The Friday 6-29-12 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - June 30, 2012 - 11:00am

Laura Ingraham was filling in again for Billy and she went right to her Top Story called: Could Obamacare legal victory be a loser for the president in the long run? The far-right insane Ingraham had Steven Law and Democratic strategist Julie Roginsky on, who doubted whether Romney will be able to run against Obamacare.

Roginsky said this: "Mitt Romney is not the guy to be carrying this message. If you're going to call this a tax, it is exactly the same thing Romney did in Massachusetts. If this were Santorum or Gingrich or anybody else, maybe the Republicans would have a point, but Romney is not the right messenger."

Steven Law, who runs a conservative SuperPAC, theorized that Republicans will benefit politically from Thursday's ruling, saying this: "A lot of people view this as a terrible decision for the country, but it is also an opportunity for Republicans to re-litigate this issue in the court of public opinion. And every time that's happened in the past, Obamacare has lost and Democrats have been collateral damage."

But that is not exactly right, because if you tell people what is actually in the bill and how they will benefit from it, the majority support it. Most of the people who say they oppose it, also support what's in it. That tells us they were fooled by the $100 million dollars the right spent on propaganda about the bill. But Ingraham and Law never tell you any of that, because they do not want you to have all the facts.

Then Ingraham said President Obama has long maintained that imposing fines on people who don't purchase health care is a penalty, not a tax. So she asked Leslie Marshall and Jeanine Turner to evaluate the Supreme Court's ruling that it is indeed a tax.

Marshall said this: "I don't see this as a broken promise. We are now paying with our taxes for the abuse of our emergency rooms and for the reality that we have more sick people as society ages. In the long run, we'll be paying less because we're stopping the locomotive from hitting the brick wall."

But of course the far-right hack Turner accused President Obama of being deceitful from the beginning, saying this: "I think Chief Justice John Roberts called Obama's bluff about what this has really been all along. It's always been a tax, Obama knew it was a tax, and he sent his Solicitor General to the Supreme Court to say it's a tax. Yet he told the American people and Congress that it's not a tax."

Then Ingraham was joined by two physicians who come down on opposite sides of Obamacare and how it will affect the quality of care. And of course the Republican doctor Marc Siegel is opposed to it, because he is a partisan.

Siegel said this: "A new survey says 90% of doctors think this is going to make health care worse, and 83% would consider quitting over this. They pay doctors less, they ask you to do more, they have more regulatory committees telling you what you can do, and it's more of a struggle to practice medicine. So of course doctors are unhappy. You can't practice the art of medicine if you're so restricted."

What a joke, the art of medicine? Now that's funny, because all these doctors care about is making money, playing golf, and getting rich, to argue they want to practice the art of medicine makes me want to puke. I know a guy right now who is making payments on a doctor bill, and they refuse to see him until he pays it off in full, even though he has never missed a payment and it is 75% paid off. They told him he can not see the doctor until it's paid off, which is ridiculous, and that's your art of medicine, jerk.

Dr. David Samadi predicted that Obamacare will benefit the majority of Americans, saying this: "One of the main advantages, is that you now have access to health care. There are about 30-million people out there who are really wandering around, not able to get insurance. And perhaps we will now be able to get people to clinics and get them to screenings."

Then Ingraham had two conservatives on to slam Chief Justice Roberts, who sided with the Court's four liberal justices to uphold Obamacare.

Michael Carvin said this: "Obviously this was a very strange opinion. The Chief Justice said that what Congress did was unconstitutional, so I'm going to pretend they did something different and therefore make it constitutional. Chief Justice Roberts said he was going to be an umpire who calls balls and strikes, but this time he saw a ball and called it a strike. This was a bad decision."

John Eastman also accused Roberts of misinterpreting the Constitution, saying this: "The issue here is whether the Constitution limits the power of the federal government. If Congress does things that are not delegated to them, the role of the Court and the Chief Justice is to say to Congress, 'No!' If he thinks this was unconstitutional but found a way to uphold it to preserve the integrity of the court, then he really ought to resign."

After the biased House voted for contempt on Eric Holder, the Justice Department announced it will not bring criminal charges. So Geraldo was on to discuss it.

Geraldo said this: "I don't know why anyone is surprised by that. I don't understand for the life of me how Darrell Issa and his committee could expect this to result in a criminal indictment. That's why I was so opposed to this process, they did this absolutely knowing that the criminal contempt charge will go no place! This is nothing but political hackery, and the question is why Darrell Issa is so intent on creating a scandal?"

So the far-right hack Laura Ingraham said this: "It's a serious issue that thousands of guns went across the border and at least one Border Patrol agent was killed as a result of these guns walking across the border."

Except there was no gunwalking, and the whole program was started by Bush, which Ingraham and O'Reilly never mention. It's a political hack job meant to make Obama look bad, and nobody cares about it but the biased idiots on the right like O'Reilly, Ingraham, Fox News, and the Republican Party.

And finally the right-wing Billy Baldwin was on to talk about making a movie out of a book that tells the story of a CIA agent in Iran. Which I will not report on, because it's not news. And the only reason he was on is because he is a Baldwin that's a Republican, and Ingraham wanted to help him promote his movie because of it. I did not mention the movie name, and I will not report on it.

Then the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense that I do not report on, and never will.

Romney Complains About Post Story That's 100% True
By: Steve - June 30, 2012 - 10:00am

Last week the Washington Post published a piece laying out how six companies owned by the private equity firm Bain Capital helped outsource jobs to several low-wage countries, including China and Mexico, while Mitt Romney was its CEO.

Romney responded at the time by saying that the Post did not adequately distinguish between "outsourcing" and "offshoring."

Earth to Mitt Romney, that's because outsourcing and offshoring are the exact same thing, idiot.

Now, according to Politico, Romney is seeking a retraction of the story, arguing that it "failed to adequately account for the support these firms gave to U.S. exports or U.S. businesses through foreign hiring." Representatives of the Romney campaign are meeting with editors of the Post Wednesday. The Romney campaign has also been arguing that the Post story is unfair because the Obama campaign outsources jobs to Nebraska.

Which is so ridiculous it's laughable, because if you send jobs to Nebraska it is not outsourcing, morons.

And btw, the Washington Post is sticking with the story, telling Politico, "We are very confident in our reporting."

The Thursday 6-28-12 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - June 29, 2012 - 11:00am

Laura Ingraham filled in for O'Reilly and she did not have a TPM, instead she went right to the Top Story about the Supreme Court upholding Obamacare. As I predicted O'Reilly called in to his own show to cry about it.

O'Dummy said this: "Everybody has to take a deep breath and step back from emotional analysis. This basically says the Supreme Court will allow the federal government to take over the health care system. It's good for poor Americans because the government is going to 'give' them health insurance, it's another entitlement."

O'Dummy also said this: "For more affluent Americans and some working Americans it's bad because their taxes are going to go up. And for businesses it's bad because they don't know how much health insurance is going to cost them. Justice Roberts said this is a tax, so the government can tax you as much as they want. The uncertainty continues, the hiring is going to be blunted, and the economy is going to be harmed."

Ingraham added that this is a huge tax on middle class Americans: "Under this ruling, the middle class that Barack Obama said he was going to protect is going to get shafted. They're going to pay for this monstrosity one way or another."

Now think about this folks, ALL THE REPUBLICANS ARE MAD AT THIS RULING. And all the Democrats are happy.

Now O'Reilly was not only mad, he was mad as hell. So what does that make him, a Republican, even though he denies it and claims to be a non-partisan Independent who has nothing against Obama. Not to mention he was wrong about the ruling, saying it would go 5 to 4 against Obama. He even said if he was wrong he would admit he is an idiot, which he did not admit.

If O'Reilly is not a Republican why is he mad at the ruling. Answer: Because he is a damn Republican, he just will not admit it. Which is dishonest, so you should never believe a word he says, ever!

Then Megyn Kelly was on to discuss it, saying this: "The amazing thing is that Chief Justice John Roberts justified this as a tax. As the dissent points out, a previous version of Obamacare was rejected by Democrats when it was creating a tax. So they created a 'penalty' for not buying health insurance and the President went out and told the whole world, 'It's not a tax.' They had to sell it this way, and then when they went to court the administration did a 180 and said it's a tax."

Then Ingraham had the crazy far-right loon Michele Bachmann on to discuss it, who is urging repeal of the health care act. Bachmann said this: "This was like a knife was stuck in us and twisted. We were shocked and incredulous, and people now recognize that there is one option left, and that's the ballot box in November. It's a very clear contrast, it's Barack Obama and you keep Obamacare or it's Mitt Romney and you repeal it. People shouldn't be fooled into thinking we have to have 60 Republican seats in the Senate; we need 50 plus one, that's all we need to repeal Obamacare. Don't give up hope, we can get this done."

Then the Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich was on, who applauded the Supreme Court's ruling, saying this: "A lot of people were surprised that the Supreme Court validated this as a tax. Is that a political issue? Of course. But it's also going to be a matter of whether Americans want to see millions more without health care and whether they want to set back the cause of those who are now covered. This is going to be a battle over health care all over again."

Ingraham reminded the Congressman of this: "The needle has not moved in terms of public approval of the health care reform law, it's never gotten above 50%."

And that's because the Republicans spent $100 million dollars on propaganda lying about it, so the people are misinformed on what the bill does for them.

Kucinich also explained why he joined other Democrats who walked out of the House chamber when Republicans voted to hold Attorney General Holder in contempt, saying this: "We certainly have to have compassion for the Terry family, but we also have to be careful that we don't throw the Constitution out the window. Congress has an obligation to investigate things, but the question here is whether Congress had a complete investigation. We should have been resolving this without a partisan battle."

Then Ingraham had the Republican Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal on, who opposes the Affordable Care Act. Jindal said this: "I was extremely disappointed. Think of the precedent the Supreme Court is setting, they're saying our federal government can tax us for not doing something. Where does that end? Can they tax us if we don't buy a Chevy Volt? This is a ridiculous expansion of federal government power. The only good thing is that the Court was more honest than the President, they called it what it is, a tax!"

The far-right spin doctor Bobby Jindal went on to savage President Obama's overall record, saying this: "Over the last five years we've seen a 70% growth in food stamp enrollment, we're seeing the federal government advertising to get more folks to sign up for food stamps, and we're creating an entitlement culture. I'm worried that we're going to have more people in the cart than pulling the cart."

And finally Finally, Ingraham had two close relatives of Brian Terry, the Border Patrol agent who was killed by an illegal immigrant wielding a weapon that was lost by the feds in the botched "Fast and Furious" sting operation on.

Brian's mother Josephine reacted to the contempt vote against Attorney General Eric Holder. "I'm happy about what happened today, it's a step forward to get justice for my son. And I was totally shocked at the members of Congress who walked out, but I think it was a disgrace to them and not to my son."

Brian Terry's cousin Bob Heyer denounced the Attorney General and his underlings for keeping the family in the dark, saying this: "Our only desire is to get answers, to get truth and justice for Brian. We've wondered whether this is arrogance or incompetence, and we are very disappointed that it's been eighteen months since Brian died and we still don't have the answers. When Brian was killed, not one government official had the courage to come to the Terry family and say the weapons found at the murder scene were part of this gun trafficking operation."

Then the pinheads and patriots nonsense that is never worth reporting. And btw folks, Including Laura Ingraham the guest count was 7 Republicans to 1 Democrat, who were on to discuss the Supreme Court ruling and the hearing on Fast and Furious, fair and balanced?

I'm Waiting For The O'Reilly Health Care Bill Apology
By: Steve - June 29, 2012 - 10:00am

On March 26th 2012 Bill O'Reilly told his guest (Caroline Fredrickson) that she was a fool and that the Supreme Court would vote down the Obama health care bill in a 5 to 4 ruling.

And now we know he was wrong, but in the segment he also basically called the guest a left-wing loon and told her she would be wrong. Not only was he wrong he barely let her talk, she kept saying let me talk, and O'Reilly told her he does not have to let her talk.

Here is the video:



During the segment O'Reilly said this: "I wil apologize For Being An Idiot If The Supreme Court Upholds The Obama Health Care Reform Law." He also said he would play her clip and then admit he was an idiot.

So did O'Reilly do that Thursday night, haha, of course not. He was on vacation and he called in to his own show, which Laura Ingraham was hosting, and he did not play the clip, or say he was an idiot. In fact, he spent his time slamming the Supreme Court and saying they got it wrong. Just like a good little Republican jerk.

Okay Billy, it's official, your were wrong and you are an idiot. So I am waiting for you to admit you are an idiot like you said you would. And the funniest part is that O'Reilly can not blame the liberal judges because the Republican John Roberts was the swing vote.

The Wednesday 6-27-12 O'Reilly/Williams Factor Review
By: Steve - June 28, 2012 - 11:00am

The Top Story was called: Why are Democrats bailing on the DNC? Juan Williams said this:
WILLIAMS: Attorney General Eric Holder faces a contempt vote in Congress for refusing to turn over some documents pertaining to the administration, response to the Fast & Furious gun-running operation. There are now five Democrats who say they'll defect and side with Republicans in the vote.
Juan had Juan Rep. Chris Van Hollen on to discuss it, he pressed the Congressman on why these five Democrats are splitting with the party and taking a historic step to hold an AG in contempt by Congress. Rep. Van Hollen believes the NRA's political involvement on this issue has influenced some Congresspeople's decisions on how to proceed, but he stopped short of judging any individual member's motives.

There are also nine Democrats in Congress who say they will skip the Democratic Convention in September. Should the Obama White House be worried? Van Hollen insisted these Democratic no-shows are not trying to distance themselves from the President; they simply want to spend time with their constituents back home.

Then Kirsten Powers and Michelle Fields were on to talk about a campaign stop in Iowa, where Vice President Joe Biden took a shot at Mitt Romney's wealth, bringing up his Swiss Bank account and Cayman Island investments.

Also, the Obama re-election team is attacking Romney's Bain Capital record in a new campaign ad. But is this sort of rhetoric resonating with American voters?

Powers said that the Obama narrative making Romney out to be an out-of-touch rich guy who sends American jobs overseas seems to be striking a chord with voters, especially in battleground states.

But Fields took issue with Biden claiming he's part of the middle class. She said it's insulting because the VP either believes Americans are stupid or he's the one who's completely out-of-touch with regular folks.

And the fake Democrat Juan Williams accused the mainstream media of helping Obama with lots of reporting about Bain Capital shipping jobs overseas. Even though a new media study says Obama is not getting good media coverage, and that Romney is getting more positive coverage then Obama. Proving once again that Juan Williams is about as much of a Democrat as I am a Republican. Not to mention, the story about Romney shipping jobs overseas is true.

Then Scott Rasmussen and Margie Omero were on to talk about a brand new Fox News poll of registered voters that shows President Obama in the lead over Mitt Romney, 45% to 40%.

Juan expressed surprise at the health care poll numbers, 38% said they would overturn the law, 30% said they would uphold it, and 21% said they would just invalidate the individual mandate portion of the law. Yet 51% of Americans disapprove of the job the President is doing in the health care realm.

Scott Rasmussen argued that whatever the Supreme Court decides, the health care law is doomed because it has lost in the court of public opinion. However, Ms. Omero disputed that notion, asserting that many of the key components of the reform are actually overwhelmingly popular.

In the horserace, Juan pointed out that Obama's favorable numbers are much higher than Romney's, even in key swing states. Scott Rasmussen indicated that the President's job approval rating will be the most crucial number, on Election Day, if Obama has 48% approval, Scott predicted he would get 48% of the vote.

Then Steven Engel was on to talk about the Supreme Court, who tomorrow morning when it is set to rule on Obama's health care law. A new Fox News poll reveals that 49% of Americans oppose the law, while 39% favor it.

Juan began the conversation by stating that conventional wisdom in D.C. right now thinks the individual mandate will be ruled unconstitutional. Mr. Engel agreed that there's a 60-40 chance of that happening, but cautioned that conventional wisdom can often be wrong.

On Kennedy being the deciding vote, Mr. Engel seemed to find it likely that this will be a 5-4 decision with four justices to the left of Kennedy and four to the right.

Juan commented that if the individual mandate is indeed struck down but the rest of the law is left intact, it will create a big mess where we're all likely to see our premiums go up.

Then Juan had another biased right-wing segment, he said that despite the fact that 1 in 7 Americans are currently on food stamps, the federal government is encouraging more people to sign up for the program in a new radio ad paid for by the Department of Agriculture.

Deneen Borelli and Rich Benjamin were on to discuss it. Borelli expressed outrage over the ad, saying we should be reducing the number of Americans on government assistance, not advocating more assistance. She also cited rampant waste, fraud, and abuse in the food stamp system. While she doesn't want to see anyone starve, Borelli said the real issue is getting more people gainfully employed in the U.S. so they don't have to rely on the government.

On the other side, Benjamin contended that 49 million people will be malnourished this year in America. Therefore, he thinks it's wise for the President to advise people to use this program so we can have a country of healthy, well-fed people. Benjamin called it slander to suggest poor people want charity instead of jobs.

Juan talked about compassion, insisting that a child whose parents are out of work deserves to be well fed. But at the same time, he worried that this is another example of big government getting bigger.

And finally in the last segment Jonathan Hoenig and Mark Sawyer were on to talk about the city of Stockton, California carrying a $700 million dollar debt, and is about to file for bankruptcy. An estimated 20% of Californian cities are currently teetering on the brink of bankruptcy.

Hoenig blamed the progressive agenda in California's government, saying it prompted cities to borrow, spend, and kowtow to unions. He claimed that firefighters in Stockton make $160,000 a year and take home outrageous pensions.

Juan moderated an intense debate after Prof. Sawyer implicated hedge fund managers like Mr. Hoenig for crashing the market. The professor said taking hard-working people's pensions away is tantamount to wage theft.

But Hoenig explained that if we don't cut the pensions, we will end up like Greece. Juan wondered how we can continue to pay these pensions when we have no growth and no money.

Then the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Low Gas Prices Shut O'Reilly & The Repiblicans Up Fast
By: Steve - June 28, 2012 - 10:00am

When gas was $4.00 a gallon O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends reported on it almost every night, and they blamed Obama for it. They said his liberal policies and his anti-drilling everywhere position was causing the high gas prices.

But now that gas is almost down to $3.00 a gallon, they are as silent as a mouse. Suddenly they are saying nothing about gas prices, not a word. That's because they are political hacks who simply used the high gas prices to attack Obama politically.

And O'Reilly was at the front of the pack with the biased dishonest attacks on Obama, even though he claims to be a non-partisan Independent who has been fair to Obama.

Experts now predict average gas prices may fall below $3 this fall after dropping 14 cents in two weeks. But when prices hit a record high, O'Reilly, Fox News, and all the Republicans attributed sole responsibility to President Obama, even though there is no evidence that factors like drilling impact what consumers pay.

They said drill baby drill.

