The Tuesday 4-30-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 1, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: A shocking report about the Boston terror family. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: According to the Boston Herald, the Tsarnaev family received more than $100,000 in taxpayer-funded assistance since it came to the USA in 2002. Even though the family was granted asylum and got an amazing amount of money from 'we the people,' the mother is accusing America of murder.

This story speaks not only to the immigration mess, but also to the welfare chaos. Why are we supporting questionable foreign folks? The Tsarnaev family wasn't persecuted in southern Russia, they freely went back there. The whole thing is a giant con that led to the murder of four Americans and horrific wounds to scores of others.

But where is the outrage from President Obama and Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, who didn't even want to make public the welfare payments to the Tsarnaev family? Other than Massachusetts State Representative David Linsky, who is demanding that this situation never happen again? It's business as usual - let pretty much anyone into the USA and pay them with taxpayer money.
Then Alan Colmes and Monica Crowley were on to talk about the O'Reilly Talking Points Memo. Where O'Reilly told Colmes to shut up, because he did not want to hear his opinion on the issue.

Colmes said this: "I don't share your anger about this whatsoever. They were in the country legally and we had no idea ten years ago that they would be doing a terrorist act. The family's Mercedes Benz was ten years old and worth a couple of thousand dollars. This is manufactured outrage to go after people on welfare and immigrants."

Colmes and his pesky facts triggered another Bill O'Reilly meltdown. O'Reilly was having a ball spewing his phony outrage over the welfare benefits the mother of the Boston bombing suspects received, when he made the mistake of asking Alan Colmes what he thought about O'Reilly's comment. Colmes told him he was "manufacturing outrage" and the next thing you know, O'Reilly was screaming "Shut up! Shut up!"

And btw, the family of four got $100,000 over 10 years, which is $10,000 a year, and hardly a lot of money, it's at the poverty level. Not to mention, they got most of that money during the Bush years, and yet, O'Reilly blamed it on Obama and the liberals.

The conservative Monica Crowley of course agreed with O'Reilly, saying this: "We're talking about taxpayer money for cash, for food stamps, for housing. We're paying for Dzhokhar's hospital bills and we paid for Tamerlan's defense when he beat up his girlfriend in 2009. The list goes on and on! We have an entitlement society that is now out of control."

Then Former federal prosecutor Marc Mukasey was on to explain the legalities involved in the Boston terror prosecution.

Mukasey said this: "Dzhokhar was arrested in a boat, and if you are arrested without a warrant you need to be presented to a judge who will read you your Miranda rights within 48 hours. But the government could have asked a judge to re-arrest him in the hospital and it could have lawfully kept him from getting his Miranda rights for up to four months!"

Now that's a good one, how do you re-arrest someone, that sounds like a crazy statement O'Reilly would make, it's ridiculous.

Mukasey also analyzed the FBI's failure to monitor Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his widow Katherine Russell, saying this: "Once Tamerlan was identified two years ago, the FBI could have been monitoring her social media and phone and email accounts."

Then Charles Krauthammer was on to evaluate President Obama's Tuesday press conference. With no guest from the left for balance to give the opposing view, so all you had were the opinions of two right-wing hacks, O'Reilly and Krauthammer.

Krauthammer said this: "Two things surprised me. First is that Obama was asked about the story that broke last night on Fox saying that the State Department is threatening employees who want to talk about what really happened at Benghazi. The President said he hadn't heard about that, which is a little hard to believe and stunning."

Are you kidding me Krauthammer, why would it be hard to believe and stunning that the President had not heard about some garbage Fox was reporting, give me a break.

Krauthammer also said this: "The second thing that surprised me was that no one in the press corps asked about the Mirandizing of the terrorist in the hospital. This administration allowed him to be Mirandized and to shut up partway through the interrogation. That is a scandal of the first order. They should have declared him an 'enemy combatant' so they could interrogate him as much as needed."

Then John Stossel was on to talk about last year Chicago had more than 500 murders; the vast majority of both victims and killers were black males. So we had two right-wing white guys to discuss it, what a joke.

Stossel said this: "It's wrong to focus on Chicago, because other cities are worse and it's also wrong to focus on race. It's much more your fault because if you weren't supporting the drug war the drug laws would go away and most of this crime would go away."

O'Reilly took issue with Stossel's proposal to fight crime by legalizing drugs, saying this: "You're living in the land of Oz on that one, I think the criminals would just find another way to make easy money."

Then Kimberly Guilfoyle and Lis Wiehl were on to talk about the murder trail of Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell.

Wiehl said this: "I predict he will be found guilty on five counts of murder, murder of the four infants and murder of the woman patient who was killed. But it was a long trial and it will take some time for the jury to decide. The main question is whether the babies were actually born, were they alive before Gosnell and others killed them?"

Guilfoyle said this: "I was there yesterday for the closing arguments and I thought the defense did a decent job except for repulsively bringing up the race card. They said this was a prosecution based on race, but the majority of the aborted babies were also black. I concur that he'll be found guilty and will get life without the possibility of parole."

