her fellow Republicans to stop trashing one another. Palin said this: "The brutality we just witnessed in Florida, had $17 million in negative ads and a 65 - 1 negative ad ratio mounted against Newt Gingrich. That brutality wastes time and resources, and we have got to stay focuses on the main thing - finding the most equipped candidate to come up against the failed policies of Obama."
And of course O'Dummy agreed that Newt Gingrich and Mitt Romney are doing Obama a big favor, saying this: "Negative advertising catches people's attention, so the Obama campaign is being handed a gift by the Republican Party. There's no doubt about that!"
Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.
O'Reilly Ignoring Republican Voter Fraud Trial By: Steve - February 2, 2012 - 10:00am
O'Reilly and Fox News love to report on voter fraud when Democrats are accused of it, even when there is no actual voter fraud. But when a Republican is going on trial for SEVEN counts of voter fraud, O'Reilly ignores the story and never says a word about it.
And he even does an is it legal segment once a week, but still does not say a word about the Republican voter fraud case. Not to mention, this is not a regular voter fraud story, it involves the Indiana secretary of state.
Here is the story:
Indiana Secretary of State Charlie White, a Republican, is in the unusual position of being the person entrusted to protect the integrity of the ballot box, while at the same time fighting seven felony charges involving allegations he registered to vote at his ex-wife's house and served as a local councilman when he actually lived outside the district.
Jury selection in White's trial is set to begin Monday morning at the Hamilton County Superior Courthouse.
White was indicted in March, accused of fraud, perjury, theft, voting in the wrong precinct, submitting a false voter registration change of address and casting a "false, fictitious or fraudulent ballot."
"Charlie White registered to vote at a place he didn't live. That was in contravention of the law," said Karen Celestino-Horseman, a lawyer for the Indiana State Democratic Party, which brought the allegations against White at the Indiana Recount Commission. "It was not his residence."
"Under Indiana law, when you register to vote you have to have the intent to make that your residence ... but he had already bought a condo," saying the condo where he really intended to live with his new wife was not in the council district.
"By not registering outside the district, he was able to stay on the Fisher Town Council and receive $1,000 a month. If he had gone in and changed his registration officially, the Democratic members would have been notified that he had moved out of the district."
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, a Republican, has called on White to resign, something White says he will not do. White has told reporters he has the support of the people, and that his case was known to voters at the time he was overwhelmingly elected.
White will be removed from office under Indiana law if he is convicted on any of the felony charges.
Whatever happens, the case has already damaged the credibility of the election system, Democratic lawyer Celestino-Horseman said. "Having violated something as basic as the voter registration system does not build confidence in voters, regarding our electoral process."
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