And just two months ago, Republicans said Obama shouldered the blame for rising gas costs, and that only he had the key to lower gas prices:
Mitt Romney, March 18, 2012: "He gets full credit or blame for what's happened in this economy, and what's happened to gasoline prices under his watch, and what's happened to our schools, and what's happened to our military forces. All these things are his responsibility while he's president."

House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), April 6, 2012: "The president holds the key to addressing the pain Ohioans are feeling at the gas pump and moving our nation away from its reliance on foreign energy. My question for the president is: what are you waiting for?"

Boehner, April 6, 2012: "The president's own policies to date have made matters worse and driven up gas prices."

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Feb. 28 2012: "This President will go to any length to drive up gas prices and pave the way for his ideological agenda."

Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), March 13, 2012: Obama is "fully responsible for what the American public is paying for gasoline."
The insane O'Reilly even said that Obama wanted high gas prices to make it politically smart to invest more into green energy. Which was the most ridiculous thing he has said this year, and that's saying a lot.

Are Republicans now reversing their rhetoric and giving Obama credit for falling gas prices? Of course not.

Former Virginia Sen. George Allen, who is running to reclaim his old seat, is another lawmaker who has misled on the gas prices. Last month, Allen was caught pushing a graphic that not only compares gas prices to an artificially low amount, but lists a current price from back in April, even though Virginia gas prices are now more than 40 cents lower per gallon.

Obama's policies have not changed since April: The Keystone XL pipeline has not been built, drilling hasn't drastically changed, and the same regulations are in place. Yet gas prices have fallen. Economics says he isn't responsible, either way.

Not to mention you never see this story reported by O'Reilly, Fox, or any Republicans.

The Obama administration's regulations to increase margin requirements on oil speculation, implemented in April, are largely responsible for this drop in gas prices. But you won't hear that from the GOP.

Here is the link to the story:

How President Barack Obama Cut Oil Prices 21 Percent in Two Months

Now that is something you will never see O'Reilly report, because it would kill his right-wing propaganda on the issue, and show you that Obama did something to get the prices down, but O'Reilly will not give him any credit for it, even though he blamed Obama when they were going up in price.

O'Reillyisms: 100% Pure Bill! (No Spin!!) Book Review
By: Steve - June 27, 2012 - 11:30am

Hey folks, I recently read a great and funny new book. It's called O'Reillyisms: 100% Pure Bill! (No Spin!!), and it is written by Bruce (Swami Sez) Singer.

Every "O'Reilly Sucks" fan will want a copy of "O'REILLYISMS" ($9.95 for book and only 99 cents for KINDLE)....there's 144 of them (a total gross) and it is comprised from over 5 years of collecting the most ridiculous and incredulous things that Billy has ever uttered.

Like on the Oprah show (10/27/06) when Bill O blurted, "I may be obnoxious, but I'm not a moron."

Or from his syndicated column, 100% in his own words, when he admitted, "I understand I am a barbarian." You will find the book rich with remembered lines, and enhanced with a humorous headline.

Bruce is a great author who has written 3 books, including these two: Hey...just Tell the Truth!! Be Frank 'n' Be Not a Lying Liar!!!: A Fair And Balanced Lean to the Left, Lean to the Right, Stand Up, Sit Down, Fight! Fight!! Fight!!!

Swami Sez Trade The Blues for Brownies: 365 Days and Over 365 Ways Guide To Happiness and Spiritual Enlightenment. Which you can also buy at amazon.com.

O'Reillyisms is 168 pages of actual quotes by Bill O'Reilly. In the book Bruce shows how insane and ridiculous the hypocrite O'Reilly is by showing you some of the stupid things he says.

The book provides a great insight into how O'Reilly works, while covering every subject from politics and people, to everything in between. The author is spot-on with this unique compilation of notable and unforgettable "O'REILLYISMS" and Bill O'Reilly's bombast shouts humorously from every page.

And you do not have to hate O'Reilly to like the book, even if you are an O'Reilly fan the book is a good read. Bruce put together some of the best of O'Reilly's hypocritical and dumb quotes, which turn out to also be funny they are so ridiculous.

I would highly recommend the book, it's the best of the best of O'Reilly's quips, and worth adding to your book collection. It's an insightful synopsis of O'Reilly's world-view, well done Mr. Singer. Great stuff.

So let's get Bruce some book sales by visiting his amazon.com book page.

Steve

The Tuesday 6-26-12 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - June 27, 2012 - 11:00am

The (biased fill-in host Laura Ingraham) TPM was called: The Obama Administration vs. Arizona. The insane Ingraham said this:
INGRAHAM: Shortly after the decision came down, Homeland Security announced that it is suspending its agreements with Arizona police over reporting illegal aliens found in the state.

So while the Supreme Court upheld police officers right to stop and question suspects regarding their immigration status, the feds won't act to deport these individuals unless the suspect already has a felony record, has previously been removed from the country, or is a recent border crosser.

Ironically, just 2 years ago the Obama Administration began ramping up the "Secure Communities" program which was started under Bush. The initiative meant that local law enforcement would send fingerprints to the Feds to check the immigrations status of suspects. Today, it's all for naught -- in reality Obama's no-deportation policy extends to everyone, not just those under-30.

The difference between Obama in 2009 and today of course, is that he is fighting for reelection and needs Latinos to turn out in November
Wow is that a bunch of lies, Ingraham said this: "Today, it's all for naught -- in reality Obama's no-deportation policy extends to everyone, not just those under-30." And that my friends is laughable, because not only is Obama deporting a lot of illegals, he has deported more illegals than Bush did in his first 4 years. Making Laura Ingraham a flat out lying idiot.

Then Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes were on to discuss her ridiculous talking points memo. Crowley suggested the President is behaving in a rogue fashion to pander to a constituency he needs to win re-election. She argued that President Obama has chosen unilaterally to no longer enforce the immigration laws of the land, essentially making us a banana republic.

Colmes said that there have been more deportations under this President than any other previous president. In addition, he pointed to the Constitution reading that it's the federal government's role, not state governments, to enforce immigration law.

And those FACTS reported by Alan Colmes were just ignored by Crowley and Ingraham, as usual.

Then Ingraham reported that During a campaign speech at a New Hampshire high school, President Obama said voters can decide that instead of defunding Planned Parenthood, this should be a country where women make their own choices about their bodies. And of course he is right, but not according to Ingraham.

The insane Ingraham started the conversation by challenging whether it is the role of the President to invoke the so-called war on women while speaking to such a young audience.

Alexis McGill Johnson, executive director of the American Values Institute was on, who insisted that high school kids are having sex whether we're talking to them about it or not. She defended the President, saying contraception is a huge part of women's health services and when we begin denying access through defunding, we're compromising the health of American women.

And of course Ingraham was outraged at the idea that women are being denied access to contraception just because the government doesn't pay for it. Except that it's true, because some women can not afford it unless the Government pays for it, which means they are denied access.

Then Dick Morris was on to cry about President Obama raising money, who is in Florida for another fundraiser. While never once saying anything about all the money Romney is raising.

Ingraham questioned whether Romney is being too timid on the campaign trail, Morris said that it's his job to avoid being threatening or striking so as not to get in the way of Obama losing voters for himself. Morris also claimed that it's been a good month for Romney in the polls, so any criticism of the campaign he's running is just nitpicking.

On the Latino vote, the crazy Dick Morris said he believes picking Marco Rubio as VP would be the panacea for Mitt Romney.

Then the Obama hating Lt. Col. Ralph Peters was on to slam former President Jimmy Carter. In a New York Times column this week, former President Jimmy Carter blasted the current administration's drone problem, as well as U.S. treatment of terror suspects.

Ingraham said that Carter has long been a thorn in the side of Republican administrations, but for him to go after the Obama White House is taking it to a whole new level.

Peters then accused Carter of attacking the single program that is actually working to kill terrorists directly.

Then the legal team of Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on to talk about Attorney General Eric Holder, who faces a contempt vote for refusing to give Congressional investigators documents pertaining to the Fast & Furious gun-running scandal. Ingraham asked if the President overstepped his legal authority by using executive privilege on this matter.

Wiehl explained that executive privilege can be invoked in cases of national security, but can't be used to cover up a cover-up. Guilfoyle said executive privilege should be applied selectively and not in this case. She claimed that refusal to comply with providing information in this instance makes it look like the administration has something to hide.

Then they talked about the guilty verdict against former Penn State coach Jerry Sandusky, who faces 450 years behind bars on child sex abuse charges. His defense team plans to appeal, but all three women agreed the conviction will stand.

And finally the far-right loon John Stossel was on to discuss a new study by the Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse that says 40 million Americans 12 and older have some sort of addiction problem. Ingraham wanted to know if it means the government needs to intervene with stricter regulations against drugs, nicotine and alcohol?

Which is ridiculous, especially when she argues that the Government should just stay out of everything and leave people alone.

Stossel even denied that the government can control addiction and said any rules to try to stop the problem only makes it worse. He also described CASA as a big government sort of organization that wants to control our lives and classifies everything as addiction.

Then the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Fox News Dishonestly Edited An Obama Video Clip
By: Steve - June 27, 2012 - 10:00am

And it was done of the so-called non-partisan Special Report show, which makes what they did even worse. Not to mention it shows a bias to the right that O'Reilly said they did not have. This is evidence of their bias and O'Reilly ignored it, even though he said if someone showed him evidence of bias he would report it.

I sent this evidence to O'Reilly and he never said a word about it, as he always does, he ignores all the bias at Fox.

People who watch Fox News are familiar with the fact that Fox has been misleading viewers with deceptively edited videos for years. And then on the June 26th Special Report, Fox aired an edited clip of President Obama that is interesting because it is symbolic of the whole story Fox is trying to tell about the 2012 presidential election.

During a report about the campaign, correspondent Ed Henry noted that some Democrats are not planning to attend this summer's Democratic National Convention in Charlotte. Then, he aired an edited clip of President Obama's speech at a June 26th campaign event in Atlanta:



Here is the Obama quote Ed Henry used on Fox:
OBAMA: They'll say, you know, the economy is bad, and it's Obama's fault. And because times are tough and because they're spending these ungodly sums, you know, it's going to be close.
Now look at the actual un-edited Obama quote from his actual speech:
OBAMA: OBAMA: This is going to be a close election because the economy is still tough and folks are still frustrated. And what that means is that you're going to have more money spent in this election than ever before by the other side on negative ads.

And their message will be simple. They'll say, the economy is bad and it's Obama's fault. (Laughter.)

They suffer a little bit of amnesia so they don't remember -- (applause) -- all the stuff that happened before I was sworn into office, but that's going to be their message.

And because times are tough, and because they're spending these ungodly sums, it's going to be close.
Look at how Fox edited the clip, they edited the middle part of the quote out where Obama mentions that Bush left him with a terrible economy.

Fox is doing its best to sweep away the fact that the economy was in a time of historic trouble before Obama took office. And that trouble was caused by the Republican President George W. Bush. Fox wants you to forget who cause the trouble, and they want you to think it was all Obama's fault.

Remember this folks:

The economy Obama inherited was moving backward at a rate not seen in 50 years. Between the 2008 election and Obama's inauguration, the economy lost 2 million jobs. And the very first month Obama took office, the economy lost 820,000 jobs.

Economists are still uncovering the depths to which the economy had sunk during the waning years of the Bush presidency: In July 2011, the Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that the economy shrank by 8.9 percent during the final 3 months of 2008 -- far more than initially thought.

But you never hear a word about any of that from Fox, or O'Reilly for that matter, because they want you to forget it and they hope you will believe their propaganda and blame it all on Obama, including the so-called non-partisan Independent Bill O'Reilly.

Despite the actual reality, Fox presents the idea that President Bush could be at fault for the recession as patently ridiculous, and another so-called un-biased Fox host Megyn Kelly just recently told her viewers that "the blaming Bush thing doesn't seem to be resonating."

Even though Megyn Kelly is wrong. In a recent Gallup poll, more than two-thirds of respondents said Bush deserves "a great deal" or "a moderate amount" of the blame.

This is direct evidence of dishonesty and bias, and yet O'Reilly never says a word about any of it. While at the same time saying there is no bias at Fox by their so-called straight news anchors. What happens is that O'Reilly just ignores it, and lies that it is not happening, when it is happening every day, he just will not report on it.

The Monday 6-25-12 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - June 26, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: . Crazy Laura Ingraham (Who was filling in for O'Reilly) said this:
INGRAHAM: Arizona's immigration law had four main components, three parts that set up state criminal penalties for immigration violations were struck down by the Supreme Court, but the justices unanimously upheld the provision allowing police to check the status of those that they had 'reasonable suspicion' were in the country illegally.

It would then be up to the federal government to deport the illegal aliens or let them go free. Arizona's 400,000 illegal immigrants must be thrilled that the justices on the Supreme Court are empathizing with their plight, but there is no such empathy for the millions of Arizonans whose lives have been adversely impacted by the glut of cheap labor, increased crime, property damage and strained social services, all due to illegal immigration.

For decades both Republican and Democratic presidents have been unwilling to remedy the problem of illegal immigration, which is why Arizona was forced to act. Today the will of the people was thwarted once again by a Supreme Court that dismisses the basic right of state sovereignty.

While the media has largely focused on the anger of Latino voters this election year, the real and unreported anger out there is felt by hard-working Americans of all ethnic backgrounds who want the borders enforced and our laws upheld.
Then Ingraham had Kris Kobach, who wrote the Arizona immigration law, and Chuck Rocha, an opponent of the legislation on to discuss it.

Rocha said this: "This ruling shows that a patchwork of state laws is not going to work, and that we need comprehensive immigration reform. Congress must act or these laws will continue to spring up. I don't agree with everything the Supreme Court did, but I think it's a step in the right direction. Eleven million immigrants have to be dealt with."

Then the insane Kobach portrayed the ruling as a win for his side and the Arizona law, saying this: "I would say this is a qualified victory. The big provision is the one that the court approved, every one of the tens of thousands of law enforcement stops made every day in Arizona can now be transformed into an immigration arrest. If they have reasonable suspicion that the person is illegally in the country, officers must contact Immigration and Customs Enforcement."

And that my friends is a perfect example of right-wing spin and dishonesty. Because only a Republicans would say that a law that had 3 of 4 provisions struck down as unconstitutional could call that a win.

With the Supreme Court expected to rule on President Obama's health care law on Thursday, Ingraham had Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on to speculate how the decision could affect the presidential election.

Williams said this: "If the individual mandate is struck down. I think it's a defeat for President Obama. But the President has a fallback position in that he can say, 'Hey, there are some consumer-friendly items that are still in the deal.' But if they strike down the entire law it's a total defeat."

Ham said she thinks that President Obama has been painted into a political corner, saying this: "The public was not with him on this law and people have been very receptive to the argument that it is not constitutional, that there are limits on what Congress can do. So it will be tough for the President politically, even if it is upheld."

But that is not exactly right, the people say they support what is in the law, they just oppose it overall by a slight majority. Which makes no sense, and here is why they hold that opinion. Because the majority of Americans actually support Obamacare, the problem is that the Republicans have spent $200 billion dollars on propaganda lying about it and what's in it.

So they are forming their opinions based on flawed information put out by the Republican Party and SuperPAC's like the one Karl Rove has. Notice that neither O'Reilly, Williams, Ham, or Ingraham tell you about that, proving they are all 4 dishonest right-wing hacks.

Then the biased Laura Ingraham talked about how Congress may vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt because of his refusal to turn over certain documents related to the 'Fast and Furious' gun-running fiasco. Ingraham asked former Obama campaign consultant Marjorie Clifton to assess the damage to the President.

Clifton said this: "This is a campaign stunt if we've ever seen one. Eric Holder has testified nine times and has released thousands of documents outlining everything they found. Holder himself said the entire situation was appalling and they shut it down when they knew. The entire operation was being run out of Phoenix by an ATF officer there, and there is no documentation whatsoever that says Eric Holder even knew of the operation."

Notice that neither Bill O'Reilly or Laura Ingraham ever tell you that the Fast and Furious operation was started in the Bush White House, they act like Obama and Eric Holder started the program, which they did not. Proving once again they are nothing but biased right-wing idiots who are only reporting on this nonsense to make Obama look bad.

Then for some insane reason Ingraham had David Silverman and Pastor Robert Jeffress on to talk about a recent poll that said 54% of Americans say they would vote for an atheist as president.

Silverman said this: "This is a progression toward tolerance, and the 'de-bigoting' of America. People are no longer willing to say, 'He is an atheist and I won't vote for anybody like that.' And among people under thirty, 70% would vote for an atheist. It doesn't mean we're going to become an anti-religious nation, it means we're more of a melting pot."

Jeffress addressed another finding of the same poll, that only 33% of Americans consider President Obama a Christian, saying this: "I take him at face value when he says he's a Christian, but most people aren't buying that because he embraces policies that are inconsistent with the Christian point of view. He embraces same-sex marriage and abortion, which are incompatible with the vast majority of Christians. A lot of people believe that President Obama is talking the talk, but not walking the walk."

Then writer Jose Vargas, an immigrant from the Philippines who has been in America illegally for two decades was on to discuss immigration. Vargas said this: "I got here when I was twelve. I thought everything was fine. I later found out that I was undocumented, and a lot of other people like me find that out when you try to get a job or a driver's license."

Vargas also talked about the Supreme Court's ruling on the Arizona law, saying this: "I fully understand the fear and frustration that Latinos have, but I read Justice Kennedy's ruling saying it is not a crime for an illegal alien to remain in the United States. How can I not be hopeful? The ruling says I am not 'illegal,' so I'm not worried. If you want me to get to the back of the line, I'd be more than happy to do that."

And finally in the last segment Ingraham cried about a New York Times columnist (Charles Blow) for comparing conservatives and Republicans to the adolescent bullies who tormented an elderly bus monitor in New York State. Even though he is an opinion writer, and when the same biased argument is made about O'Reilly or Ingraham they pull the I am an opinion anchor excuse.

Ingraham had Kathy Areu on to defend his point of view. Areu said this: "It's a very interesting angle, and I do think people have a bullying mentality these days. It's a tough time to be a white man in America where the minorities are really taking over, and Republicans have always been known to be the 'white man's party.' Latinos are being bullied in Arizona by Governor Jan Brewer and women are being bullied, we know about the 'war on women.'"

So Ingraham somehow argued that the actual victims of bullying are often traditional Americans, saying this: "People who are hard working feel bullied by a government that is not responsible to the people. They feel bullied when health care passed by one vote, they feel derided and dismissed. So if there is bullying, it's mutual."

Then the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Republican Claims 90% Of Terrorists Are Muslims
By: Steve - June 25, 2012 - 11:00am

And as usual he is wrong!

Congressman Peter King (R-NY) has a long history of demonizing American Muslims. So it's no great surprise that his hearing earlier this week on the radicalization of Muslims fell under attack as both a waste of time (Rep. Hansen Clarke (D-MI) commented that his time would be better spent discussing how to protect water resources for his constituents) and yet another example of King congratulating himself for his previous hearings attacking Muslims.