Then the right-wing stooge Jesse Watters was on to talk about the celebrities and media types at the White House Correspondents' Association gala dinner in Washington. And of course then O'Reilly edited the video to only show you the replies they wanted you to see.

He asked some people whether there is in fact a liberal bias in the press, and got these replies: "Probably on both sides, yes" ... "Are they biased as a whole? That's just dumb, it's silly" ... "I think there's bias everywhere" ... "Fox puts forth the notion that there are two sides to every story and I agree with that."

Watters also reported that he had the distinct pleasure of speaking with Korean singer Psy, whose "Gangnam Style" dance was a runaway sensation. "He's incredibly out of shape," Watters revealed, "and he was sweating profusely through the entire red carpet. They had to wipe the guy down after that."

Now there is some hard-hitting journalism, haha, not. It's biased one sided tabloid fake journalism, and this entire weekly Jesse Watters segment is a waste of time on a so-called hard news show.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Wounded Warrior Windfall. Billy said this: "The Wounded Warrior poster signed by all six living First Ladies brought in $51,000 from a bidder who prefers to remain anonymous. When combined with sales of the $25 poster replica, nearly $100,000 was raised for this excellent cause."

The Monday 4-29-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 30, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The Factor's Excellent Adventure to Washington, D.C. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Every year the White House Correspondents Association holds a dinner that raises money for kids, and this year Fox News Ed Henry was in charge. Conan O'Brien headlined the dinner and made this joke about your humble correspondent: 'Bill O'Reilly is working on his next book about the killing of Jesus. It'll be the first time in history that Jesus' death is blamed on Obamacare.'

Thanks for the publicity, Conan. I was sitting next to Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, a no-spin guy who loves his country and has stayed true to his working-class roots in Queens. After the dinner the schmoozing began and I'm not very good at that.

Neither is Barbra Streisand - she was at the dinner but everybody was kept away from her. She was certainly the diva of the evening, but most of the other celebrities were more down to earth.

The primary reason I went to the dog-and-pony show was to help Ed Henry and Fox News correspondent Jennifer Griffin, who is working with the Independence Fund, which helps military people who lost limbs in Iraq and Afghanistan.

We want to get these patriots a high tech marvel called the Trackchair, which can go everywhere and gives amputees a degree of control over their lives. The chairs cost more than $10,000 each and Jennifer and I want to get at least 50 more of them.

We've developed a program that could raise an enormous amount of money and President Obama is going to help. We must help the wounded warriors who lost their limbs on the battlefield and we will get those Trackchairs for those heroes. Fox News is helping me do it and Jennifer Griffin is a saint.
Then O'Reilly had the right-wing hack Bernie Goldberg on, and he asked him why the Press still loves President Obama.

Goldberg said this: "They have a lot invested in the President. I once interviewed a network news correspondent who told me not to expect the press to go after Nelson Mandela. When I asked what Mandela had to do with anything, he told me that a lot of journalists see Barack Obama as Nelson Mandela. He's a hero to them and an historic figure; they didn't just want to be eyewitnesses to history, they wanted to help define history. They have so much invested in him that they'll never be skeptical of him, and they are willing to sacrifice their credibility because they are so in love with Barack Obama!"

Which is just ridiculous, because the media hammers Obama all the time, O'Reilly and Goldberg just ignore it and refuse to admit it. They are just mad that the media is not slamming Obama like they did their hero George W. Bush, even though Bush deserved it and Obama does not, because he has been a good President, unlike Bush who was terrible.

Then Juan Williams was on, who denied that most of the media is in the tank for Obama.

Williams said this: "Bernie Goldberg was going down the right path when he said this guy's iconic. But if you look at the press today all you see is how 'Obama lost' the gun control vote. And anytime there's an Internet conspiracy coming from the right it's immediately reflected in the print press."

O'Reilly said that a compliant media is dangerous for the republic, saying this: "The press is supposed to be adversarial toward those in power, but it's not in the case of Barack Obama. We stand alone here at Fox News in bringing skepticism - we tell the folks when the President does something right and when he does something wrong."

And that is just laughable, because when Bush was in office O'Reilly and Fox News defended and covered for everything he did, O'Reilly is a biased fool who can not even see the truth about the media or Fox News.

Then Brit Hume was on to talk about a report in the New York Times that the CIA is transferring bags of cash to Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai. Hume defended the money transfer as fairly standard practice.

Hume said this: "The question is whether this is the sort of thing the CIA does, and the answer is yes. If Afghanistan is a place we care about, we need influence and you get it however you can. If Iran is in there bidding on Karzai's loyalty, perhaps we have to bid, too. There are parts of the world where you're choosing among gangsters, and Afghanistan is not going to be turned into Switzerland."

But O'Reilly slammed the blatant corruption, saying this: "I don't think we should be spending all this blood and treasure on corrupt criminals. It's our tax money and the military blood that are propping this guy up, we're in business with a gangster!"

O'Reilly also said we are losing in Afghanistan and that we should just get out and cut our losses. Which is what liberals have been saying for years, and O'Reilly called them all un-American traitors who want to cut and run. Now he agrees with us, but suddenly he is not a traitor for saying it, what a jerk.