Appearing on Fox News Saturday, King continued his dishonest attacks on Muslim Americans:
KING: What I am very concerned about is that while the overwhelming majority of Muslims are good people, the fact is even though Muslims are 1 percent of the population, almost 90 percent of the terrorist crimes are carried out by the Muslim community.

And there are not enough people in the community willing to step forward and speak out against this and cooperate with law enforcement.
And now the reality, a VERY small percentage of terrorist attacks and plots in the U.S. are the result of Islamic extremism -- 56 percent have been perpetrated by right-wing extremists, 30 percent by ecoterrorists and 12 percent by Islamic extremists.

King's claim that Muslims are simply unwilling to pushback against extremism was refuted by recent reports of aspiring Muslims terrorists finding difficulty in raising funds in New York. Last year, a Gallup poll found that Muslim Americans are more likely (89 percent) to reject violence than any other U.S. religious group and nearly all Muslim Americans (92 percent) have no sympathy for al-Qaeda.

King also claimed that "it's so important that the NYPD focus on [the Muslim community]. That's why it's important that the NYPD and law enforcement not give into political correctness."

But that claim ignores the FBI's concerns about the NYPD's surveillance of Muslim businesses, Mosques and student groups in New York and New Jersey.

FBI Newark Special Agent in Charge Michael Ward complained in March that the NYPD's spying was making the FBI's job harder, telling reporters, "It's starting to have a negative impact. When people pull back cooperation it creates additional risks. It creates blind spots. It hinders our ability to have our finger on the pulse of what's going on around the state."

Surprisingly, as House Homeland Security Chairman, King appears to absorb little information from the FBI, the National Counterterrorism Center, and the Department of Homeland Security.

Issa Admits He Has No Evidence Against Obama
By: Steve - June 25, 2012 - 10:00am

Last week, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) claimed that the White House decision to invoke executive privilege to prevent the release of some documents related to the Fast and Furious investigation indicated some sort of admission of a White House cover-up.

But Sunday, pressed by host Chris Wallace, House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) admitted that there is absolutely no evidence to back up Boehner's allegation:
WALLACE: Do you have any evidence that White House officials were involved in these decisions, that they knowingly misled Congress, and are involved in a cover-up?

ISSA: No, we don't. And what we are seeking are documents that we know to exist, February 4 to December [2011] that are in fact about [murdered Border Patrol agent] Brian Terry's murder, who knew, and why people were lying about it.

WALLACE: I want to be clear, because we've got to get out, no evidence that the White House is involved in the cover up?

ISSA: And I hope they don't get involved.
Boehner should certainly know better than to imply that executive privilege has to involve White House officials.

Because every administration has asserted deliberative process privilege and as recently as 2008, Bush administration Attorney General Michael Mukasey rejected congressional subpoenas for reports of Department of Justice interviews with the White House staff regarding the Valerie Plame Wilson identify leak investigation citing the same privilege.

And btw, O'Reilly said he supports the Republicans asking for the documents, as he also supports the AG Eric Holder being fired. But when Bush was in office O'Reilly said the exact opposite. Back then O'Reilly said the Bush admnistration should not hand over any documents because it was a partisan witch hunt by the Democrats, who are simply on a fishing expedition trying to find something with no evidence.

But now that it's the Republicans doing the very same thing, O'Reilly supports it, proving once again how biased he is, and how dishonest he is.

More Proof O'Reilly Is Wrong About The Media
By: Steve - June 24, 2012 - 10:00am

Findings from a new media study indicating Republican Mitt Romney has received substantially better press coverage this year than President Obama may have surprised some observers.

It certainly made conservative activists mad, especially since they relentlessly promote the idea of a left-leaning press that works with the Democratic Party, and according to Fox News, is covering for Obama.

Just last week Bill O'Reilly complained that the "liberal media wants to re-elect President Obama."

But that kind of rhetoric has become as natural as breathing for a conservative movement that's built its base since 2008 around the bogus claim that the liberal media has rolled over for Obama.

Notice that O'Reilly has never said a word about this study, and never will. But when the right-wing biased MRC puts out a study saying the media is liberal, O'Reilly reports it that day and reports on it on future shows after that.

And btw, PEW is not partisan, O'Reilly even cites their polls and studies once in a while, so he believes they are honest. But he never once reported this study, because it kills his spin that the media is liberal and they want to help Obama get re-elected.

The so-called liberal media accusation has been a cornerstone to American conservatism for forty years. It's actually grown into a cottage industry that pays the bills for talk radio, fills endless hours of commentary on Fox News, and produces content for right-wing authors.

Bernie Goldberg even wrote a book claiming the media is liberal and that they slobber all over Obama. Not to mention, O'Reilly has him on the Factor every week for a media bias segment, where the two of them do nothing but complain about liberal bias in the media. While never saying anything about conservative bias in the media, especially by Fox.

What they do is cherry pick a few examples of liberal bias and then claim it is like that everywhere. Which is just laughable, but they put it out as fact anyway, with nobody from the other side to give the counter point. It's a biased joke of a segment, and O'Reilly does it every week. Goldberg is a right-wing stooge who does nothing but spin out lies and propaganda, and O'Reilly let's him do it.

What they say is that if there's a Democratic president in the White House, those openly biased journalists must have their thumbs on the scales, right, wrong!

They claim Obama is benefiting from warm praise and soft coverage. Meaning, now is the time for conservatives to prove definitively that their claims about the slanted press are true.

Except that, of course, it's all lies.

Because the results of the latest survey from the nonpartisan Pew Research Center Project for Excellence in Journalism should not come as a shock. If you look at Pew's research, it shows the so-called liberal media has not given President Obama one single week of positive news coverage in the ten months since Pew started their ongoing study.

Now think about this, conservatives themselves have cited Pew reports to bolster their claims about a liberally bias media.

For example, last October Pew released a media survey that looked at news coverage stretching back to May. Its conclusion was that Obama had been on the receiving end of "unrelentingly negative" coverage:
The assessments of the president in the media were substantially more negative than positive in every one of the 23 weeks studied. In no one week during these five months was more than 10% of the coverage about the President positive in tone.
In 2011, only Newt Gingrich, whose campaign was crashing at the time, received more negative press than Obama did during the time frame studied by Pew. And you never hear a word about any of this from O'Reilly or Bernie Goldberg, ever, not one word.

In fact, Pew reported that between May and October, "negative assessments of Obama have outweighed positive by a ratio of almost 4-to-1."

As for Pew's latest findings, which covered from January to early April, the trend continued:
Of all the presidential candidates studied in this report, only one figure did not have a single week in 2012 when positive coverage exceeded negative coverage, the Democrat Barack Obama.
The Pew findings are clear: While Republicans jockeyed for their party's nomination for the last year, the Democratic president Barack Obama has been hammered with negative press coverage.

And while it was all happening the insane Bill O'Reilly, Bernie Goldberg, and all of Fox News have been saying the media is in bed with Obama and they are helping him to get re-elected.

Which is just ridiculous, and the Pew poll proves it. Not only does it prove that, the Pew poll also proves that O'Reilly and Goldberg are both crazy right-wing liars.

O'Reilly Let Rove Lie About New Obama Immigration Policy
By: Steve - June 23, 2012 - 10:00am

Monday night O'Reilly had Karl Rove on for a dizzying spin session about the Obama administration's announcement that it will allow some young undocumented immigrants to remain in the U.S. In the biased one sided segment Rove managed to put forward numerous lies about the new policy and the recent history of the immigration debate.

Here are four facts about immigration -- and how Rove lied about them:

1) Rove claimed that President Obama is saying "we will selectively apply the laws of the United States" and that "we will exempt a class of people from the statutes. There's no authority, I think, to do that."

But the change in deportation policy for young people is legal. The Department of Homeland Security announced that it will exercise its prosecutorial discretion and consider exempting some young immigrants from deportation. This is consistent with current law and has decades of precedent.

2) Rove claimed that Obama is saying "we will selectively apply the laws of the United States, not individual, case by case by case, but by class."

Even though the new policy WILL be applied case by case. The DHS press release describing the policy change says this: "Under this directive, individuals who demonstrate that they meet certain criteria will be eligible for an exercise of discretion, on a case by case basis."

3) Rove falsely claimed that in August 2009, Obama promised to introduce comprehensive legislation, but "nothing has happened."

Which is a 100% lie, because comprehensive reform legislation was introduced in Congress under Obama. In December 2009, Democrats introduced a comprehensive immigration reform bill in the House of Representatives.

4) Rove also claimed that Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid "was the guy who screwed up comprehensive immigration reform in 2007. He really is not a fan of comprehensive immigration reform."

And that is also a 100% lie, because Republicans led the way in killing the 2007 reform legislation. In June 2007, Senate Republicans played a dominant role in killing comprehensive reform legislation, which was backed by President Bush. A majority of the Democrats voted to advance the legislation, while a majority of the Republicans voted to block it.

And btw folks, O'Reilly never once pointed out the facts I have just reported, he ignored it to let Rove spin and lie about what Obama did. In fact, O'Reilly said it was unconstitutional. Proving once again that he is nothing but a biased right-wing hack.

The Thursday 6-21-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 22, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama's power eroding at a fast rate. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Here's how this country works at the federal level: If a president is strong like Ronald Reagan or Franklin Roosevelt, he can get a lot of things done behind the scenes. But when a president is weak like Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon in his last days, very little gets done in Washington. The opposing party, sensing blood in the water, does not cooperate because they want the weak president out of there.

That's what's happening to Barack Obama right now, his power is in steep decline. The Russian tyrant Putin knows that and totally disrespected President Obama at the G-20 summit. Also at the summit, the President seemed discombobulated, his answers were rambling, tedious and at times incoherent. And next week the full House will likely hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for not handing over relevant 'Fast and Furious' documents.

Meanwhile, the President is defending Holder by invoking executive privilege and stonewalling the documents. And then there's Obamacare. The Factor has learned that the Obama administration has already crafted a narrative anticipating that the Supreme Court will rule the mandate unconstitutional. If that happens, the President will become even weaker because Obamacare is his signature achievement.

The Factor has also learned that the Obama reelection campaign believes the economy will not improve by Election Day, and therefore is targeting liberal Americans to the President's cause by using personal, not policy, arguments. All in all, about five months before the election President Obama is at his weakest point and things seem to be getting worse.
Now remember this, everything you just got from O'Reilly is an opinion, his opinion, and it's all right-wing spin. Those are not facts, it is a partisan opinion and some of it is flat out lies, from a biased right-wing tv host. O'Reilly is a joke, a fraud, and a hack. The opposing party is trying to bring Obama down, and have been since day one. And O'Reilly knows it, but he will not admit it.

Putin never disrespected President Obama at the G-20 summit. And next week the full House will likely hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt. But O'Reilly never mentions that it will be a party line vote, with all Republicans voting yes and all Democrats voting no. And since the Republicans have the majority it will pass, and then nothing will happen, it is meaningless. And the economy is getting better, not to mention gas prices are dropping, proving O'Reilly is a hack who does not report reality.

Then Laura Ingraham was on to predict the fate of President Obama's health care reform. Ingraham said this: "The only people who know are the clerks at the court and the justices themselves. But I can tell you that the medical community and business folks are anticipating a reversal of Obamacare, that at the very least the mandate will be deemed unconstitutional. And the entire law might be thrown out."

Ingraham also predicted how Democrats will respond if the health care law is struck down, saying this: "They could say that this shows how important it is for us to have a second term so President Obama can appoint more justices to the bench."

Now of course Obamacare will be struck down 5 to 4, because the 5 who will vote it down are Republicans, and we all know it.

Then O'Reilly had the far-right loon Glenn Beck on to talk about a disturbing video that shows four young teens in New York State bullying and taunting a 68-year-old woman whose job is to monitor the bus.

Beck said this: "These kids are dead inside. They tell her how her family doesn't love her and that her family kills themselves. Well, she had a son who committed suicide and she's a widow. She was crying at one point, this was horrible. Americans have seen this and they're really hurt by it, people are sending her money and more than $300,000 has been raised."

Beck also said this: "This is the arrogance of this administration coming home to roost. The American people have not connected with this yet, but they will, and when they do there is real trouble for the President."

And I predict Obama will be re-elected, that means you two fools will have to suffer through another 4 years of Obama.

Then Jeanine Pirro was on to talk about the case of a woman who was told by Southwest Airlines that her attire was too revealing. Pirro said this: "Southwest Airlines is throwing a hissy fit, and it's not the first time they've tried to control the way women dress, they don't like cleavage! You can go to the beach and see more cleavage than this woman was showing, and they threw blankets on two other women because they didn't like the way they were dressed. This airline started with hot pants and now they're anti-woman!"

O'Reilly defended the airline and said this: "Southwest says they are a 'family-based' airline and therefore sensitive to the way adults dress and behave."

Then Chris Cuomo was on to talk about his Rielle Hunter interview. Cuomo said this: "This was potentially the biggest political sex scandal of our generation, and Rielle Hunter was at the middle of all of it. We can finally get her perspective on how it all began, how it continued, and John Edwards' mountain of lies. She gives great insight and information into Edwards behavior, and there's a legitimate argument that Rielle Hunter has taken a lot of heat that should have been on John Edwards."

O'Reilly (who was dead wrong about the Edwards verdict) said this: "This guy could have been vice president and he is totally morally bankrupt."

Join the club Billy, because you are totally morally bankrupt too, for your biased partisan dishonest reporting, idiot!

Then Megyn Kelly was on to discuss the House of Representatives who may vote to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt for withholding documents relating to the 'Fast and Furious' gun running scandal.

Kelly said this: "Holder has said some things that he then had to retract, they've caught him in a few 'errors.' And now Congress wants to see for themselves who authorized this, who was signing off on the wiretaps, who did what and when did they do it. House Republicans will eventually go to a civil federal district court and ask a judge to issue an order compelling Mr. Holder to fork over the documents."

And finally Uma Pemmaraju and Steve Doocy were on for the total waste of time Factor News Quiz, that I do not report on because it is not news, it's nonsense.

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

O'Reilly Compares Obama To Julius Caesar Over Immigration
By: Steve - June 22, 2012 - 10:00am

O'Reilly said this on Monday night. O'Reilly: Obama Doesn't Like Immigration Law So He, Julius Caesar, Is Going To Say No, You Don't Have To Enforce It"



And what's so funny is that O'Reilly recently said he basically approved of what the president is doing. Then a few days later he says it is unconstitutional and compared him to Ceasar, proving he is an idiot.

O'Reilly said this on Friday:
O'REILLY: As for the policy, how can you blame kids when they are dragged to the USA? It's not the child's fault that laws were broken. Thus the new policy is humane and the President believes it will make America stronger. What most likely happened is he got a ton of hate mail from the far-right for saying he approved, so he changed his tune to make his CRAZY right-wing viewers happy.

The Wednesday 6-20-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 21, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama invokes executive privilege in Fast and Furious gun scandal. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Let's walk through this complicated situation: For years federal law enforcement has been running sting operations in Mexico, sending American guns down there to see who is buying them and where they are being used. Unfortunately, the feds lost track of some of those guns and one of them turned up in the killing of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

Congress wants to know who was responsible for the screw up. Attorney General Eric Holder testified that he did not know about the 'Fast and Furious' program until very late in the game. Some doubt that, and a Congressional committee has requested all Justice Department documents pertaining to the matter, but Holder will not turn them over.

Today President Obama invoked executive privilege, saying he can not reveal private advice, and therefore he is ordering the Justice Department not to turn over documents in which such advice is present. The House committee rejects that argument and says the President and Attorney General are covering up the situation; today that committee voted to hold Eric Holder in contempt.

All this will be adjudicated in the courts, which will take forever. Some believe that's the plan â?" keep the documents secret until after the election. There's no reason the President can't redact any advice given in private, just black it out. Congress doesn't care about advice, they care about how the sting went wrong and who's responsible.

The privilege deal is a ruse and it's obvious. Release the documents, Mr. President, and redact what you think should be held confidential. President Obama campaigned on transparency, but this is obviously the exact opposite. Release the documents!
When O'Reilly says Congress wants to know he should have said the partisan Republicans want to know, because nobody else cares. O'Reilly also fails to mention that this is a partisan scandal simply done to make Obama look bad, that's because he is part of it.

So what does O'Reilly do then, have a fair and balanced discussion on it, haha, of course not, he had the partisan hack Dick Morris on to talk about it.

Morris said this: "The President has wrapped Eric Holder in executive privilege, which means this is now his scandal and he's withholding the documents. To raise the issue to this level is just dumb, nobody in the mainstream media was paying any attention to this scandal, but now everybody's going to be covering it, it will be a big deal."

O'Dummy said he thinks that summertime apathy may help the administration, saying this: "Most Americans are not watching the news, they're not reading the newspapers, they're disengaged. The folks are not going to rally to this and I think that's what the Obama administration is counting on."

Then Lanny Davis was on to discuss NBC News, which recently broadcast a misleading and doctored quote from Mitt Romney on Andrea Mitchell's daytime news show. But if you notice O'Reilly never said a word about Fox News doctoring a quote from Romney to make him look better. And NBC did not doctor the quote, it was simply used without the full context, which O'Reilly and Fox do all the time.

Davis said this: "I don't think Andrea Mitchell would do that. I don't think she knew. This is a horrible example of taking a quote out of context. Both sides are doing this and Michael Steele and I are saying we're fed up. We think people in Washington want solutions, not this kind of stuff."

O'Reilly then warned Davis that his campaign for greater civility is akin to tilting at windmills, saying this: "There is money to be made in the partisan precincts on television and radio, so they're not going to stop attacking because they make money attacking."

Then Jeff Gold was on to talk about the Jerry Sandusky trial, which I do not report on because it is not real news, it's tabloid news.

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because it's un-funny partisan one sided nonsense.

And finally Jesse Watters was on to talk about men and women who sport multiple tattoos. Which I will clearly not report on because it's ridiculous. Hey O'Reilly, how is this news, and who cares. Report some real news moron. You call this a hard news show, so where is the hard news?

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

O'Reilly Slams Obama For Boring Press Conference
By: Steve - June 21, 2012 - 10:00am

If you want proof O'Reilly is a biased right-wing hack who hates President Obama, here it is. Not only did O'Reilly say nothing important could be found to talk about in the Obama press conference, he called it the most boring thing he has ever seen in his 30 years of so-called no spin journalism.

Here are the two videos:

O'Reilly On Obama's G-20 Press Conference: "I Have Never Seen More Anything More Boring Than That, Ever"



O'Reilly: "The Most Important Thing About Obama's Press Conference Was That It Ended"



And that is called the no spin zone? Give me a break, because we all know he would never say anything like that about a Republican press conference. During the Bush years O'Reilly never once called any of the boring Bush press conferences boring, or say the most important thing about it was that it ended.