Then O'Reilly had the dishonest pro-life activist Lila Rose on, who has conducted an undercover sting of abortion clinics. That was dishonest, and she used an edited video to claim something that never happens.

Rose said this: "The main point of this investigation, is to show the inhuman and abusive practices, the brutality of abortion in America. We've allowed our nation to support an industry that is brutalizing children who are old enough to survive outside the womb. And these clinics are killing babies who are struggling for their lives after surviving failed abortion attempts."

Which is a lie, because she edited out from her video the portion in which the clinician makes clear that the situation they're talking about has never happened in her experience and the discussion is hypothetical, and the video shows the counselor explaining to the woman that the doctor would have to resuscitate the baby if that situation did occur.

O'Reilly said this: "The pro-choice lobby will say these are the extremes, these are the irresponsible people."

And not once did O'Reilly report that she edited the video, or the fact that it was a hypothetical, and that it never happens. Proving both O'Reilly and Rose are dishonest and biased pro-life loons. I will have a blog on this with more details tomorrow.

Then the biased right-wing stooge Adam Carolla was on to talk about officials in Washington State who have decided that terms like "penmanship," "fisherman," and "freshman" will be purged from state laws, to be replaced by gender-neutral terms.

Carolla said this: "Just take something like immigration, which used to include the term 'illegal alien.' Then it became 'illegal immigrant' and now it is 'unauthorized immigrant.' Hey lawmakers and politicians, how about if you start doing what we want you to do, which is to fill the potholes, get the schools up and running, and weed out the Al Qaeda sleeper cells living among us?"

O'Reilly then reported on another outrageous edict from the language cops, saying this: "Some realtors will no longer use the term 'master bedroom' because it has a slave connotation. Now it's the 'owner's suite.' We're having a contraction of the language."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Get your bids in soon. Billy said this: "The auction of the Wounded Warrior Project poster signed by all six living First Ladies, including 91-year-old Nancy Reagan, ends Tuesday morning. Place your bids here at"

Gun Group Raffles Off AR-15 To Resist President Obama
By: Steve - April 30, 2013 - 10:00am

The Tennessee Firearms Association is raffling off one AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, the same weapon used by Adam Lanza to kill 20 children and six adults in Newtown.

According to the promotion, "TFA is giving away a BUSHMASTER AR15 to advance the effort to resist Barack Obama, the federal government and even a few in Tennessee state government who are determined to destroy your 2nd Amendment rights."

Which is ridiculous, because background checks that are supported by 90% of the people would not destroy anybody's 2nd amendment rights. Not to mention, nowhere in the 2nd amendment does it say you have the right to own an assault rifle.

The promotion began earlier in April to coincide with the Senate's consideration of gun violence prevention legislation. And while contestants do not have to be a TFA member to enter, the promotion notes TFA would appreciate donations, ending with, "Our rights under the 2nd Amendment and even the Bill of Rights are not safe in Tennessee! We must act with force and determination to protect, preserve and restore our rights!"

The Tennessean reports that the raffle has already drawn more than 10,000 entries for the Monday drawing.

And Tennessee gun groups have little reason to fear for their representatives position on guns. Both Senators Bob Corker (R) and Lamar Alexander (R) voted against the Senate bill to expand background checks -- two of 46 Senators who filibustered a safety measure that is approved by 90 percent of Americans.

"This may illustrate perfectly what I've been saying all along: They create these issues to raise money. That just stokes the fire to frighten folks," former state Rep. Debra Maggart said of the motive for the raffle.

Maggart herself was a target of both TFA and the National Rifle Association in her Republican primary last year.

Tea Party Loon Says Muslim Brotherhood Controls Obama
By: Steve - April 29, 2013 - 10:00am

Tea Party Congressman Louie Gohmert (R-TX) told a conservative radio program last week that the Obama administration bungled the investigation of the Boston bombing due to internal guidance from the Muslim Brotherhood.

Appearing on World Net Daily's radio show, Gohmert said he thinks that Attorney General Eric Holder read bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev his Miranda rights to shut him up and undermine the investigation into the brothers possible ties to radical Islam.

"It's very clear to everybody but this administration that radical Islam is at war against us," he said, before noting that "Obama has displayed a real pattern of incompetence in responding to the threat from extremists during his tenure."

He then suggested that members of the Muslim Brotherhood have infiltrated the Obama administration and are leading the president astray:
GOHMERT: It's very clear to everybody but this administration that radical Islam is at war agains us. Radical Islam is at war with us. Thank God for the moderates that don't approve of what's being done. But this administration has so many Muslim Brotherhood members that have influence that they just are making wrong decisions for America.
And btw, Gohmert has no proof of any claims he made, it's all his opinion and 100% pure speculation, he has no evidence that any of it is true.

Last year, Gohmert joined a small group of conservative lawmakers led by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) to demand that the Inspectors General of four government agencies investigate "deep penetration" by the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S. government.

The Obama administration condemned the lawmakers for using false and inaccurate information to smear anyone that happens to be Muslim.

On Friday, Gohmert took the the House floor to suggest that Obama's political correctness prevented the FBI from asking deceased Boston marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev about Islam during their 2011 interview.

And even O'Reilly does not report any of this nonsense, because it's garbage and there is no proof it's true, plus it also makes Republicans look bad so O'Reilly ignores the story to cover for the crazy Republicans.

Supreme Court Justice Scalia Sitting At The Fox News Table
By: Steve - April 28, 2013 - 11:00am

Talk about admitting you are a biased judge, the Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia was sitting at the Fox News table Saturday night in Washington for the White House Correspondents Dinner.

Which is pretty much an open admission that you are a biased right-wing judge. And on top of that, he was sitting right next to the one and only Bill O'Reilly.

Now just imagine if a liberal Supreme Court judge like Ruth Bader Ginsburg was there and sitting at the MSNBC table right next to Chris Matthews. O'Reilly would go insane and do half a show on it, saying it proves MSNBC and a Supreme Court judge are in bed together.

Then Scalia is caught sitting at the Fox News table, and O'Reilly will never say a word about it, or complain about the open bias from him, or Fox for letting him sit at their table.

Benghazi Review Member Calls BS On Fox News/GOP Report
By: Steve - April 28, 2013 - 10:00am

Notice that O'Reilly does not have Richard Shinnick on his show to discuss the biased GOP report, all he had on were right-wing stooges to put out one side and spin it for the Republican party. Which is just more proof O'Reilly is a dishonest and biased right-wing hack of a pretend journalist.

A member of the independent panel that reviewed the September attack on a U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya is calling attempts by Fox News and congressional Republicans to blame Hillary Clinton for the deaths of U.S. personnel "total BS."

O'Reilly and Fox News have been promoting Republican attacks blaming Hillary Clinton for security cutbacks prior to the September 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya. But Richard Shinnick, a member of the five-person State Department Accountability Review Board that reviewed the Benghazi attacks last fall, says such claims are ridiculous.

"Hillary Clinton was never in the loop for that," said Shinnick, a former 27-year foreign services officer. "It just doesn't make any sense to anybody who understands the State Department. They all know that the Secretary of State was never in that chain of responding to Benghazi, it just wasn't so."

On April 25th, the Republican chairmen of five House committees released a report that said in Clinton's congressional testimony that she was unaware of requests for additional security at the Benghazi compound was false, citing a cable signed by Clinton that responded to one such request by calling for security cuts.

Fox News, which has frequently reported on the Benghazi attack to criticize the Obama administration, quickly promoted the GOP attacks, calling them a "Benghazi Bombshell."

Shinnick says the claim that Clinton's signature on the cable indicates her involvement misrepresents how the State Department operates. He said many directives and orders come through that office without the secretary personally reviewing each one, and they know it.

"Every single cable going out is signed 'Clinton,' it is the normal procedure," Shinnick said. "Millions of cables come into the operation center every year, not thousands, millions. And they are all addressed Hillary Clinton."

"So you can make a story that Hillary saw a cable and didn't act on it or sent a cable out; it's all BS, it's all total BS," Shinnick stressed. "I can't be any clearer than that. I read those stories and fortunately or unfortunately the people on the ARB understood that. If you don't want to believe that, then go chase a story."

The Independent and non-partisan ARB report cited four State Department officials for criticism, but did not even mention Secretary Clinton:
The Board found that certain senior State Department officials within two bureaus in critical positions of authority and responsibility in Washington demonstrated a lack of proactive leadership and management ability appropriate for the State Department's senior ranks in their responses to security concerns posed by Special Mission Benghazi, given the deteriorating threat environment and the lack of reliable host government protection.

However, the Board did not find that any individual U.S. Government employee engaged in misconduct or willfully ignored his or her responsibilities, and, therefore did not find reasonable cause to believe that an individual breached his or her duty so as to be the subject of a recommendation for disciplinary action.
"I stand by that, I signed the report, the four people, that's where we tracked it through," Shinnick said.

He noted that so many directives are issued and decisions made under Clinton that she or any Secretary of State are unable to personally review each one.

"She has undersecretaries, there's deputy secretaries, they have assistant secretaries," he said. "The assistant secretaries are presidential appointees specifically responsible for those duties. I am sure there are people who would like to connect the Secretary of State to that. There could be a shortage of drinking water somewhere and critics would say 'why doesn't Hilary send water?'

Shinnick's comments are consistent with several media reports finding that all such messages from the State Department to diplomatic facilities abroad are sent out using the secretary's signature.

Another State Department veteran who agreed with Shinnick's view is Michael A. Newton, a professor at Vanderbilt University Law School and former senior advisor to the Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes from 1999 to 2002.

"There are many, many layers over any action between the secretary and any desk officer or a staff officer," said Newton. "It takes a lot of effort to get something personally in front of the secretary. It's a very complex place to work."

And notice that O'Reilly did not report any of that, all he did was put out right-wing propaganda from the GOP with only Republican guests on to discuss it.