The Tuesday 6-19-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 20, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Is America in decline? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal today laments the fact that the USA is losing power all over the world. The Journal points to Russia and Putin supplying the tyrant Assad with weapons in Syria while the USA and the UN can do absolutely nothing about it. Putin is a villain who consistently thumbs his nose at America and doesn't care about civilians being massacred with Russian weapons.

Also, Iran is supplying Syria with weapons and military people, even as it continues to develop its nuclear capability. Iran doesn't fear the USA at all. The question is, why are we declining? The first reason is the economy - the Obama administration is attempting to shift from a market economy to a quasi-socialistic approach where the federal government calls the shots. That has failed by every measure and has also eroded consumer confidence here and abroad.

President Obama has to know that the reason Europe is collapsing financially is because they abandoned the market economy. Greece, Spain, and Italy are all entitlement states going bankrupt, yet the President makes no attempt to downsize government or reduce our staggering debt. On the Republican side, there's no question that the war in Iraq hurt the USA. It cost nearly a trillion dollars and put heavy pressure on our military, and for what?

The war in Afghanistan was a necessity, Iraq was not, and fighting two wars over a ten-year period has drained our military. So the Wall Street Journal is correct - America's power is in decline. The good news is that the situation can be reversed. A return to the market economy and aggressive capitalism can rebuild what we've lost.

Our military remains the finest in the world, our technology is the best, and the working men and women of America have no equal. But this country needs to harness those strengths, fast!
Now that's funny, because during the Bush years when liberals said America is in decline O'Reilly called them biased traitors. But now that a Democrat is in the White House O'Reilly says America is in decline. So guess what, Bill O'Reilly you are a hypocrite and a traitor.

Then O'Reilly analyzed President Obama's just-completed press conference at the G-20 summit in Mexico with the biased Fox News hack Brit Hume.

Hume said this: "The President didn't have anything new or dramatic to announce, and the questions from the press got nowhere. Nothing major came out of this summit, and it's arguable whether anything minor came out of this summit. The President is in no position economically or militarily to do much about any problems."

O'Reilly expressed enormous disappointment in the President's comments, saying this: "That was the most boring press conference I've ever seen. This really offends me - I was trying to listen to President Obama, who was speaking to the world, but he made no sense and he reiterated what was said an thousand times. I resent it!"

Then Alan Colmes was on to discuss it. Colmes said this: "You always say it's boring, but what do you expect, dancing girls and fountains? This was an economic summit. He was saying we can work with Putin, we can work with China, and they should realize that it's in their best interest. President Obama believes he can bring them around."

So then Billy said this: "The President of the United States has to lead the world but he's not because he doesn't know what he's talking about."

Are you kidding me, he is the President who is one of the smartest men in America, you are just a two-bit biased right-wing cable news tv show host. My God O'Reilly you need to get a clue and wake up, you are nothing, and Obama is the President of the United States, try to remember that.

Then Steve Greenberg and Matt McGill were on to talk about Chicago violence. Greenberg said this: "Chicago is a victim of its own success. Years ago we had a couple of large gangs that controlled the streets, but now that the gangs have fallen apart we have tiny cliques that are like militias. They engage in random acts of violence because they think it's about respect. It's like disarray in a third-world nation."

McGill pointed out that almost all the crime is in black neighborhoods, saying this: "Chicago historically has been the most segregated city in the nation, and when you have that kind of segregation the crime is going to be in these separate areas. There is a culture of violence that has been simmering for maybe forty years. Now the numbers are getting startling and we realize we have a crisis."

Billy said Chicago officials should do whatever is needed to quash the violence, saying this: "Why don't the Chicago police force and Mayor Rahm Emanuel flood the zone with all the firepower they can get?"

Now ask yourself why O'Reilly only reports on the violence in Chicago and nowhere else. Answer: Because Obama is from Chicago, and the liberal Mayor Rahm Emanuel worked for Obama. He does it to try and make Obama look bad. Proving once again O'Reilly is a biased right-wing hack. Hey O'Reilly, why do you ignore the violence in all the other cities?

Then John Stossel was on to cry about the problem of disability fraud. Stossel said this: "The government pays out $75 billion for this, and we don't know how much of it is fraud. But it's contagious - if your neighbor is out playing golf but collecting disability, then you might feel like a sucker if you don't cheat too. It's an epidemic and it's growing."

Wow, what an idiot. Yes there is a little fraud, but it's a small percentage, not an epidemic. Stossel himself proved he is a fool, because first he said we don't know how much of it is fraud, then he says it's an epidemic and it's growing. Which can not be possible, because if you do not know how much of it is fraud you can not know if it's an epidemic or if it's growing, idiot!

But of course O'Reilly never pointed any of that out, and he said the problem is an unfortunate sign of the times, saying this: "Forty years ago people had a lot of pride and wouldn't have taken the money, but now they want the money because they think they're entitled to it in our entitlement culture."

And I would bet 90% (or more) of the disabled are really disabled, and you idiots just speculated that it is a massive problem, with no proof, breaking two of O'Reilly's own rules. Speculation and reporting on something with no proof.

Then Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on to talk about Republican Congressman Darrell Issa, who has been threatening to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in contempt of Congress over the 'Fast and Furious' scandal, met with the AG Tuesday.

Wiehl said this: "This was a 20-minute meeting, and both parties say it was fairly non-contentious. Holder said he will give Issa's committee a briefing and a compilation of documents. In exchange, he wants the committee to stop the investigation. Chairman Issa said absolutely not."

Guilfoyle accused Attorney General Holder of stonewalling, saying this: "He's not acting in good faith. If you don't have anything to hide, why are you continuing to withhold these documents? Isn't his job to seek the truth?" And of course O'Reilly agreed that Holder "doesn't have any right to hide anything from the American public."

And none of them mentioned that it's a partisan witch hunt, with only Republicans doing it, or that they are only doing it to try and make Obama look bad and force him to fire Eric Holder because he is a liberal and they do not like him. Including the so-called non-partisan Independent O'Reilly, who is at the head of the table in the witch hunt.

And finally the biased far-right stooge Charles Krauthammer was on with his assessment of President Obama's press conference in Mexico.

Krauthammer said this: "I watched the beginning of the show and you were great. You were on the verge of an apoplectic reaction and if I were there I would have hosed you down with a valium spray. And in fact it was the dullest press conference since the invention of the radio."

Krauthammer also said this: "However, regarding Syria, President Obama actually said that he is confident that the Russians do not condone the massacres. The Russians are providing the helicopter gunships that are conducting the massacres and they are preparing to send three ships to a Syrian port. This is a thumb in the eye to the United States, this is the Russians saying Syria is our property, and the United States has a president who says he's confident that they don't condone the massacres!"

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

More Proof O'Reilly Wrong About Bias In The Media
By: Steve - June 20, 2012 - 10:00am

Before you read this blog think about this: O'Reilly claims almost all the media is liberal (except Fox) and that they all want Obama to be re-elected. Even though the facts show otherwise, and O'Reilly refuses to report it.

Here is an example of the news O'Reilly ignores, because it does not fit his right-wing talking points spin that all the media are Obama supporting liberals.

A new study about the Media show they have overwhelmingly repeated false claims by Republican politicians and corporations that government policies are "job killers" without citing any evidence for this claim. And today's news reporting proves the study's main point.

Occidental College professor Peter Dreier and University of Northern Iowa professor Christopher Martin found media stories in The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post, The New York Times, and the Associated Press with the phrase "job killer" have spiked since President Obama took office and that since 1984, "in 91.6% of the stories alleging that a government policy was or would be a 'job killer,' the media failed to cite any evidence for this claim or to quote an authoritative source with any evidence for this claim."

Dreier and Martin pointed out that "With little or no fact checking of 'job killer' allegations, Americans who get their news from the mainstream media have no way to know if there is any evidence for these claims."

The study also found that the majority of these stories involved allegations by Republicans or business spokespersons, and that the phrase was used most often to attack tax policies, health care reform, and policies to protect the environment, workers, or consumers.

The study findings are proven by the facts. A study from NYU's Institute for Policy Integrity found that usage of the phrase "job-killing regulation" in newspapers has increased 17,550% between 2007 and 2011. And media figures have indeed thrown around the phrase "job killers" or similar terms to attack progressive government policies.

Not to mention, many media figures have repeatedly launched misleading attacks on Obama's jobs record.

The study states that even in the rare cases in which the media provided an opposing viewpoint to the Republican and corporate "job killer" claims, news stories still failed to provide any evidence as to whether the "job killer" claim was accurate:
In 91.6% (349 of 381) news reports analyzed, news organizations provided no evidence to support the "job killer" claim.

Even in the 8.4% (32 of 381) of the stories in which some evidence was supplied, it's not clear whether or not journalists investigated the veracity of the evidence cited.

Similarly, in only 6.8% (26) of the 381 stories did reporters provide an alternative claim. In most issues, there are at least two sides to a story. In the case of "job killer" allegations news organizations typically report only one side.

Even in the stories that carried alternative claims -- in other words, that reported that some organization or expert challenged the "job killer" allegation -- reporters provided evidence to back up challenges to the "job killer" claim in only 8 stories.

Thus, in 18 of the 26 alternative claim cases, there was just a competing claim with no supporting evidence.
Now if that is not proof there is no liberal bias in the media, I'm Donald Trump. In fact, it proves there is a conservative/corporate bias, not a liberal bias. What O'Reilly does is cherry pick one or two examples of liberal bias from the media (mostly from MSNBC) then claim all the media has a liberal bias. When in fact, if you look at the overall picture you see the media has a conservative/corporate bias, as this study has proven.

Here is more: Sunday's coverage of the economic messages from Obama and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney illustrates how merely quoting a source who disagrees with the "job killer" claim is inadequate.

Yesterday Romney attacked the Obama administration for supposedly pursuing the "most anti-investment, anti-business, anti-jobs series of policies in modern American history."

The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the Associated Press each quoted Romney's attack. The outlets also reported on Obama's statements about the economy and the Times, Post, and AP quoted Obama campaign spokeswoman Lis Smith calling Romney's claim dishonest.

Smith said this: "Contrary to Romney's rhetoric, the president took our nation from losing 750,000 jobs a month to adding 4.3 million private-sector jobs over the last 27 months."

But none of the articles tried to determine the accuracy of Romney's attack on Obama's investment, business, and jobs record.

The private sector was indeed bleeding jobs when Obama came to office but has added about 4.3 million jobs in the past 27 months.

And that's not all: The Congressional Budget Office estimated that between 200,000 and 1.5 million jobs were created or retained as a direct result of the stimulus through the first quarter of 2012. Independent analyses also found that the stimulus increased employment by millions of jobs and raised the GDP.

Readers of the Journal, Times, Post, and AP articles, however, were not given this information in order to determine the inaccuracy of Romney's attack.

So they basically helped the Republican Mitt Romney lie about the Obama jobs record, which is the opposite of being a liberal media, it's being a conservative media. Not to mention, the majority of Newspapers in America endorsed George W. Bush in 2000, and the Republican John McCain in 2008, a fact that O'Reilly never reports.

The Monday 6-18-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 19, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama, illegal immigration, and the new law. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: There are many things in play after President Obama announced a quasi-legalization of perhaps 800,000 illegal aliens. The government will no longer deport illegal aliens who were brought here when they were 16 or younger. Those folks must not be more than 30 years old now and must have a clean record with a high school diploma or military service.

The President says it's the fair thing to do, and Talking Points does not disagree with the theory. However, the policy may very well be illegal - it is up to Congress to make federal law, not the President. So we can expect court challenges to President Obama's pronouncement, and charges that he has once again overstepped his authority.

On the political front, Mitt Romney believes the President's move was dictated by vote pandering. And then there is the racist angle - whenever the right goes after President Obama, some on the left cry racism.

Summing up, Talking Points believes that illegal aliens who were dragged to the USA by their parents should be given special status by Congress. But because he bypassed Congress, what the President did is flat-out unconstitutional. No spin!
Then Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham were on to discuss it. Williams said this: "This is not at all illegal. This is a memorandum telling Homeland Security to exercise discretion when enforcing laws regarding deportation. President Obama thinks deportation is onerous and puts pressure on law enforcement."

And of course the right-wing Mary K. Ham accused the President of overstepping his presidential authority, saying this: "A couple of months ago he was saying he doesn't have the power to do this, but suddenly he does. Barack Obama had a rare super-majority in Congress and he completely ignored immigration reform."

Then the insane O'Reilly actually claimed President Obama is violating his oath of office, saying this: "The President took an oath to uphold the laws of the United States, but he is saying he doesn't like this law and he's going to exempt 800,000 people from it."

Then the far-right Karl Rove was on with his biased take on the issue. Rove said this: "A year ago President Obama said he doesn't have the authority to do this, and the authority still does not exist for him to say we will selectively apply the laws of the United States."

Rove also said this: "This is a smart political move. President Obama has never drafted or introduced any comprehensive immigration reform and people in the Latino community were understanding how little he had done on this issue. There was concern in the Democratic camp that Latino turnout would be less and that Romney would get a larger portion of their vote than McCain did."

Then Jose Antonio Vargas, an illegal immigrant born in the Philippines, was asked how the United States should deal with productive illegals.

Vargas said this: "What we should be doing now, is allowing people to come forward. I would love a process to become an American citizen. I came here when I was 12 because my mother wanted to give me a better life. But I agree that we need smart enforcement, a country needs to enforce its borders."

O'Reilly somewhat praised Vargas for his industriousness, but reminded him that most illegal immigrants came here under far different circumstances, saying this: "If you're 32 and you sneak across the border or overstay your visa, you shouldn't become an American citizen."

Then Monica Crowley was on to promote her new book, when she claims that conservatives and Republicans are primed to take over the levers of power.

Crowley said this: "I tried in this book to create a new template for Americans. Not just for conservatives, but for every American so we can get our attitude changed. Enough with this depression and despair, it's time to get our groove back."

Crowley even admitted that her book is largely an anti-Obama book. Because she is a biased stooge who hates him.

Crowley said this: "Every day under this administration, we have been hit with some new piece of leftist madness, from the small stuff to the big stuff. President Obama wants to change the United States into a socialist idea. This is all about taking down the traditional pillars of the U.S. economy and remaking it into a redistributionist model. He wants to redistribute everything great about America as a way to dilute our exceptionalism."

Then O'Reilly had the biased hack Bernie Goldberg on to cry about Former ABC News correspondent Sam Donaldson, who claimed that many of President Obama's detractors are motivated primarily by racism. And he is right, but neither Goldberg or O'Reilly will ever admit it, even though there is a lot of evidence to prove it.

Goldberg said this: "We've heard this approximately 22-million times from liberals inside and outside the media. It comes from liberals like Sam Donaldson looking at things through a racial prism because it makes them feel better about themselves. But if Sam is listening tonight, I'd ask him this: Do you really think that those people you call right-wing bigots and racists would be racist toward a conservative black man who was President of the United States? I think they would love him, so it's clearly President Obama's liberal politics that these conservatives don't like."

O'Reilly also slammed Donaldson's unproven accusation, saying this: "This is unseemly because Donaldson can't back it up. It's cheap and that's what angers me about it."

And finally in the last segment O'Reilly had his ridiculous so-called Reality Check Segment. Which I do not report on because it's biased one sided garbage. It's simply O'Reilly giving his biased right-wing opinion on something someone else said. And he never does reality checks on Republicans, they are all on Democrats.

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

Monica Crowley Calls Obama Parents Communists
By: Steve - June 19, 2012 - 10:00am

And O'Reilly never said a word about it, proving once again that he is about as biased of a right-wing jerk you can be.

Crowley said Obama's Parents Were Communists and that his Mother Attended A Communist Church:



Great E-Mail From An O'Reilly Lover
By: Steve - June 19, 2012 - 9:00am

Enjoy this folks, I know I did:
Subject: You're a douchbag
Date: Monday, June 18, 2012 10:28 PM
From: "Brook Bennett" brooktrout2112@gmail.com
To: no-spam-oreillyspins@yahoo.com

It is unbelievable that you spend this much time on this. You have to be uneducated and jobless to devote this much effort into this. That is the problem with this country. People like you talk a lot and bash people, but do not contribute to the greater good. I'll bet you've never given to charity or served in a soup line. You're just a big talkers and not a doer. Grow up and do something you can be proud of. This is garbage.
Now that is funny, because I am a doer, I am doing it right now idiot.

More Proof O'Reilly Spins What The People Want
By: Steve - June 18, 2012 - 10:00am

O'Reilly claims the majority of the people support big cuts in federal spending. And as I have proven time and time again he is lying to you.

To begin with, a new poll from PEW shows that only 18% of the people even care about the debt or the deficit. The new poll backs me up once again and proves O'Reilly is a right-wing spin doctor.

Nearly 70 percent of Americans now say that cutting the deficit is an important goal for 2012. But there's a major problem with that: when asked about specific programs, big majorities almost always favor either increasing spending or maintaining the current level, according to the Pew Research Center.

On education, 62 percent favor increases and 25 percent favor maintaining the current level. More than 90 percent favor either an increased level or the current level of spending on veteran's benefits; and more than 80 percent favor increasing levels or maintaining the current level on college financial aid, public school spending, Medicare, and Social Security.

The only program that even gains a small plurality of support for reduced spending levels is aid to the world’s needy, as the following chart from Pew shows:



And of course, cutting aid to the world's needy would do virtually nothing to reduce the deficit. Though Americans think it represents anywhere from 10 percent to one-third of the federal budget, in reality, it makes up less than one percent of federal spending.

By contrast, Americans actually do support one way to reduce the federal deficit: raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans.

The Friday 6-15-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 17, 2012 - 10:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama changing the rules on illegal immigration. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: In a very political move, the President has announced new rules for a specific group of illegal aliens. If your parents brought you to America when you were under 16, if you have completed high school or served in the military, and if you are under the age of 30 now, then you are most likely going to stay in America.

Mr. Obama has announced that deportations will stop and working papers could be issued to illegal aliens who fit that profile. The President calls it 'the right thing to do,' and it is the politically smart thing to do. Many Hispanic Americans will support the move and he needs those votes.

Also, it puts Mitt Romney on the defensive - will he support the change or will he be perceived as an unyielding mean guy? As for the policy, how can you blame kids when they are dragged to the USA? It's not the child's fault that laws were broken. Thus the new policy is humane and the President believes it will make America stronger.

Nevertheless, a reporter from a conservative website interrupted the President's remarks Friday. Neil Munro from the Daily Caller is the man the President scolded and he was absolutely wrong in interfering with the President's statement. As Talking Points always says, you must respect the office of the presidency, even if you don't like the person in it.
Then O'Reilly had the far-right stooge Lou Dobbs on, who argued that President Obama has overstepped his power, with no opposing point of view to balance the segment.

Dobbs said this: "This is the President, who six months ago acknowledged that he didn't have the authority to do precisely what he did today. I think he's going to be successfully challenged on exceeding that authority. What makes this objectionable to me, among other things, is that he blames Republicans, saying he couldn't get it through the Congress. That completely distorts the reality and the record."

Which is laughable because Obama is exactly right, and Lou Dobbs is a biased liar.

Dobbs even defended the right-wing reporter who interrupted the President, saying this: "Was it the correct professional demeanor? No. But the fact is that this President constrains and controls the national liberal media, and it's refreshing to see a direct question asked on a specific topic."

Then O'Reilly had Janine Turner and Leslie Marshall on to talk about the British government who wants to monitor everything citizens do on their computers and smart phones.

Really? Are you kidding me O'Reilly, who cares, it is not happening in America so why do you care what they do in England. Get a clue and report on what is happening here in America. I will not report on this because it has nothing to do with America.

Then Wendy Murphy and crime reporter Aphrodite Jones were on to talk about the Former Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, who is accused of multiple child molestations. Jones said this: "We've sat and listened to eight accusers in court, boys who testified again and again what happened to them. Sandusky's lawyers tried to impeach these boys, but there was not an iota of a doubt. This man walked on water at Penn State and he used that to molest boys."

Murphy said she thinks that Jerry Sandusky will absolutely, positively be convicted. Murphy said this: "He'll be convicted because of what he did. This is an extremely strong case and it is not defensible. It's a defense attorney's nightmare because you can not destroy the credibility of this much evidence. He's not going home, ever!"

And O'Reilly said nothing, not a word about Murphy convicting him on tv. But he screamed bloody murder when some of the media convicted George Zimmerman, and even said nobody should be convicted on tv. What a massive hypocrite.

Then O'Reilly talked about a father in Texas who caught a child molester abusing his daughter, then proceeded to beat the pervert to death. Billy asked Geraldo Rivera whether the father might be charged with a felony.

Geraldo said this: "If the facts are as they have been reported, I do not believe a Texas grand jury will indict him. Jurors are ordinary, reasonable, prudent people who identify with someone whose story they can identify with. 99% of all dads would have done the same thing, and there will be dads on that grand jury. We know this dad has never been in trouble and we also know that he has expressed remorse."

And O'Dummy agreed that most fathers would have done something similar, saying this: "I would have done this, you would have done this, because when you see something that horrific you kind of snap."

Now that's ridiculous, because of course every Father would have done something, but when you beat someone to death you need to get some kind of punishment, parole or something. The biased hacks Geraldo and O'Reilly want to let the guy off with nothing.

Then O'Reilly had the Beach Boys Brian Wilson and Mike Love on to talk about their music. Why, I have no idea, and I will not report on this nonsense.

And finally in the last segment O'Reilly had Greg Gutfeld and Arthel Neville on for dumbest people of the week. Neville picked the mom who videotaped her young son when he was under anesthesia and acting drunk.

Neville said this: "If she wants to do this and put it on her own Facebook for friends and family, okay, that's the age we live in. But it gets out of control when you post it on YouTube. What's the point, and why do people watch this stuff?"

Gutfeld went with Madonna, who has been exposing various body parts during her concert tour. Gutfeld said this: "She bared her bottom in Rome and her breasts in Istanbul. But she's getting older, she's gone from pro-gay to BenGay. She's our generation's Betty White."

O'Dummy singled out FNC's Steve Doocy, who tried his hand - and feet - at ballet during Fox & Friends.

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

Romney Advisor Admits Republicans Want Economy To Fail
By: Steve - June 16, 2012 - 10:00am

A media strategist who was a senior adviser to Mitt Romney when he ran for governor in 2003 said Republican lawmakers are "rooting against the economy to ensure that President Obama doesn't win re-election."

Rob Gray, a senior adviser on Romney's gubernatorial campaign, is a Republican media strategist who owns Gray Media, which lists an assortment of Republican officials among its past clients.

Gray worked for John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign and, according to Gray Media's web site, has advised former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld (R), Lt. Gov. Kerry Healey (R), the Republican National Committee, and Romney.

Appearing on Boston's Fox 25 news channel Thursday morning, Gray said he bought the idea that congressional Republicans were "rooting against the economy because they believed short-term pain between now and November would be better than four more years under Obama:
HOST: Plenty of pundits, Rob, are suggesting that GOP lawmakers might be dragging their heels when it comes to trying to turn it around in fears that it might actually help the president. Are you buying that?

GRAY: I'm buying that they're rooting against the economy because they think that the short-term pain of, you know, the next four months is much better than having additional four years of pain under Obama.

They believe the government should spend less and that they have better economic ideas than the president does. So, you know, if we have to suffer between now and November to get a better president for four years, they're all for it.
Democrats have made similar allegations of congressional Republicans in the past. After Republicans blocked the American Jobs Act last October, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said Americans were "tired of Republicans in Congress rooting for the economy to fail instead of working with us to secure our economic future."

And of course O'Reilly says nothing, because he is a Republican and he does not want to report what the Republicans are doing, he also wants Obama to lose to Romney. Not to mention, when some Democrats were known to be rooting for the economy to fail under Bush, O'Reilly called them traitors.

But when Republicans do it O'Reilly not only does not call them traitors, he does not even report the story at all.

The Thursday 6-14-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 15, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Is the fix in regarding national security leaks? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: As you know, we're not in business to 'small-ball' Barack Obama - we don't nitpick, we don't play 'gotcha' with the President. But now something has arisen that is very disturbing and it directly involves the President and his beleaguered Attorney General Eric Holder.

There's no question that someone in the Obama administration is leaking national security secrets to the New York Times, the best example being a Times article on how the USA is conducting espionage against Iranian nuclear facilities. Under pressure, the Obama administration has announced it will investigate the leaks and has appointed two U.S. Attorneys - Rod Rosenstein and Ronald Machen.

The problem with Machen is that he has given money to Barack Obama, has worked on his campaign, and owes his career to the man. I mean, c'mon! If the fix isn't in on that appointment, there's no such thing as a fix. It's unbelievable and it's arrogant! This is shades of Richard Nixon, who tried to get away with Watergate by having his cronies investigate.

Talking Points is not equating today's national security leaks with Watergate, but the investigation blueprint is the same as Nixon's. President Obama has to realize that he's in trouble, so he can't afford a scandal of any kind. Every fair-minded person knows an independent counsel needs to be appointed to look at the leaks, and that person should come from outside the government.
WOW! Talk about dishonesty, this is the most dishonest thing I have ever seen from Billy. O'Reilly said this: "As you know, we're not in business to 'small-ball' Barack Obama - we don't nitpick, we don't play 'gotcha' with the President."

Are you kidding me, yes you do, you small-ball and nitpick Obama for everything that happens in America, and the world for that matter. To even say you don't is just ridiculous.

So then what did O'Reilly do, have a fair and balanced segment on it, of course not, he had the Republican Megyn Kelly on all alone.

Kelly said this: "There's a question about whether Machen is objective when it comes to President Obama, who he has described as a 'legend.' He was one of the first donors to his Senatorial campaign and his Presidential campaign. The other investigator is a Republican, so there's a question about whether these are the right guys to perform a truly independent investigation. But an independent counsel would take years to get to the bottom of this, it would be long after the next presidential election."

Billy said he thinks that the U.S. Attorneys are unsuited for the job, saying this: "They are not the right guys if you want an aggressive and fair investigation."

But when Bush did the same thing Kelly and O'Reilly had no problem with that, and even said their should not be an independent counsel used.

Then O'Reilly had the Meteorologist Nicole Mitchell on who claims she was fired by The Weather Channel at least partly because she serves in the Air Force Reserve. So Billy asked Mitchell whether she can prove her allegation.

Mitchell said this: "Not only were there verbal incidents, but there were also schedule changes when I couldn't come in on military weekends. I was asked a lot of questions about how much time off they had to give me, and I was asked to come in on weekends when they knew I had military duty. I also have emails, so when you look at the overall picture it's clear that my contract renewal was biased."

So for some crazy reason O'Reilly reported that the Weather Channel is partly owned by NBC Universal, saying this: "If you were working for the Fox News Channel I can assure you that they wouldn't be giving you a hard time because of your military obligation, but NBC has a reputation of being a very liberal network."

O'Reilly even implied that the people at NBC hate the military, which is just pure speculation, and ridiculous. Not to mention he has no proof, so it was speculation that he claims he never does or allow.

Then Karl Rove was on to assess the weaknesses in Mitt Romney's campaign. Rove said this: "The main problem, is how the Romney campaign is responding to the Obama narrative that he is a 'vampire capitalist' and untrustworthy of being in the Oval Office."

Rove also said this: "I also think it was a mistake to have their vice presidential prospects like Marco Rubio campaign with him. It trivialized the process and makes it look like everything depends on how well you perform for 30 minutes on the stump. Are we going to have eight or nine people go out and campaign with Mitt Romney? No, you want the focus to be on your message - you want to spend your time talking about how you're going to create jobs and how you're going to put our fiscal house in order. But overall the Romney campaign has been very smart and very adroit."

Then Bob Beckel was on to identify the problem areas in the Obama campaign. Beckel said this: "The economy overwhelms everything for Obama, and he should continue blame Bush because of the 'hangover effect.' If you ask people who they blame, Bush still scores fairly high. The other thing the Obama campaign should do is get him off the air, he has too much exposure."

Beckel also advised President Obama to ignore Republican calls to fire Attorney General Eric Holder, saying this: "Do you think people in Middle America wake up and say Eric Holder is driving me crazy? Nobody cares, and I've never seen a presidential election go on the basis of a cabinet member."

Then the 2 Republican Culture Warriors Jeanne Pirro and Gretchen Carlson were on to talk about a new government report showing that more teens are smoking marijuana than cigarettes.

Pirro said this: "I was stunned, but every young person that I've spoken with is not surprised at all. I think this is attributable to two things - one is that we card young kids who want to buy cigarettes, and we as a society have created this image that cigarettes are dangerous and cause cancer. Young kids think grass is not as dangerous as tobacco."

Carlson credited the drop in cigarette use to incessant advertising about the danger of tobacco, saying this: "In the 1990's, 70% of all kids said they had tried cigarettes; in the 2000's, after the major messaging campaign, it went down to 45%. So there's hope here if we do the same thing for marijuana."

But O'Reilly said that a comparable anti-pot campaign is unlikely because "the people who make the messages like marijuana, smoke it themselves."

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

One last thing, during the show O'Reilly had the liberal Bob Beckel on, and he claimed it shows that he is a fair and balanced man. Okay fair enough, then explain this O'Reilly, the other 7 guests were all Republicans. So how the hell is it fair and balanced to have 7 Republicans (plus O'Reilly, which makes 8) and 1 liberal?

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

Fox Claims The People Do Not Blame Bush For Economy
By: Steve - June 15, 2012 - 10:00am

O'Reilly said it was crazy for President Obama to blame Bush for the debt and the economy, and Megyn Kelly put out the same right-wing talking points, along with just about everyone else at Fox too.

But along the way they all forgot one thing, the latest Gallup poll shows that 70% of the people think Bush deserves either "a great deal" or "a moderate amount" of blame for the economy, compared to just over half who say the same about Obama.

During a preview of a speech on the economy that President Obama gave Thursday in Cleveland, Megyn Kelly reported that President Obama would not introduce new initiatives, but instead would reframe his message.

Describing President Obama's previous themes on the subject, Kelly said that Obama has tried "the blaming Bush thing" but that it doesn't seem to be resonating.

In fact, according to a poll released Thursday, Americans actually do agree that President Bush deserves a large share of blame for economic problems.

Gallup wrote this:
The percentage of Americans blaming Bush dropped to about 70% in August 2010, and has stayed roughly in that range since.

Meanwhile, about half of Americans have blamed Obama since March 2010, with little substantive change from then to the present.
This is simply part of the Fox News campaign to shift all responsibility for economic problems to Obama while letting President Bush off the hook. And of course you never heard a word about this poll, because it kills the right-wing spin O'Reilly, Kelly, and the rest of Fox News are putting out.

The Wednesday 6-13-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 14, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Is your child special? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: One of the problems America is currently having is that many of us believe we are special, that society owes us respect and prosperity. That's why so many Americans support the entitlement system. Public schools are very concerned about student 'self-esteem,' and there are even schools that say national testing is biased if some of the students fail.

Well, you may have heard of historian David McCullough, who wrote a best-seller on John Adams. His son, also named David, has been teaching high school for 26 years, and last week he said this to the graduating class of Wellesley High in Massachusetts: 'You're not special, you're not exceptional ... if everyone is special then no one is.'

Talking Points believes students need to hear Mr. McCullough's stern message. In the private sector you must compete and prove yourself to be special. Sadly, many American students are not prepared for the real world - they have been pampered by parents and the public school system.

The old saying is, 'Life is hard and then you die.' But in America, slow death is becoming very common because some of us don't want to compete, don't want to work hard, don't want to be honest and sober. Those things are absolutely necessary if you are to prosper in this country. So David McCullough should be applauded and his message should be echoed by our nation's leaders.
Then O'Reilly had psychiatrist Daniel Bober and psychologist Lisa Boesky on to comment. Boesky said this: "I think we have a problem with teen entitlement and narcissism, but this was not the time nor the place. This was the one day they could celebrate their four years of achievement. If he made that speech to the parents I would have no problem; tell them to stop keeping their kids from failing."

Bober endorsed the tough commencement speech, saying this: "We're sending them the wrong message to tell them they're special, we need to be much more realistic. We're living in an 'eggshell generation' and, unlike Humpty Dumpty, we have to teach our kids that they're going to have to put themselves back together again."

Billy criticized the public school system for failing to stress what is needed to succeed, saying this: "We are becoming a dependent people, and the reason we are is because of the public school system failing to tell Americans what is necessary, not only for their own personal success, but for the success of their country."

Then O'Reilly had the far-right hack Laura Ingraham on to trash Obama, with no opposing view of course.

President Obama, while telling audiences that our massive deficits and debt are mostly President Bush's fault, challenged the press to "take a look at the numbers." So Billy claims he did exactly that, and discovered that $4.9 trillion was added to the total public debt during President Bush's eight years in office, while President Obama has added $5.1 trillion in just three-and-a-half years.

Which is dishonest and biased reporting. Because what O'Reilly fails to mention is that only $2 Trillion of the Obama debt is from policies he put in place. The rest of the $5.1 Trillion was added from policies Bush put in place. O'Reilly added all the Bush debt that happened after he left office to Obama's numbers, and never once told you that.

And of course the biased Ingraham ridiculed President Obama's blame deflection, saying this: "The numbers on this are devastating, however he parses his words. We have added more money to our national debt in his three-and-a-half years than we had during the first 219 years of our republic. That is a staggering figure. He's right that Bush and the Republicans overspent, but President Obama has one-upped that, and I haven't seen any proposals on the table that take any serious approach to the deep spending cuts that are necessary."

Then the biased right-wing stooge Dick Morris was on to gauge President Obama's economic performance, and what a shocker (NOT) he was not happy. Morris said this: "When Obama took office, there were 70-million working-age adults who did not have jobs, but now it's 100-million. This is a very important statistic - when Obama took office two-thirds of us worked for a living, but now it's only 56%. We are rapidly approaching the point where a majority of us pay no income taxes and a majority of us don't work."

What Morris fails to mention is that almost all the extra 30 million working age adults who do not have jobs are out of work because Republicans fired them or would not hire them, not because of anything Obama did. Pretty much everything Morris said is a lie, and the fact that O'Reilly puts this biased jerk on his show is just more proof he is a right-wing idiot.

Morris also speculated why Mitt Romney would be wise to pick Senator Marco Rubio as his running mate, saying this: "Start with the electoral college - Romney's ability to carry Colorado, Nevada and New Mexico hinges on his ability to get Latino votes. The idea of having a vice president who is Latino is transcendent."

Well that's the kiss of death on my prediction, because I said Romney would pick Rubio. But now that Morris picked him I will probably be wrong, because Morris is almost never right with his predictions.

Then O'Reilly cried about a California high school valedictorian who delivered his graduation speech in Spanish. Billy talked about the school crisis with right-wing author Deborah Kenny.

Kenny said this: "Absolutely the schools are in chaos, and we need a revolution in how we teach our children and what we expect of them. We need an absolute transformation and the only way that's going to happen is if we elevate the teaching profession, so we need to get rid of anything that stands in the way. That includes all the union work rules that get in the way of teachers being treated like professionals. Right now teachers are treated like factory workers, but you have to have an incredibly passionate, dedicated and smart teacher in front of every kid."

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because he is not a journalist, and his segment is not news, it's simply biased un-funny garbage.

And finally Juliet Huddy was on for the did you see that nonsense, she watched footage of former Secretary of State Colin Powell admitting to college grads that he was a terrible student. Huddy said this: "I was a horrible student too, but I worked hard at the subjects I enjoyed. Like Colin Powell said later in the speech, 'it's not where you start, it's what you do along the way and how you finish up.' And he's a guy who should know."

And of course the idiot Bill O'Reilly reached a different conclusion, saying this: "The dumb kids that I grew up with in my neighborhood are still dumb."

Is he saying Colin Powell is dumb? If he is then he is an even bigger idiot than I thought, because General Powell is a very smart man, he just did not like school. I know a lot of smart people that did not like school. You can still be smart and hate school, O'Reilly you fool. I also know college educated people who are stupid, who just did well in school.

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

The Tuesday 6-12-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 13, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Should Attorney General Eric Holder resign? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Once again Talking Points is an oracle. In my newspaper column last week, I opined that if the presidential election were held tomorrow, Mitt Romney would defeat Barack Obama. And today the Federal Reserve backed up my contention that economic fear could very well defeat President Obama. According to the Fed, median net worth of American families has plunged by 39% in just three years and the value of American home equity has fallen 32%.

The awful economy is not entirely Barack Obama's fault; the recession began under President Bush. However, Mr. Obama continues to believe that massive federal spending will turn the economy around, but there are no facts to back that up. Thus undecided voters must decide whether the President deserves to be reelected based once again on 'hope.'

To me, undecided voters will break for Romney in the face of a very bad economic picture, but I could be wrong. The election will be all about performance and right now the Obama administration is performing poorly. They'll say that's not true, but the Fed's stats are devastating.
Oracle? Now that's funny, because you are wrong most of the time, you just never admit it. And what O'Reilly is really saying is that he HOPES Romney beats Obama, which just shows his partisan bias again.

Then Alan Colmes and Monica Crowley were on to discuss whether Eric Holder will be forced to resign. Crowley said this: "No, at least not immediately, because he still has the confidence of the President. But what we do know about Barack Obama is that when somebody becomes a political liability to him, he has no problem cutting them loose."

Colmes denounced those Republicans who are calling for Holder's scalp, saying this: "This is a partisan witch hunt and this is why Congress has a 17% approval rating - all they want to do is go after this President and hold hearings, rather than trying to accomplish anything."

Then Glenn Beck was on to talk about President Obama's reelection team that has produced a radio ad aimed specifically targeted at black Americans.

Beck said this: "I never heard anything like that. In that ad they say 'we've got your back, Mr. President.' But isn't the President supposed to have our back, isn't he supposed to be watching our liberty and our life. The other problem is the things he's saying in the ad. A real leader doesn't suck you in and say 'depend on me,' a real leader says 'you can do this, you can strive.'"