The Friday 4-26-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 27, 2013 - 11:00am

There was no TPM, instead O'Reilly opened the show with former Congressman Barney Frank, who came under fire (from O'Reilly and the Republicans at Fox) for using the Boston Marathon bombings to criticize people who want fewer taxes and smaller government.

Frank said this: "When I was called that day. I began by talking about the sadness we all feel. Some interviewers then pressed me for further reaction and I do not think a discussion of public policy is either premature or inappropriate. I do not accept the notion that you suspend the discussion of important issues after a tragedy."

O'Reilly told Frank why many people considered his comments inappropriate, saying this: "When you say that no tax cut would help this situation, you are basically polarizing Americans who want lower taxes and smaller government. But in a time like this, I wanted to see all Americans to come together. Your rhetoric was dividing people when we should have been uniting people."

Frank returned fire by citing Dennis Miller's appearance on The O'Reilly Factor, saying this: "Two days after the bombings Mr. Miller, with you cheering him on, attacked President Obama for his response. And I did not know you are opposed to polarizing, I could not tell from watching your show."

Then the biased Lou Dobbs was on to talk about the conservative group Judicial Watch, who has obtained documents showing that the USDA is actively working to help illegal immigrants obtain food stamps.

Dobbs said this: "The American people are being gamed again, not by illegal immigrants, not by the Mexican government, but by our own government. This program started in 2004 under George Bush and carried through under Barack Obama. The USDA is working in concert with Mexico to recruit food stamp recipients, which is the exact opposite of what the regulations say."

O'Reilly accused USDA officials of willful law-breaking, saying this: "The federal government is not supposed to distribute welfare to people who are here illegally, but the USDA ignored that and said we will do what we want. The government is not obeying the laws on the books."

Then the biased Karl Rove was on to talk about the George W. Bush Library dedication. All five living U.S. Presidents were together in Dallas Thursday for the dedication.

Rove said this: "There is a cordial relationship among all five, but before the event there were President Bush 41, President Bush 43, President Clinton, and President Obama all having a nice conversation. Off to the side looking pensive was Jimmy Carter, who is a different kind of a cat. He was hanging off to the side and not really engaged with the others, which is just his nature. But they were all gracious and respectful when they spoke."

Rove also said this about Barney Frank: "He made a provocatively political and unnecessary comment in the immediate aftermath of the Boston bombings. There was a bombing and he said no tax cut would have helped; that was a stretch and it had nothing to do with the issue."

Then Geraldo was on to talk about Tavon White, a gang leader at the Baltimore City Detention Center who allegedly ran a drug-and-sex ring inside the prison, and has also reportedly impregnated four corrections officers.

Geraldo said this: "This is like a real-life episode of The Wire. This guy took over the jail with the implied consent of the prison administration. He kept order, and in return for keeping order, he became the king of the jail. He and his thugs ran dope-dealing and prostitution and he was in charge of anything and everything. The authorities allowed him to have free run."

O'Reilly said that the buck stops with Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley, saying this: "You hear about this in Mexico but we are supposed to have a system of accountability and corrections czar Gary Maynard has not even been fired! This is so outrageous and embarrassing and I am demanding that Maynard be fired. If Governor O'Malley does not fire him, then it's on O'Malley."

Then Greg Gutfeld and Bernard McGuirk were on to talk about 60 Minutes, who aired an interview with a high school classmate of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who described the suspected terrorist in glowing terms.

Gutfeld said this: "This is beyond disgusting, we have turned terror into an article from Teen Beat magazine. I do not want to see anyone associated with Tsarnaev brothers ever again. I don't want to see the faces of the family or the killers, I hate them all!"

McGuirk said this: "The New York Times described the kid's love for Frosted Flakes and his taste in music. It's inexplicable, why do they do it? The only conclusion you can draw is that they don't like this country and therefore they like these people."

Gutfeld then took a moment to deliver a verbal smackdown to Time magazine and its list of "influential" people, saying this: "Time is now officially thinner than Kate Moss, I have seen instructions from Ikea that are thicker than that magazine. So they found who was most popular and threw this list together to build their brand, which is dying."

Then O'Reilly had the two right-wing stooges back for a second segment, so they could name their pinheads of the week.

McGuirk went with Virgin Airlines boss Richard Branson, whose new ad campaign implies that flying on Virgin is an ideal way to meet a sex partner.

McGuirk said this: "This guy should not be allowed to own an airline. The only way you 'get lucky' when you fly these days is if you are not squeezed between two smelly fat guys, your luggage gets there, and your flight is not delayed. People want to be left alone!"

Gutfeld singled out Tom Brokaw, who theorized that drone attacks play a role in anti-US terror.

Gutfeld said this: "I blame drones, too, drones like him! He is a drone who cannot pronounce the letter 'L' and cannot pronounce 'Muslim terror.' He is afraid of being perceived as a bigot, which prevents him from placing blame."

O'Reilly went with school officials in California who failed to expel a high school student who physically attacked her female teacher, saying this: "The student has been suspended but not expelled. The district superintendent should have sent the message that you cannot have students fighting with teachers."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Future scribes. Billy said this: "Fox News correspondent Ed Henry runs the White House Correspondents Association scholarship fund, which raises money to send poor kids to journalism school. Check out the program at"

Quicken Loans Chairman Slams O'Reilly For Detroit Segment
By: Steve - April 27, 2013 - 10:00am

Hey O’Reilly, Dan Gilbert is talking to you.

Gilbert, the Quicken Loans chairman and owner of the Cleveland Cavaliers, let loose Thursday morning with a tirade about an April 11th O’Reilly Factor that depicted Detroit as a dying, corrupt wasteland destroyed by 50 years of Democratic rule.

"I don't know how many people saw the Bill O'Reilly thing, but there's never been a hack job done on an American city in the history of mankind, like what he did a few weeks ago," Gilbert told a Pancake & Politics breakfast crowd at the Detroit Athletic Club.

"It's probably the single worst thing I've seen -- forget about Detroit -- on any city in the history of mankind," Gilbert added. "So if you get a chance and you want to get angry and get all crazy, just go out on the Web and pull up the segment he did. It's just the most irresponsible, worst thing I've ever seen."

O'Reilly concluded the 6-minute segment titled "Detroit in Chaos" by saying this: "Detroit is an iconic city, but it's through. You have to put it under martial law, and you'd have to suspend all kinds of these crazy laws they have, and you have to bring people in just to oversee it. It's like the military, you'd have to do like they did with the Marshall Plan after World War II. Cuz it ain't coming back by civilians."

Earlier in the segment, O'Reilly's producer Jessie Watters slammed Detroit while standing against backdrops of burned-out houses and disabled fire trucks and EMS units.

"Corrupt politicians destroyed this city. You can't afford to live here, and you can't afford to leave," Watters said. "There's no jobs any more. They said the auto industry bailout worked. It didn't; 200,000 jobs have been lost. There's no plants, half the plants have gone. There's just crime all over the city, and they're so corrupt they just can't run the city effectively."

Gilbert went off on O'Reilly during a panel discussion about efforts to revive Detroit's downtown and Midtown areas.

"There is a fascination with the city of Detroit nationally that is just truly remarkable," he said earlier, referring to recent stories by national and foreign news outlets. There's also a fascination with a great American city and its perceived comeback. I think we're slowly chipping away at the image, America loves a comeback story."

The Thursday 4-25-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 26, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Did the Boston bombing suspect clam up after being read his Miranda rights? The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: There is no question that many on the left are disappointed that the two suspects in the terror bombing are Muslim, and it's sad to say that many in the Muslim world will never believe the Tsarnaev brothers committed the atrocity.

That's a big problem with the terror war - no matter what the proof, no matter what you see with your own eyes, there will be crazy people denying the reality that Islamic jihad is a threat to the world. Even a powerful institution like NBC News employs people who denigrate the serious issue of Islamic terrorism.

An MSNBC host said this: 'Krauthammer and O'Reilly going after the President and saying he's not being tough enough on Muslims smells a little bit like a precursor to, "Is the President secretly a Muslim?"' It's almost impossible to believe that person is given a national platform by NBC News.

For the record, Charles Krauthammer and I did not say that President Obama is not 'tough enough on Muslims.' We analyzed why the President will not use the words 'Muslim jihad' in describing the motive of the terror attack. The overwhelming evidence is that these brothers killed four Americans and hurt more than 200 others in the name of Allah, period!

So Talking Points is going on a jihad of another stripe: Every time a high profile person spouts gibberish about deadly terrorism, I will embarrass that person on this broadcast. Public opinion is the only way to stop this madness.
To begin with, no liberals I know are disappointed that the two suspects in the terror bombing are Muslim, O'Reilly just made it up. And the MSNBC host is right, O'Reilly and Krauthammer are both using the Boston Bombings to slam President Obama. So O'Reilly is in denial and lying in both cases.

Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about the case against surviving terror suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

Kelly said this: "The FBI was stunned, when Dzhokhar had his Miranda rights read to him by a magistrate judge, a public defender, and an assistant U.S. Attorney. The FBI was in the middle of an interrogation and they did not sign off on the fact that there was a judge being sent over to Mirandize the suspect. They said he was providing valuable information and then, as soon as he was read his rights, he stopped. There is no way this happened without Attorney General Eric Holder knowing about it and the FBI was not pleased."

Earth to Kelly and O'Reilly, you and I may not like it, but he is an American citizen and he has rights, idiots. If they did not read him his rights after a short time the entire case could be thrown out and he would walk, is that what you want, fools.

Then the biased far-right Obama hating jerk Col. Ralph Peters was on to talk about the Boston Bombings.

O'Reilly said the CIA is reportedly claiming that it told the FBI to keep an eye on slain terrorist Tamerlan Tsarnaev; meanwhile, Secretary of State John Kerry was scolded by the White House after he said Tamerlan "went to Russia and Chechnya and then blew people up in Boston."

Peters said this: "For once Secretary Kerry said something absolutely honest and right. It is preposterous to think that this already radicalized American resident went back to Dagestan and sat in an apartment for six months watching TV. He unquestionably went there to make contact with terrorists and he got training in bomb-making. To believe anything else is just politically correct folly."