And Billy said he was worried that President Obama's policies encourage dependence on the government, saying this: "Barack Obama is a big-government guy and he's telling the African American community, I'm going to continue to give you more stuff. He's the most liberal president ever."

Then the far-right John Stossel was on to talk about residents of Middleborough, Massachusetts who have approved a law empowering police to impose a $20 fine on anyone heard using profanity. Stossel said this: "It's fine if you want to have a city that's very proper, and people don't have to live there. But we should always err on the side of government doing less."

Stossel also argued that a restaurant should be allowed to permit nude dining, saying this: "McDonald's is a private company, and it should be their right to let nude people come in. That's the beauty of private property and it's why we should have less government property where everybody has to obey the same rules."

Billy said this to that: "We don't want a naked McDonald's!"

Then the far-right Adam Carolla was on to talk about welfare. Hey O'Reilly, I thought you told us to not listen to these Hollywood pinheads, so why are you putting this fool on every week. Oh yeah, I forgot you are a dishonest and biased jerk, and you want us to listen to the Republicans in Hollywood, but not the liberals. What an idiot you are!

Carolla said this: "We were on welfare and food stamps and I did the free lunch program at school, and I felt like my mother was cut off at the knees. She got her stipend from the government, it was just enough to get by, and that's all we did. When I was about nine, I asked her, 'Why don't you just get a job?' She said, 'If I get a job I'll lose my welfare.' I thought that is a horrible message to send, but it inspired me and motivated me to work."

Carolla also said this: "We're all capable of doing a ton and we're all capable of doing almost nothing, depending on what the demands on us are. Without welfare, I think my mother would have risen to the occasion."

Then Kimberly Guilfoyle and Lis Wiehl were on to discuss the trial of Penn State assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky, who is accused of molesting ten young boys.

Wiehl said this: "Two accusers have taken the stand, and they told what happened in very great detail. And remember that these accusers did not know each other before this trial."

Guilfoyle agreed that Sandusky's accusers have great credibility, saying this: "You have this kind of repetition, people coming forward with the same details."

Then they talked about a lawsuit filed by some former cast members of the hit show Happy Days. Wiehl said this: "They're saying CBS has been selling DVDs and lunch boxes and t-shirts, but they haven't gotten any royalties. They say they have a contract." Guilfoyle said this: "The case is unlikely to succeed, their best chance is for them to try and get sympathy from the jury."

And finally Charles Krauthammer, was on to discuss the former Florida Governor Jeb Bush's contention that his father George H.W. Bush and Ronald Reagan would not be welcome in today's more conservative Republican Party.

Krauthammer said this: "His problem, is that he was equating his father with Ronald Reagan. His father was a very good president, but he was no Reagan - George H.W. Bush was a moderate conservative, Reagan was a movement conservative with a coherent set of ideas and policies. I think he would be very comfortable today with the Tea Party and the Republican Party. He was utterly uncompromising and he got his way, which is exactly what Republicans ought to be doing."

But O'Reilly maintained that Washington has become far more contentious and bifurcated, saying this: "Reagan was a master at selling his point of view to a liberal guy like House Speaker Tip O'Neill, but that has vanished on both sides."

And of course they did not address anything Jeb Bush complained about, all they did was say his Father was no Ronald Reagan. Not to mention, no Democrat, Republican or anyone was on to discuss it who agreed with Jeb, proving once again how biased O'Reilly is. In fact, only 1 liberal was on the entire show, and he had to share his time with Monica Crowley, so he did not even get his own segment.

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

The Monday 6-11-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 12, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Did someone in the Obama Administration compromise national security? Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: There have been a number of leaks to the press about sensitive issues about life and death. Number one, the Pakistani doctor who helped the CIA locate bin Laden - details about him found their way into the newspapers and he is now serving 33 years in a Pakistani prison.

Second, somebody told the New York Times about Stuxnet, a computer virus targeting nuclear facilities in Iran. Third, the 'kill list.' Somebody told the Times that President Obama has a terrorist death list and the leak, some believe, was designed to make the President look like a tough guy.

Attorney General Eric Holder has assigned two Justice Department officials to investigate, but many people don't believe Holder will do anything that might embarrass his close friend Barack Obama. Obviously, some Obama folks are talking and New York Times' reporter David Sanger admits it.

So President Obama finds himself in a very embarrassing situation that could escalate into a full-blown scandal. Here's what we know: There have been leaks, they have caused human suffering, they have put America in danger, and they need to be uncovered.

The Attorney General is far too close to President Obama and it's a conflict of interest to have his people investigate. An independent counsel should be appointed immediately.
Now that is funny, because when Bush was the President and the liberals called for an independent counsel to investigate all the stuff Bush was doing O'Reilly and all his right-wing friends said no independent counsel should be used. Proving once again the right-wing bias and hypocrisy from O'Reilly.

So then O'Reilly has one guest on to discuss it, the Republican Brit Hume, who said this: "These are pretty serious, and the outrage on Capitol Hill is bipartisan, this is no partisan witch hunt. But I don't think you can look to the investigative reporting teams in Washington to pursue this story very eagerly because things involving President Obama tend not to look as bad to them."

Hume also talked about the Republicans in Congress who want to cite Eric Holder for contempt over the 'Fast and Furious' gun-running scandal.

Hume said this: "It's possible that the stonewalling at the Justice Department over documents could continue and Eric Holder could be held in contempt of Congress. But if you're a leader of Congress and you're about to take this action against the first African American Attorney General, you may want to think twice because you know what's going to come at you. Everyone would say they wouldn't do this to him if he were white."

Then O'Reilly had Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on to discuss the President saying the private sector is doing fine, that was a true statement. Which only Republicans are dishonestly using to score cheap political points, including the so-called non-partisan Independent Bill O'Reilly. Here is just how biased O'Reilly is, he asked if those six words could cost Obama the election, which is just laughable.

Williams even defended Obama on this one, saying this: "I'm a little puzzled about this one, because what the President said is exactly right. He didn't say the economy is doing fine, he said the private sector is doing fine, and the private sector is doing fine. Corporations have more cash on hand than at any time since the 1960's, jobs are up every month, and wall street is up 40% under Obama."

Ham said this: "This was close to saying the economy is doing fine because most people think of the economy as the private sector. This further illustrated his priorities of putting public sector first and I don't think this was a 'gaffe' in that it wasn't actually a mistake."

And of course the crazy O'Reilly took issue with Williams defense of the President's statement, saying this: "Doesn't the private sector include working people, and are they doing fine? I'm seeing a lot of fear and they don't seem to think they're 'doing fine.'"

Then O'Reilly talked about the New York City principal Greta Hawkins who banned the song "God Bless the USA" at a kindergarten graduation, worrying that it could "offend" someone.

Billy had attorney and child advocate Jim Steyer on, who defended the principal, if not her principles, saying this: "As an educator myself, you always want to support principals and teachers who know their community better than we do. I think you should back principals even if they don't make decisions you agree with."

Billy told Hawkins to step up and defend her decision, saying this: "I think this woman doesn't like the country and she doesn't want 5-year-olds singing 'God Bless the USA' She owes the public an explanation because we pay her salary."

Then O'Reilly had Jesse Watters on to talk about a technology trade show he went to, which is not news and a total waste of time that I will not report on. In fact, I wonder why O'Reilly even does these worthless Watters segments, especially when he claims the Factor is a hard news show. Earth to O'Reilly, this is not hard news, it's garbage.

Then O'Reilly proved his right-wing bias again by having the far-right idiot Bernie Goldberg on to slam Chris Matthews and the great Walter Cronkite.

Goldberg said this: "I was pleasantly surprised, and he was absolutely right, so I give Chris credit for saying it. If we're ever going to make progress on this media bias problem, it's going to take liberals to admit there's a liberal bias and it's going to take conservatives to admit that there's a conservative bias. There are biases on both sides."

Billy claimed that media conservatives are generally more open about their ideology, adding this: "All the big guys making money in radio are conservative, not one liberal yakker makes any money."

Which is just laughable, because O'Reilly is the biggest conservative on cable news and he will not admit he is a conservative. In fact, he denies it and says he is a non-partisan Independent with a no spin zone. Not to mention, even if Cronkite was a liberal, unless he had a liberal bias in his reporting (which he did not) it does not matter. It only matter if you use your bias in your reporting, as O'Reilly does, which he will not admit to.

And finally O'Reilly had the biased one sided Factor Reality Check, which I do not report on because it's just O'Reilly by himself putting his right-wing spin on something that happened, or what someone said. It's biased one sided garbage, and not news.

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

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Progress On Green Energy
By: Steve - June 11, 2012 - 11:00am

Criticizing President Obama for remaining enthusiastic about massive government investment in green energy, Bill O'Reilly claimed that "the feds have not been able to make progress in the green area despite spending many, many billions of dollars."



In fact, federal policy has driven improvements in energy efficiency and rapid growth in clean technology.

In an April 2012 report, energy policy experts at the Brookings Institution, and World Resources Institute noted that federal support has driven a recent expansion in US clean tech sectors.

The report warned that federal support "is now poised to decline precipitously ... raising the possibility of market turmoil ahead," and recommended policy reforms to provide more stable and effective incentives.

From the analysis:
In recent years, US clean energy technology ("clean tech") sectors have grown rapidly, despite the economic turmoil gripping the nation. By the end of 2010, installed wind power capacity in the United States stood 60 percent above 2008 levels, while solar power capacity had increased 120 percent over the same period.

The United States regained global market share in advanced battery and vehicle segments, and construction commenced on the first new US nuclear reactors in decades. Robust expansion can be observed across virtually all segments of the clean tech sector, with total employment across clean technology segments growing 11.8 percent from 2007 to 2010, a period when overall US employment was stagnant.

US renewable energy and energy efficiency segments alone attracted $48 billion in investment in 2011, up 42 percent from 2010 and over twice as high as 2009 levels. This recent expansion of clean tech segments is due in large part to a substantial increase in federal investment and policy support.

Though current subsidies could be better optimized to drive innovation, many clean tech companies have nonetheless achieved significant technology improvements in recent years, often with the assistance of these federal programs.

Federal support for clean energy technologies has fostered market competition and improvements in technology and/or manufacturing efficiencies in areas like advanced batteries and vehicles, solar panels, and wind turbines, and other technologies.
And that is not all, the cost of Solar Panels has dropped significantly and Solar Installations have soared.

U.S. Wind Power Capacity Has Expanded Considerably. Wind Turbine Manufacturing Has Grown 12-Fold.

A letter from over 350 coalition members including the National Association of Manufacturers, the American Farm Bureau Federation, and the Edison Electric Institute states that "US wind turbine manufacturing has grown 12-fold" since 2005 and "costs have been reduced over 90% since 1980."

Clean Energy Jobs Grew More Than Twice As Fast As The Rest Of The Economy Between 2003-2010.

According to a Brookings Institution study, clean energy segments (including biofuels, geothermal, solar photovoltaic, solar thermal, wind and others) grew at an average annual rate of 11.1 percent between 2003 and 2010, while the national economy grew by 4.2 percent annually.

Federal Support Has Been Key In Creating American Advanced Battery Industry.

The huge federal investment has single-handedly vaulted the US toward becoming the globe's major supplier of advanced batteries for plug-in vehicles.

Government funds have helped to finance 26 of 30 electric-vehicle battery and component plants now under construction - including nine lithium-ion battery manufacturing plants. Four of the nine are expected to be producing batteries by year's end.

By 2012, those 30 factories will have enough capacity to supply 20 percent of the world's advanced vehicle batteries, according to a new report by the US Department of Energy. That share could rise to 40 percent by 2015.

"There's no question this federal investment has given US battery manufacturers a huge push in the right direction," says Vishal Sapru, industry manager for energy and power systems for Frost & Sullivan, a market research firm. "The funding has contributed significantly to giving the US at least a chance to play in this arena."

Fuel Economy Standards, Biofuels Have Helped Drive Down Oil Imports.

And on top of those lies about green energy, O'Reilly implied that just because the Democrat lost in Wisconsin (because Walker outspent him 8 to 1) it means the whole country does not support any progressive ideas.

Which is just ridiculous, because if you look at all the national polls the majority of Americans side with the progressives on most issues, like Medicare, Social Security, Health Care, etc.

Election Supervisors Stop Florida Voter Purge
By: Steve - June 10, 2012 - 11:00am

And some of them are even Republicans. Wednesday, Florida Governor Rick Scott announced he would defy the Department of Justice and push forward with his purge of thousands of registered voters. The process has targeted hundreds of fully eligible U.S. voters.

Scott and other prominent Republicans in Florida argue that the Justice Department's actions were motivated by partisanship. Rep. Tom Rooney (R-FL), for example, directly accused Attorney General Eric Holder of "working to enable voter fraud" to get Obama elected.

But Scott's battle with the Department of Justice may end up being more symbolic than substantive. Why? All of Florida's county election supervisors, who are ultimately responsible for maintaining the voter rolls, refuse to execute the purge. Florida's 67 local election supervisors include 30 Republicans.

From the Miami Herald:
Florida's voter purge looks like it's all but over.

The 67 county elections supervisors - who have final say over voter purges - are not moving forward with the purge for now because nearly all of them don't trust the accuracy of a list of nearly 2,700 potential noncitizens identified by the state's elections office.

The U.S. Department of Justice had ordered the state to stop the purge.

"We're just not going to do this," said Leon County's elections supervisor, Ion Sancho, one of the most outspoken of his peers.

"I've talked to many of the other supervisors and they agree. The list is bad. And this is illegal."
Yesterday, ThinkProgress spoke with the Republican election supervisor of Pinellas County, Deborah Clark, who echoed Sancho's concerns. "We will not use unreliable data," Clark told ThinkProgress.

The reality is, Rick Scott's voter purge is dead (for now) - not because of partisan action by the Obama administration - but because he has failed to convince members of his own party that the purge is justified or legal.

Republicans Block Disclosure Of Political TV Ad Spending
By: Steve - June 10, 2012 - 10:00am

Remember when you saw every Republican in America say they support full disclosure of political spending. Well that was when the Democrats were doing it, and they wanted to know who was paying for their TV ads.

Now when it comes to finding out who is spending money to pay for Republican TV ads, suddenly they are opposed to it, and blocking the disclosure.

The Supreme Court's Citizen United decision has created a flood of television ad spending (hundreds of millions of dollars_ from outside groups, corporations, and individuals. The Justices who voted for the decision and its supporters argue that disclosure is all voters need to make informed decisions. But yesterday, a panel of House Republicans moved to keep much of this spending in the dark.

They voted on a new FCC guideline that would have forced the nation's top television stations to list the funders behind political advertisements online.

But the Republican House Appropriations financial services subcommittee voted along party lines to prohibit the FCC from implementing their proposal to add another layer of transparency to the political ad process. Committee Chair Hal Rogers (R-KY) argued that fiscal matters are private and should remain that way, from the LA Times:
The proposal, which had cleared the Federal Communications Commission in April, would require TV stations affiliated with the four top networks in the 50 largest markets to post political ad sales records online.

Stations are already required to make the records available to the public upon request, but most stations keep them in paper files, making it difficult to compile and track the information.
Democrats on the subcommittee tried to strip the rider which blocked the FCC from the funding bill. And despite several groups and media organizations calling for the records to be posted online, the TV stations themselves have bristled at the idea of making those records publicly available.

A widely circulated video made by journalism students at Kent State shows the difficulty they faced in attempting to get hard copies of those records. While Political operatives and other insiders will get access to much of the information through high-priced subscription services.

And of course you never hear a word about this from O'Reilly, because he does not want you to know the Republicans blocked the disclosure bill.

The Friday 6-8-12 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - June 9, 2012 - 11:00am

Laura (far-right loon) Ingraham filled in for O'Reilly again and her TPM was called: President Obama addresses the shaky economy. The partisan hack Ingraham said this:
INGRAHAM: Barack Obama surprised everyone Friday by actually appearing in Washington. After a few days of Hollywood schmoozing and a week after the worst job numbers in a year, he reported that 'the private sector is doing fine.' What??

The economy is growing at only 1.9% and the there are 552,000 fewer Americans working now than when he took office. This is not 'fine' by any measure - it is shocking and unacceptable. After Republicans jumped on his remarks, the President tried to clarify them later in the day, maintaining that the economy is not doing fine but the private sector has seen momentum.

On Thursday in Las Vegas the President urged Congress to 'get to work,' but that was just a few hours after he was at a Hollywood breakfast with young Hollywood stars. And on Wendesday he attended star-studded celebrity fundraising bashes in San Francisco and Beverly Hills.

There's a big game of pretend going on here - President Obama pretends that both he and the economy are working and he hopes voters don't catch on before November. I don't know what's worse - President Obama pretending the economy is working when it's not, or pretending that he's working when he's not.
Then Ingraham had a former Obama advisor Steve Murphy and reporter Michelle Fields of the conservative Daily Caller on to discuss it.

Murphy said this: "The President was telling the truth about the private sector. Over 4-million jobs have been created by the private sector in the last 27 months, but it's been offset by a necessary pullback in the public sector. We have one of the strongest economies in the world right now." Fields said this: "This President is so out of touch with the American people. He has spent more time campaigning than his five predecessors combined, schmoozing with people like George Clooney and Sarah Jessica Parker and people on Wall Street. It's no surprise that he thinks the economy is doing just fine because he's out of touch with Americans."

Then Ingraham was joined by Bill Clinton's former top aide Lanny Davis, who said this about Bill Clinton: "I believe President Clinton supports the policy of taxing the wealthy at a greater amount than the rest of us. I think what happened is that he was looking at the timing on increasing taxes at a particular moment in time. He probably regrets interjecting what looks like a difference with President Obama. We all agree with President Obama's policies - we're disagreeing with some of the tactics. I think President Obama has done a good job and he should be telling his story better."

Ingraham climed that President Obama's problem runs deeper than how he delivers his message, saying this: "You think it's a story-telling program, I think it's a fundamental misunderstanding of the economy on his part."

Comedian Chris Rock, a supporter of President Obama, jokingly compared President Obama to a zebra and mocked Mitt Romney's Mormon religion. So Ingraham had Janine Turner and entertainment reporter Jeanne Wolf on to discuss it. Wolf said this: "Chris Rock blasts everybody, but let's remember that Chris is funny and very strategic. He doesn't care if he made you or President Obama mad, he cares that his movie is publicized."

Earth to Laura Ingraham, Chris Rock is a COMEDIAN, so who carew aht he said about anybody, get a clue and report some real news.

Turner said this about Obama: "He goes to Hollywood and raises a lot of money with celebrities, but I don't know that it's going to help him with the American people who are looking at their paychecks and the unemployment numbers. I think Obama has a fun time in Hollywood, but there's a lot of hypocrisy. Can you imagine if a conservative had made the 'zebra' comment?"