Hey O'Reilly, I thought you had a no speculation zone, and what Peters just said is speculation. Because he does not know it is 100% true, and he even admitted there is a chance he did not go to Russia for bomb-making training. You can even learn how to make those bombs on the internet.

Then Laura Ingraham was on to talk about the Senate, who is working on a new immigration law that would allow illegal immigrants to stay in the country and strengthen border security. O'Reilly asked Ingraham if the legislation will be affected by the Boston bombings.

Ingraham said this: "There are lots of problems with this bill, which gives sole and unreviewable discretion to Janet Napolitano for a whole bunch of things. On the terror issue, the asylum granted to the Tsarnaev family in 2002 raises all sorts of issues. Why were we giving asylum to a family from a troubled part of the world? The new immigration bill would actually allow asylum to be made easier and would allow more family members come into the country on asylum."

O'Reilly predicted that the Boston attacks will transform the debate, saying this: "All the focus has been on the issue of Central and South Americans coming here to work, but now we have to shift the focus to terrorism."

Then Bonnie Forrest and Wendy Walsh were on to talk about the bombing suspects parents and their insistence that their boys were innocent.

Walsh said this: "Freud invented the word 'denial,' which is a defense mechanism to protect yourself from emotional pain. If they admit their sons did it, they will have to feel guilt and shame, and those are really difficult emotions for a lot of people."

Forrest added that parental denial is not at all uncommon, saying this: "School counselors tell me the number one issue for them is when they try to confront parents and the parents don't want to get help for their kids. This is an extreme case, but it's not so much different. The mother here really seems to have some constricted thinking and she actually seems to believe in some of the jihadist teachings."

Then the far-right lunatic Glenn Beck was on, who claims a mysterious 22-year-old Saudi man should also be under scrutiny in the Boston bombings.

Beck said this: "This man's apartment was searched for nine hours, and his roommates were interviewed for five hours. Our sources tell us this man was 'armed and dangerous' and a terrorist of the highest order. But suddenly, after the President and John Kerry met with Saudi officials, this guy was no longer a 'person of interest' and somebody went in and tried to get rid of all the evidence. The government is hiding the Saudi connections. Who is this guy, where is this guy?"

And what Beck and O'Reilly did not tell you is that after the Saudi man was investigated, he was cleared. They also did not tell you that Bret Baier from Fox News investigated the story and said there is nothing to it. It's all garbage from Beck, and O'Reilly fell for it.

Then Jesse Watters paid a visit to Colorado last weekend, where pot-lovers were out in force to celebrate the state's legalization of marijuana.

Watters said this: "I was at the Cannabis Cup, which was a mellow event, but there were some shots fired at the park downtown. Two rival gangs crossed paths during a rap concert, fists started flying, and two people got shot. Some of these large events attract a criminal element because it's so chaotic and there are thousands of people."

And that had nothing to do with the Pot event, but O'Reilly tried to link it to the gang shootings anyway. but even Watters denied it was linked.

Watters described his experience interviewing folks who were obviously high, and not just on life, saying this: "I probably interviewed twelve people and only two were able to answer really easy questions. But they were very peaceful, the only time there was any trouble was when they handed out free doughnuts."

What did you expect, it was a Pot event, they are stoners who sit around getting high playing video games and watching cartoons, they do not know about politics, jerk. And btw, Watters and O'Reilly decided to not show the interviews with the two people who knew the answers. They only showed the interviews with the stoners who did not know any answers, to make them look even worse.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Respect thy ideological opponents. Billy said this: "Strong beliefs are good, but disliking people with whom you disagree is destructive, so try to be respectful of opposing points of view."

Which is just laughable, because O'Reilly is a Republican that does not respect anyone on the left. He calls all liberals loons and recently called Alan Colmes a liar. O'Reilly does not respect any opposing views, if you do not agree with him he claims you are un-American and a loon.

More Proof Some Republicans Are Racist
By: Steve - April 26, 2013 - 10:00am

And of course O'Reilly never said a word about it, because he is a Republican and a racist himself. Not to mention he does not want them to look bad so he ignores the story showing more racism in the Republican party, as he denies they are racist.

A conservative group connected to Colorado's Secretary of State has been sending political mailers (including a picture of a dark skinned woman whose face was digitally removed and replaced with a white woman's face) in an attempt to oppose a landmark voting bill that may soon become law.

Colorado is currently considering a major piece of legislation to improve the state's voting laws by implementing Election Day Registration, automatically sending mail ballots to every voter, and creating a real-time voter database to detect and prevent fraud. It passed the House last week and will now be taken up by the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Secretary of State Scott Gessler, a frequent speaker at True The Vote events who uses his perch to warn about the supposed threat of voter fraud, is leading opposition to the bill, which is supported by a number of Republican County Clerks and the Colorado County Clerks Association.

The original photo included a dark skinned woman in a white hoodie sweatshirt, but the altered version in the mailer took out her face and replaced it with the exact same face of the white woman standing alongside. In addition, a dark-skinned man standing behind her in the photo was removed from the mailer entirely.