After Democrats lost in Tuesday's Wisconsin gubernatorial recall election, many folks on the left seem genuinely worried that President Obama could lose in November. So Geraldo (the traitor) analyzed the fear on the left.

Geraldo said this: "Unions and big labor truly suffered a devastating blow on Tuesday, and I think unions will never be the same - they are really staggered and I think history will mark this as the end of a trend where unions disproportionately wielded their clout. And right now Mitt Romney is leading the President in half the polls, so liberals are trying to get ginned up again because the President could clearly lose."

Geraldo also said this: "Liberals are right to be very concerned, but before we overstate the panic on the left, liberal enthusiasm for Barack Obama is building again. Wisconsin could be used as a catalyst by groups like MoveOn." During his Friday news conference President Obama said he was mad that someone in the White House is leaking classified national security secrets. So former Clinton aide Nancy Soderberg was asked about the recent leaks.

Soderberg said this: "This is a President who has done more to crack down on leaks than anyone in history, and the administration has been investigating people who are leaking since they took office. Having been at the White House and having handled national security information, it is one of the most serious responsibilities you take. The President has been unequivocal in that he has authorized no leaks."

And finally Ingraham talked about the Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan, who is accused of killing 13 people at Fort Hood in 2009, showing up at his pre-trial motion with a beard, which is a violation of Army rules.

The Fox News intelligence correspondent Catherine Herridge was on, who has been investigating the Fort Hood massacre. Herridge said this: "Our investigation shows there was a series of people dropping the ball. In the five months that we looked at this there were moments when you felt you wanted to weep because it was so avoidable at so many points along the chain."

Herridge added that Hasan's superiors seemed to be obsessed with political correctness, saying this: "When Major Hasan was in the Army, at least twice he justified the use of suicide bombings and he also justified the writings of Osama bin Laden. Yet none of this appeared in his performance reviews. His supervisors seemed more worried about protecting him and promoting him than actually dealing with the problem."

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

Stupidity Alert: CNN Moved Right & Lost 52% Of It's Viewers
By: Steve - June 9, 2012 - 10:00am

CNN's abandonment of news to climb in bed with the tea party has turned into an epic disaster as the network has lost 52% of its viewers.

In a month where all three cable networks had ratings declines, no one did as badly as CNN. The network lost 52% of their total viewers. Wolf Blitzer's The Situation Room was down 46% in total viewers and 61% in the demo.

CNN's problems started when the network bosses got the bright idea that they should try to copy Fox News, and move to the right. After climbing into bed with the Tea Party Express and hiring far right wingers Erick Erickson and Dana Loesch led to the current ratings disaster, what would you expect CNN to do?

If you said hire more right wingers and conservatives, congratulations, you are qualified for an upper management position at CNN. The network's latest hire, Fox News castoff Margaret Hoover, let the cat out the bag, Executives at CNN have been looking for fresh faces and new talent with conservative perspectives.

Despite the fact that their network is dying because they hired a bunch of conservatives, executives at CNN are looking to hire even more conservatives.

The ratings suggest that viewers don't want a Fox News clone CNN. They want their news network back. CNN used to be the best cable news network for two reasons. They focused on news, and they had more reporters and bureaus around the world than anyone else. CNN has been cutting their staffing for years, and their focus is now on trying to be a Fox News clone.

What they don't seem to understand is that Fox News has branded itself so thoroughly with the conservative movement that their viewers are never going to leave Fox for CNN, and by moving to the right, they have alienated the left and middle who also will no longer watch CNN.

The truth is that the conservative cable news audience is tiny. Fox News only averaged 1.6 million primetime viewers in May, and those people are mostly the elderly who are sitting in their nursing homes with their televisions tuned to Fox.

However, CNN could be very successful by moving to the center/left. The network has more resources and is in more homes than MSNBC, and the vast majority of Americans don't belong to the polarized extremes of the left and right.

CNN's downfall should serve as a warning to the entire mainstream media that catering to the far right will only result in failure. There is only room for one Fox News. The audience isn't big enough to support two networks working the same side of the street.

Maybe one day someone in cable news will wise up and not cave to the few screaming idiots on the right, and realize that there is a large and hungry audience in the middle, and those people would like to see some real news.

The Thursday 6-7-12 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - June 8, 2012 - 11:00am

The far-right loon Laura Ingraham filled in for O'Reilly, her TPM was called: Eric Holder in the hot seat over Fast and Furious. The biased hack Ingraham said this:
INGRAHAM: There were fireworks Thursday on Capitol Hill as Attorney General Eric Holder was once again pummeled with questions from the House Judiciary Committee over the Justice Department's now-infamous 'Fast and Furious' operation.

What was intended to be a sting operation set up to track illegal gun purchases from the United States to Mexico led to thousands of firearms being transported into Mexico and then lost. Holder's story about his role in the operation has changed over time, and today his story got even murkier.

He also admitted that the White House has assisted in the crafting of the Justice Department's response to Congress. So they're talking to one another about how to best respond.
Then Katie Pavlich, and former government attorney John Flannery were on to discuss it. Flannery said this: "I thought Committee Chairman Darrell Issa lost control of the hearing, and I thought it was like a hack politician questioning an experienced trial attorney. The problem with this entire investigation has been amateurism, we have people posturing."

Pavlich disagreed and accused Attorney General Holder of stonewalling and sidestepping the important questions, saying this: "I don't know what is so hard about answering the questions, what did you know and when did you know it? Who in the Justice Department knew about 'Fast and Furious' and when? Today Eric Holder did nothing but obfuscate and say, 'I don't know anything, I don't read my memos.'

Then Dick Harpootlian and Kirsten Powers were on to talk about the so-called disarray among Democrats. Powers said this: "The people who you've mentioned love Hillary Clinton, so it's not terribly surprising to see them come out and criticize President Obama. That doesn't mean they aren't making valid criticisms, but we can put it over in that category of Hillary-lovers."

Harpootlian dismissed any notion that Democrats and President Obama are in political trouble, saying this: "This party is coming together - I'm hearing optimism and I'm seeing states gel. If you look at the exit polls for this week's Wisconsin special election, many of the people who voted for no recall said they'd vote for Barack Obama. This is the silly season when we're focusing on Wisconsin or focusing on what Ed Rendell said."

Proving once again that Laura Ingraham is nothing but a right-wing hack who does these biased segments to score political points for the Republican party. And O'Reilly is just as big of a right-wing hack as she is, for letting her do this nonsense, and for letting her host his show after claiming to be a non-partisan Independent. What kind of Independent lets Laura Ingraham host his show, it's ridiculous.

Then Ingraham talked about Government authorities who are looking into leaks of America's foreign policy secrets. Ingraham discussed the leaks with Republican Congressman Mike Rogers, and no Democrats.

Rogers said this: "Republicans and Democrats have worked together well on national security issues, and we are all saying that this has risen to a level that is unprecedented and incredibly dangerous to the national security of the United States. We need to be able to shut this off and we need to give tools to the intelligence community to be very tough with individuals they even suspect may be leaking."

So of course the far-right propagandist Laura Ingraham criticized President Obama for his silence about the leaks, saying this: "All this information is leaking out of the government and I haven't heard one statement from this President expressing anger and outrage. This is criminal and lives are at stake!"

Then Ingraham asked Republican strategist Ford O'Connell and Democratic strategist Tara Dowdell about Michelle Obama stepping up her role in the Obama reelection campaign.

O'Connell said this: "The Obama campaign is in trouble and they know it. "They've had a bad jobs report, they lost the Wisconsin recall and they're trying to stop the bleeding. They have a muddled message, it's that simple."

Dowdell described the First Lady as an extremely effective spokesman, saying this: "Michelle Obama is absolutely an asset to the President - she is smart and successful and savvy. But ultimately this will be a choice between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney."

Then Ingraham talked about Planned Parenthood partnering with Los Angeles public schools and will run a clinic at an L.A. high school, offering "emergency" contraception, pregnancy tests and counseling.

Ingraham had Dr. Laura Berman, a sexuality and relationship expert on who endorses the school-based clinic. Berman said this: "In California this is legal. You don't need parental consent to get birth control or STD testing. We have the highest teen pregnancy rate of any industrialized nation and 9-million teenagers contract an STD every single year, so this clinic is serving the community and providing these children with deeply-needed education."

And of course the partisan far-right hack Ingraham denounced the idea of placing a clinic at a public high school, saying this: "Schools are already overloaded with the burden of trying to teach kids of all different backgrounds, but now we have a clinic at schools? School is not a health clinic."

Then Ingraham talked about an Islamic group is suing the New York Police Department, claiming the NYPD is spying on Muslims in New Jersey and New York. Ahmed Rehab of the Council on Islamic-American Relations was on to discuss it.

Rehab said this: "This program is unconstitutional, and it's also un-American. The Pilgrims crossed an ocean to avoid this kind of religious harassment - this program was targeting an entire community, including individuals, restaurants, mosques, cab drivers. They weren't following criminal leads, but rather they were going after an entire community based solely on religious affiliation and political opinions."

Laura claimed that police have valid reasons to be suspicious of some Islamic groups, saying this: "Al Qaeda and its affiliates used the platform of the mosque to recruit and to radicalize and to gain supporters and money. Should the NYPD just say mosques are off limits? We all have a vested interest in keeping this nation safe, Muslims and non-Muslims alike."

Then the lame as ever pinheads and patriots nonsense.

Ed Schultz On The Fox Anti-Obama Attack Ad
By: Steve - June 8, 2012 - 10:00am

Here is what Ed Schultz said about Fox's Anti-Obama Video: "If There Was Any Doubt Fox News Is An Arm Of The Republican Party, It Ended Today"



Here is what O'Reilly said about the anti-Obama bias by Fox & Friends. That's right, nothing, zip, nada. Because O'Reilly ignores all the Obama bias by people at Fox.

The Wednesday 6-6-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 7, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Liberal orthodoxy takes a big hit in Wisconsin. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Governor Scott Walker is keeping his job after defeating progressive forces by a wide margin Tuesday. At issue is future compensation for state union workers; the government wants to cut that back, the left does not. But since cities and counties are going bankrupt all over the USA because they can't pay the big pensions, and because public workers often make far more than private workers, Americans are finally beginning to wise up.

Simply put, there's no more money! Governor Walker knows that and he's done a pretty good job turning the Wisconsin economy around. So why on earth would you want to throw the man out? Ideology, that's why. The question going forward is what the Wisconsin vote means for President Obama. Talking Points believes it is very bad news. Mr. Obama is running to the left this time around; four years ago he portrayed himself as a moderate.

The President has embraced gay marriage, will not support major cuts in federal spending without tax hikes, does not seem to be very concerned about the $16 trillion debt, and continues to promote his 'social justice' economic programs. The President also remains enthusiastic about massive government investment in 'green energy,' although time after time green energy investments prove to be unworthy.

So as we see in Wisconsin, the folks have had enough and they're not buying the progressive economic vision any more. Therefore the President finds himself on the wrong side of history.
And that my friends is right-wing spin, because if you look at the polls the people side with the Democrats on almost every issue except taxes and the defense. Yes Walker won, but he out-spent Barrett 8 to 1, a fact that O'Reily never mentioned, and when Marshall did he got mad at her for simply telling the truth.

Then Leslie Marshall and Mary Anne Marsh were on. Marshall said this: "I was disappointed by the vote in Wisconsin, but I wasn't surprised. Scott Walker had more than eight times the cash and he had more support outside of Wisconsin."

Marsh said this: "This has to be a wakeup call to Democrats for two reasons. One, labor unions have fewer members, less clout, and they have been tone deaf. Number two, all those Democrats who do have big bucks have to get all in. You can not be outspent like that and win."

Then the dishonest hack Dick Morris was on to talk about Bill Clinton. Morris said this: "I think Bill Clinton is still deeply stunned by the accusations of racism against him in the 2008 campaign. Secondly, I think he wants to remain the only Democratic president since FDR to get reelected after serving a full term."

Morris also said this: "The third thing is that I think he fundamentally disagrees with Obama - he is basically a free market, free enterprise, balance the budget guy and he dislikes Obama's agenda. On the other hand, he does not want Hillary and him to be blamed for Obama's defeat, so he's determined to do enough for Obama so he doesn't get blamed for the defeat."

Then O'Reilly asked Megyn Kelly if the United States Supreme Court will eventually decide whether same-sex marriage is protected by the Constitution.

Kelly said this: "This is an ongoing legal matter until the Supreme Court rules one way or the other. I hate to tell you this, but I don't think it's inching toward the end. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals voted in favor of gay marriage in California, but now opponents of gay marriage will ask the Supreme Court to hear this case. The Supreme Court might take it, but this case doesn't really require the high court to say gay marriage is constitutional. If the Supreme Court wants to punt on this case, it can probably do so."

Then O'Reilly had a right-wing pro-life doctor on to talk about abortion. Dr. Mary Davenport said this: "I think gender-based abortion happens in some communities more than others and in certain ethnic groups such as Indian Americans and Chinese Americans. There are some groups that really want to have a boy, especially if it's the third child and they already have two girls. They will do sex-selection abortions and in a lot of states it's perfectly legal. People who work in abortion clinics tend to favor abortion at any stage of gestation, no matter the reason."

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because it is not news.

And finally O'Reilly had a segment about Jesse Watters greatest hits from past months. That I did not report on because it was nothing but re-runs from past shows.

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

Neo-Nazi White Supremacist Elected To GOP Committee
By: Steve - June 7, 2012 - 10:00am

O'Reilly says there is no racism in the Republican party (or the Tea party) and nobody can prove there is, despite the fact that a top official was fired from the Tea party Express for making racist tweets, and now the GOP has elected a known Nazi loving racist to one of their county committee's.

Republicans in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania have elected Steve Smith, a lifelong white supremacist with close ties to neo-Nazi groups and groups like Aryan Nations, to the county's GOP Committee.

The elections, which took place in late April, were certified by the committee two weeks ago, and Smith notified supporters of his victory last week by posting a message to the online forum White News Now.

The Southern Poverty Law Center has documented Smith's participation with known skinhead organizations like Keystone State Skinheads, (now Keystone United) which he co-founded in 2001. And his racist activism extends far beyond violent rhetoric as well, into actual violence:
In March 2003, Smith and two other KSS members were arrested in Scranton for beating up Antoni Williams, a black man, using stones and chunks of pavement.

Smith pleaded guilty to terrorist threats and ethnic intimidation and received a 60-day sentence and probation.
Smith is also an active member of local Tea Party groups, a network that he used to gain support for his bid for the committee seat. According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, Smith referred to the Tea Party as "fertile grounds for our activists."

And btw, Luzerne County is not a small rural county either. According to the 2010 census, over 320,000 people live in Luzerne, many in the county seat of Wilkes-Barre, a large city of over 40,000 people.

But you will never know this information if you watch the O'Reilly Factor, because O'Reilly ignores this kind of news to cover for racism in the Republican and Tea party, as he denies there is any racism by either group.

The Tuesday 6-5-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 6, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The Battle for Wisconsin. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The election in Wisconsin and the presidential election as well are mostly about money and how to spend it. Liberals want the government to supply almost unlimited funds to the folks; conservatives want fiscal responsibility in order to stabilize the economy and promote self-reliance.

Money is important to Americans because the best material things in life are far from free and the USA is a society that likes its comforts. But more important, the American economy is built on trust - people all over the world invest here and buy oil with dollars because we are a stable nation that pays its debts and earns its way.

But that's changing under a very liberal president. Barack Obama has made no attempt to rein in government spending, asserting that government can stimulate the economy with massive investments. The result is record spending and a debt of $16 trillion.

Republicans reject Mr. Obama's approach and want to cut big time. That's what Governor Scott Walker did in Wisconsin, where he signed a law that makes it far more difficult for state workers to increase their compensation. Whenever you limit someone's ability to acquire money or security, that person most likely will get angry.

The battle between liberals and conservatives is getting bitter, and the situation in Wisconsin is just a preview of what is likely to happen all over the country when the presidency is on the line.
And what O'Reilly does not tell you is that most of that debt is from the Republicans and George W. Bush, his tax cuts, his wars, and his economic policies that almost put the country into a depression. O'Reilly reports the debt and blames it ALL on Obama, when Obama is only to blame for about 30% of it. Which is bias and dishonest journalism.

Then the two Republicans Mike Tobin and Carl Cameron were on to talk about the Winconsin election. Cameron said this: "When it comes to Governor Walker's handling of collective bargaining issues, there is a fairly predictable split - the left disagrees, the right agrees. But when it comes to independent swing voters, the type of voters who are likely to decide the election this fall, they seem to be leaning toward Walker." Tobin thinks that even a decisive win by Governor Walker won't convince the left to give up, saying this: "The people who forced this recall equate themselves to the civil rights movement - they're fighting a holy war. When they try to sleep at night they're going to think of something new to do."

Then Alan Colmes and Monica Crowley were on to talk about the son of P Diddy, his father Sean "P Diddy" Combs is worth about $500 million, but 18-year-old Justin Combs has accepted a football scholarship to UCLA.

Crowley said this: "I have no problem with this whatsoever. The United States is supposed to be a merit-based society and this kid has a 3.75 grade point average and apparently he is a superstar defensive back. He earned his scholarship."

Colmes thinks that Justin Combs could be making a statement of his own, saying this: "Maybe the young man is saying, 'I don't want parental assistance, I want to be able to go out in my life on my own.' Wouldn't that be a nice conservative point of view?"

And O'Reilly said Sean Combs should decline the scholarship, saying this: "I applaud Justin Combs - he's smart, a good athlete and he stayed out of trouble. However, his father should have said we're going to let another kid have the scholarship."

And for once I agree with O'Reilly, when your Father is worth $500 million you should not be taking a scholarship away from a poor kid that actually needs it to go to college and play football at a good school.

Then Nile Gardiner and Sarah Baxter were on to talk about the Queen's Jubilee in England. Which I could care less about because it is not happening in America.

Then John Stossel was on to talk about New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg pushing to ban large sugared drinks, and other anti-obesity efforts across the country.

Stossel said this: "The libertarian plan is nothing. Leave free people alone! Just because we have half-socialized medicine, do we have to give up all our other freedoms as well? Since all the stuff that's been done about obesity, people have gotten fatter! Why not have 'exercise police' come into our homes and make us run laps and do push-ups?"

So then O'Reilly disagreed saying that government has a legitimate role in promoting good health: "The anti-smoking campaign was brilliantly conducted by the federal government. We spent a lot of money on it, but smoking has dropped in this country, and I'd like to see the same thing done with nutrition."

Earth to O'Reilly, smoking did not drop because of the anti-smoking campaign by the federal Government, it dropped because the price for a pack of cigarettes went through the roof. Remember the Government also ran a campaign on marijuana and it failed, because marijuana use is up.

Then the Factor legal analysts Lis Wiehl and Faith Jenkins were asked when the Supreme Court will hand down its ruling on Obamacare.

Wiehl said this: "It will be June 25th at the latest, and I think the individual mandate will be overturned." Jenkins was far more reluctant to make a prediction, saying this: "The Supreme Court usually defers to Congress regarding issues surrounding the Commerce Clause, so I think this is going to be a close call."

Then they turned to accused child molester Jerry Sandusky, the former assistant football coach at Penn State. Wiehl said this: "The state absolutely has a strong case, and if he's convicted he's gone for life. There are eleven victims who will testify." Jenkins agreed, and so did O'Reilly.

And finally Charles Krauthammer was on to cry that even though President Obama has approved countless drone strikes against suspected terrorists, there has been deafening silence on the left.

Krauthammer said this: "There is also silence on just about every comparable issue. Think of Guantanamo Bay - for years the left complained that it was a denial of all America holds dear. Obama himself railed against it, but it remains open and there isn't a peep. Remember the Patriot Act, eavesdropping, preventative detention? All of these were the Bush administration 'tearing up the Constitution,' but all are still in place. And do you hear a word from the left?" Earth to right-wing idiots, the left is ok with the drone strikes because they are killing terrorists not American citizens. And they still are complaining about Gitmo, the Patriot Act, etc. You right-wing stooges just will not report on it.

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

Federal Judge Blocks Florida Voter Suppression Law
By: Steve - June 6, 2012 - 10:00am

A federal judge blocked much of Florida's year-old voter suppression law today as an unconstitutional infringement on speech and voting rights.

And of course O'Reilly never said a word about it, even though he does a legal segment every week, and claims to be the man who will hold politicians accountable for their actions.

Last year, the Republican-held Florida legislature passed HB 1355, which imposed harsh new restrictions on third-party voter registration groups, requiring them to turn in completed registration forms 48 hours - to the minute - after completion, or face fines.

Outside groups often register hundreds of people at a time and, before this law, had used a quality-control process that took days to ensure the accuracy of submitted forms.

With the onerous restrictions now in place, some groups like the League of Women Voters were ultimately forced to cease registration drives in the Sunshine State.

In blocking the new law, U.S. District Judge Robert Hinkle wrote this:
The statute and rule impose a harsh and impractical 48-hour deadline for an organization to deliver applications to a voter registration office and effectively prohibit an organization from mailing applications in.

And the statute and rule impose burdensome record-keeping and reporting requirements that serve little if any purpose, thus rendering them unconstitutional even to the extent they do not violate the NVRA.

The plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm if an injunction is not issued, first because the denial of a right of this magnitude under circumstances like these almost always inflicts irreparable harm, and second because when a plaintiff loses an opportunity to register a voter, the opportunity is gone forever.
Though state judges and the Department of Justice have already taken steps to prevent voter disenfranchisement, Hinkle's decision is the first time a federal court has blocked one of the most recent round of state voter suppression laws.

Voters have already begun to experience the effects of new anti-voting laws. Minority voter registration is down significantly from the 2008 election. Among Latinos nationwide, voter registration has dropped five percent; for blacks, registration rates are down seven percent.

New York University's Brennan Center, which studies voting rights issues, hailed the decision. "Florida's law and others approved in the past year represent the most significant cutback in voting rights in decades," said director Wendy Weiser. "Today's decision will help turn the tide."

Justice Department Demands Florida Stop Voter Purge
By: Steve - June 6, 2012 - 9:00am

And of course O'Reilly has still not said one word about this story, because a Republican is doing it and he is glad they are trying to keep Democrats from voting in Florida so his man Romney has a better chance to beat Obama in Florida.

The Justice Department sent a letter to Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner Thursday evening demanding the state cease purging its voting rolls because the process it is using has not been cleared under the Voting Rights Act.

The DOJ also said that Florida's voter roll purge violated the National Voter Registration Act, which stipulates that voter roll maintenance should have ceased 90 days before an election, which given Florida's August 14 primary, meant May 16.

This is a big deal folks, and O'Reilly has been silent about it. This is the kind of real news story journalists were meant to report on, instead of abortion, or having has been comedians on to make jokes about liberals, and yet O'Reilly (the so-called hard news Independent journalist) will not even mention it.

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

The TPM was called: The Wisconsin Recall Vote. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: In March of 2011 Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker signed a law eliminating most collective bargaining for Wisconsin state employees. The left went wild, protesting vehemently against the new law; there was even vandalism at the State House.

So in order to punish Governor Walker, the Democratic Party pushed for a recall and got enough signatures to put it to a vote. The final judgment will be made Tuesday and the stakes are very high for President Obama, who does not want to constrain union bargaining power. But Governor Walker has a pretty good story to tell - when he took office in January of 2011, Wisconsin unemployment stood at 7.7%; now it's down to 6.7%.

On the spending front, when Walker took office there was a budget deficit of $3.6 billion; now the deficit is projected to be $143 million, and astounding drop. All in all, Walker seems to be succeeding economically in Wisconsin, so the vote comes down to ideology. The left doesn't like him so they want to throw him out.

If Governor Walker does keep his job, President Obama, American labor and the hard-core left will all be disappointed. It's not so much about Walker himself, it's about the message that will be sent - big spending and big government versus tough measures when it comes to taxpayer dollars.
Then Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham was on to discuss the Wisconsin vote. Williams said this: "I'm not comfortable with recalls, unless they're about criminal corruption. But if this was 2014 I would vote against Governor Walker because he used a sledgehammer and a Republican majority in the legislature to absolutely crush the unions. This guy said he was going to produce jobs, but by every measure he hasn't done it."

Ham said that a Walker victory will not bode well for President Obama and other Democrats. Ham said this: "What the President has to worry about is that if it turns out well for Scott Walker, then people have not gotten the message from unions. This was going to be the end of the world, but things are looking pretty good in Wisconsin and that does not help unions or the President."

Then Brit Hume was on to talk about President Obama's political guru David Axelrod who claimed that the vast majority of the campaign's ads have been positive. Hume said this: "Positive ads don't make news very much, because they don't strike sparks in the way negative ads do. Negative ads get replayed on cable news and they also get more reaction than do positive ads. I suspect that what Axelrod said is basically true, but it's a little misleading. I think Obama has a record that is such a burden to him that he has no choice but to go negative."

O'Reilly then told Romney he should go negative, and said that going negative may be an effective strategy for Mitt Romney, saying this: "If I'm Romney, I'm running negative ads all day long saying that President Obama doesn't know what he's doing, he's killing the economy."

Which is about as biased and hypocritical as you can get, because when Democrats go negative O'Reilly attacks them for it, but somehow it's ok for Romney to do it and O'Reilly even says he should.

Then O'Reilly cried about the Actress Sarah Jessica Parker, who will host a lavish fundraiser for President Obama, that said in a TV spot President has created 4-million new jobs.

Billy had Democrat Austan Goolsbee and Republican economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin on to discuss it.

Holtz-Eakin said this: "There is more lipstick on that number than on Sarah Jessica Parker. There are 1.4 million fewer jobs than there were in December of 2008, the last month of the Bush presidency. And for those who do have jobs, we've seen no income growth. The record is not satisfactory and the policies haven't worked."

Goolsbee insisted that the 4-million number is valid, saying this: "The 4-million jobs are over the last two years, and since the recession ended they've added more than that. That's how candidates running for reelection have always counted jobs."

Goolsbee also dismissed the notion that health care reform is making small businesses wary of hiring, saying this: "The health care bill exempts small businesses from the employer mandate and it gives a big tax credit to help reduce the cost of their health care."

So after all that O'Reilly came up with this partisan garbage: "Two-thirds of the American people say the country is on the wrong track and I don't know how an incumbent president gets reelected with those numbers."

Then the body language bimbo Tonya Reiman was on, which I do not report on because it's nonsense.

Then the biased hack Tim Graham of the conservative Media Research Center was on to evaluate the political leanings of the morning programs on the three broadcast networks.

Graham said this: "These shows reach a lot of female voters, and we have found that there is just a dramatic bias in terms of favoring Obama and the Democrats. They have been very harsh to the Republicans throughout this primary season, to the point where I think Mitt Romney really didn't want to do many morning show interviews because they were so tough. They were very swift to attack Republicans, while Barack Obama and Michelle Obama both get the puffball interviews."

And finally O'Reilly had his joke of a so-called Reality Check segment, which is not worth reporting on because it's a fraud segment. It's just O'Reilly putting his right-wing spin on something someone else said. With no guest to balance him out.

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

The Friday 6-1-12 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - June 2, 2012 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: More bad economic news. Crazy O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The unemployment rate ticked up to 8.2% in May, the first increase in 11 months, and just 69,000 jobs were created. That is dismal and does not bode well for President Obama's reelection. The question now becomes why is the economy so bad, and Talking Points believes the answer is simple - fear!

Many employers are afraid to hire people because they don't know whether consumers will buy or what their health care costs are going to be. Also, the folks themselves aren't spending much because they don't know if they're going to have jobs next month. Investors are spooked as well, with crazy oil prices and a very unstable stock market eroding confidence.

Add to that madness in Europe, insanity in Iran, and the Far East slowing down, and you have a perfect storm of economic fear that no president could overcome. Mr. Obama made a huge economic bet by spending trillions of dollars on a variety of projects. That has not worked and the economy is not improving quickly enough to allay fears.

The President continues to say his strategy will pay off soon, but that's more about hope than anything else. Instead of big government pouring money into the economy, Mr. Romney wants to allow the private sector to drive the train. The decision is between the government running the economy or private business being in charge. Many Americans have no clue about economics, but they do understand one thing - they are afraid!
It's not fear, it's Republican business owners holding back on hiring to make Obama look bad. And talk about bias, O'Reilly only reports on the economy when it's bad news, when it's good news he just ignores it because it makes Obama look good. And compared to what the economy did under Bush it's good news, because we are still into positive job growth every month, and gas prices are way down, which is another thing O'Reilly has suddenly ignored.

Then O'Reilly talked about the unemployment rate with Christian Dorsey, director of a liberal economic think tank. Dorsey said this: "We had a lot more people entering the workforce, and not enough jobs were created to offset the number of people entering. This is mostly people who were on the sidelines in previous months. We also have a loss of demand that started with the recession and has never really been replaced."

Economist Ben Stein blamed high unemployment on uncertainty, saying this: "There is so much fear all around and businesses are sitting on the largest cash hoard since records have been kept. Stein added that many of our problems stem from economic turmoil in Europe and urged the U.S. to "work with the European monetary authorities to say we are not going to allow a collapse in Greece, Spain or Italy."

Then the biased loon O'Reilly said this: "President Obama has lost the confidence of the American people economically."

Then Mary Anne Marsh and radio talk show host Janine Turner hashed out the issue of media bias. The Republican Turner said this: "I love that John Sununu got in there and debated, because the mainstream media serves President Obama. The liberal press definitely wants to support President Obama and help him win."

Marsh accused Sununu of manipulating viewers, saying this: "If you pick a fight with the media, the voters ignore the topic at hand and they turn their anger on the media."

Then O'Reilly had the insane Republican Congressman Joe Walsh on to spin for the right-wing, he accused Democrats of encouraging dependence on government.

Walsh said this: "The Democrat Party is the party of government. Look what the President has been doing - he has been running around from interest group to interest group promising things. They look at it as buying votes - once you're hooked on government you're going to keep voting for them. And we're at a scary point because we have the highest rate of government dependency since the end of World War II and we can't support all of this!"

Walsh also defended his claim that some black leaders are fine with dependency, saying this: "Jesse Jackson does want blacks dependent upon government and he doesn't want blacks to have opportunity. The best way to give a hand up to African American inner city parents is to give them school choice, but Jesse Jackson stands in the way of that. He wants to imprison poor black kids in under-performing schools."

Then Geraldo was on to talk about the news that George Zimmerman's bail has been revoked in the Trayvon Martin murder case. Geraldo said this: "This is the biggest day in this case so far, because the court claims George Zimmerman and his wife lied about their financial wherewithal when bond was set. They said they were indigent, but they had a $200,000 PayPal account from sympathetic donors. The importance of this is that there is only one witness to what happened between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin, and that is Zimmerman! His credibility is an issue."

Rivera also discussed John Edwards being acquitted on one charge of corruption and effectively beating the rap, saying this: "I'm not surprised - my legal colleagues here at Fox were almost unanimous in believing the government's case was extremely weak. The verdict was almost a slam dunk and I can't believe the prosecutors brought this case."

Then O'Reilly had re-runs of Dennis Miller, called the best of Dennis Miller, which is just laughable, because there is no best Dennis Miller anything.

And finally Arthel Neville and Greg Gutfeld were taking the week off, so O'Reilly had the week's dumbest things by himself.

Billy said this: "The winner was the D.C. school that held a Trayvon Martin Day and handed out Skittles and iced tea, the items Martin was carrying the night he was shot to death. What happened to Trayvon Martin was awful, but we don't know the full extent of the story. To expose young kids to a speculative situation is irresponsible, to say the least."

Which is laughable, because O'Reilly speculates every night, then slams other people for speculating. Making him the dumbest person of the week, if not the year.

Then the highly edited Factor mail, and the lame as ever pinheads and patriots garbage that I do not report on.

O'Reilly Ignoring Biased Florida Voter Purge Story
By: Steve - June 1, 2012 - 11:00am

This is a big news story and the so-called non-partisan Independent Bill O'Reilly has not said one word about it, not a word. Because it's a Republican doing it, and because it blocks liberals from voting. Now if a Democrat were doing it and it blocked conservatives from voting, O'Reilly would be all over it.

The massive voter purge order by Republican Governor Rick Scott in Florida has been plagued with errors, resulting in election officials notifying hundreds of eligible U.S. citizens that they are ineligible to vote.

In response, the Scott administration has vowed to intensify its efforts to remove registered voters from the rolls.

Initially, the state created a list of over 180,000 purported non-citizens by comparing their list of registered voters to the state motor vehicle database. The state forwarded about 2700 names from that list to local officials to remove from the rolls.

But yesterday, in the face of mounting problems with the limited effort, Scott administration officials made it clear they were just getting started, saying this:
Chris Cate, a spokesman for the state Division of Elections, defended the state's actions. "It's very important we make sure ineligible voters can't cast a ballot," he said in an email to the Herald on Tuesday.

He said the state continues to identify ineligible voters, saying the state Division of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles has agreed to update information using a federal database that the elections division couldn't access directly.

"We won't be sending any new names to supervisors until the information we have is updated, because we always want to make sure we are using the best information available," Cate wrote. "I don't have a timetable on when the next list of names will be sent to supervisors, but there will be more names."
It's unclear how the new procedures alluded to by Cate will solve the systemic problems with the voter purge list. There have been several individuals targeted by the list that have been citizens their entire lives. Therefore, there seems to be a major problems beyond outdated citizenship information.

In fact, the entire process of database matching to remove voters is problematic. The Fair Elections Legal Network, which is challenging the purge, noted that database matching is notoriously unreliable and "data entry errors, similar-sounding names, and changing information can all produce false matches."

The first list was also created with information accessible to the state motor vehicle administration, which the former Secretary of State Kurt Browning considered so unreliable he refused to release it. Then Browning resigned in February.

Fox & Friends Silent About Anti-Obama Attack Ad
By: Steve - June 1, 2012 - 10:00am

Thursday morning Fox & Friends did not address the widespread criticism of the 4-minute anti-Obama attack video it aired twice on Wednesday.

The video, which was loaded with misleading attacks on President Obama's economic record, drew widespread criticism.

Baltimore Sun television critic David Zurawik wrote that "Any news organization that puts up this kind of video is rotten to the core."

The Associated Press described it as "a format that looked similar to a campaign advertisement."

Even conservative blogger Ed Morrissey, while noting that he wouldn't "disagree with much, if anything," in the video, asked, "Should a news organization produce and publish attack ads like this?"

And btw, Fox has now pulled the video from its websites.

Bill Shine, Fox News executive vice president of programming, said this on Wednesday: "The package that aired on 'Fox & Friends' was created by an associate producer and was not authorized at the senior executive level of the network. This has been addressed with the show's producers."

Washington Post media writer Erik Wemple wrote that Shine's "statement answers one question -- whether Fox News is standing by the video -- even as it raises many others."
1) Are we supposed to believe that the producer was working on his own? The video itself reflects an enormous amount of splicing and searching and cutting and producing, a fact noted by one of the "Fox & Friends" co-anchors this morning. Oh, and it's about the president of the United States. Such an effort got around the suits?

There's another point related to the video's raw ambition. Would a producer really sink hours and hours of tedium into a package of this sort under the notion that it would displease his bosses? Or would he undertake such a heave only if he thought it would send them into fits of Foxical joy?

2) So the senior executive level never "authorized" the video. Does that mean they never viewed it? And what would they have done if they had engaged more thoroughly with the thing? Would they have killed it or just asked the producer to stick a couple of pro-Obama snippets in there for "balance"?

3) What's the interpretation of Fox News's claim to have addressed the matter "with the show's producers." How do you address what gave rise to this video? Hey guys, next time let's disguise our intentions a little better.
Wemple went on to note that while Fox "has piled the depravity high in this episode," it "did the right thing, however imperfectly. It bailed on a video that bore unfairness in its every second, and it did so in the course of a single day."

As Media Matters reported Wednesday, the Fox News ad was the equivalent of $100,000 of free advertising for the Republican Party.

And of course O'Reilly never said a word about any of it, but if CNN or MSNBC put out a 4 minute ad like that about Mitt Romney O'Reilly would scream bloody murder and slam them for the whole show, if not a week of shows.

Romney Lied About Government Jobs Under Obama
By: Steve - June 1, 2012 - 9:00am

Labor Department statistics show that government employment has decreased by 608,000 since February 2009. But that did not stop Romney, Fox News, and Politico from reporting Mitt Romney's false claim that Quote: "We have 145,000 more government workers under this president."

Fact: Government Employment Has Decreased By 608,000 Under President Obama!

From the Bureau Of Labor Statistics: According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, government employment has decreased by 608,000 from February 2009 through April 2012.

In July 2011, PolitiFact.com Rated As "True" The Statement That There Are "Half A Million Fewer Government Employees Now Than There Were When Obama Took Office."

And yet, Fox News, Politico Repeat Romney's False Claim About Govt. Employment.

Politico: At A Colorado Campaign Stop, "Romney Said" That "We Have 145,000 More Government Workers Under This President."

Romney also continued his attack on Obama's 2009 stimulus package, saying that he will seek to assist private sector employment at the expense of public sector jobs.

ROMNEY: "That stimulus he put in place, it didn't help private sector jobs, it helped preserve government jobs and the one place we should have shut back -- or cut back was on government jobs."

ROMNEY: "We have 145,000 more government workers under this president. Let's send them home and put you back to work."

It's all lies, but that did not stop Romney from saying it anyway, and it sure did not stop Fox and Politico from reporting it. Now you know who the liar is, and who is biased in their reporting of the lies.

And of course you will never hear a word about any of this from O'Reilly, because he is a Romney supporter and he is glad they are helping Romney spread his lies about Obama.