And of course the right-wing racist denied any involvement. Sunday evening, a spokesperson for Gessler told FOX31 Denver that the Secretary of State had nothing to do with the mailer, even if it did come from his former law firm. So how did they get his mailing list, he had no answer to that.

Republican Senator Lied To Shooting Victims Mother
By: Steve - April 26, 2013 - 9:00am

Shortly before the a crucial Senate vote to expand background checks in gun transactions, Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) sent a letter to the mother of a shooting victim claiming that he was "truly sorry" for her son's death and that "strengthening background checks is something we agree on." A few days later, he voted to kill the background checks bill.

Caren Teves son Alex died during the Aurora theater mass shooting while shielding his girlfriend from the gun man's bullets. She wrote a letter to Sen. Flake, in which she "invited him to our home to sit in our son's chair, his empty chair" and "feel the emptiness and have dinner with us and discuss guns."

In response, Flake sent Teves a hand-written letter claiming that he supported one of the most important steps Congress could take to improve gun safety - expanding background checks.

Then after raising Teves hopes that the Senate would act to prevent future mothers from experiencing the same pain inflicted upon her family, Flake voted against background checks.

Flake claimed to oppose the bill because it "would expand background checks far beyond commercial sales to include almost all private transfers - including between friends and neighbors," even though that claim is a lie.

As Mark Kelly, husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) lamented after seeing Flake's explanation, "it appears he hasn't read the bill."

The Wednesday 4-24-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 25, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Lone Wolf vs. conspiracy theory in the Boston terror attack. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Some left-wing media are already touting the 'lone wolf' theory that the two young terror bombers acted alone. Talking Points does not believe that theory but well understands why it is being promoted.

Let's look at the facts: Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had no money, so how did Tamerlan afford a six-month trip to Russia? Also, who bought the guns, the explosives, and the cars the brothers had? It simply doesn't add up that these two financed the Boston Marathon terror attack on their own.

But why do some on the left want the lone wolf theory to be true? Because if it is shown that organized Muslim terrorists helped the two brothers, that would lead to a crackdown on whoever did it. As we pointed out last night, President Obama doesn't even want to describe the terror attack as an act of jihad.

So there is strong media motivation for the left-wing media to tell you that the attack was the action of self-contained zealots. Summing up, these brothers had access to no money, so let's find out where the money came from that financed their terror spree.
Earth to Bill O'Reilly, the media is not saying they were lone wolfs, they are saying it is possible that they did the bombings all on their own, get your facts right, idiot.

Then the so-called Democrat Kirsten Powers (who almost always agrees with O'Reilly) and Republican Kate Obenshain were on to discuss the dishonest O'Reilly talking points memo.

Powers said this: "I get your fundamental point, and we probably mostly agree on this. For some reason the term 'Islamic terrorism' has become a racial statement, and you get called a 'racist' or an 'Islamophobe.' That's ridiculous because there are Islamic jihadists all over the world who want to kill us. It's not 'anti-Muslim' to criticize Islamic jihadists."

Take note of that folks, because once again Powers agreed with O'Reilly, which no real Democrat would hardly ever do. Proving once again she is only on the show because she is a moderate who agrees with O'Reilly most of the time, and a real Democrat would disagree with O'Reilly 90% of the time.

Obenshain said this nonsense: "The Obama administration is still calling the Fort Hood massacre 'workplace violence' and the President has an edict out that no one will use the term 'radical Islam.' The Muslim radicals are targeting the United States because they hate freedom, individualism, and markets, and there is something about that liberals find appealing. It's a bizarre alliance."

That's because it hurts us more than it helps us to slam the entire Muslim community for the actions of a few, moron.

Then Bob Beckel, a real liberal, was on to talk about calling for a reevaluation of Muslim immigration.

Beckel said this: "I have been taking a beating from my side. I think the 75,000 Muslims who are here on student visas ought to stay, although about 15,000 of them have never showed up for schools. But there are 20,000 more coming in September and the FBI has a number of open cases on student visas. Let's take a two-year hiatus and finish up those investigations, and when we are satisfied that the Muslims are not radicals, let's put it back together."

Then James Rosen was on to talk about a biased one sided Congressional Republican report accusing former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of lying about the attacks in Benghazi. And that is all you need to know, it was a biased report put together by Republicans only. Not one Democrat was involved in it, meaning it is worthless, and yet O'Reilly reported on it anyway. And nobody from the left was on for balance, making O'Reilly a biased hack.

Then the Republican Congresswoman Marsha Blackburn was on to talk about another bogus and biased one sided report from Congress. Blackburn was one of 72 members of Congress who sent a letter to ask the news networks to address their lack of coverage of the Gosnell trial, even though they have reported on it.

And all you need to know is that all 72 of them are Republicans, not one Democrat signed the letter. What they are mad about is that they think the media has not covered the story as much as they want them to, which is ridiculous. Because the media is now in the ratings business, O'Reilly has even said ratings matter, and they report on what gets ratings. The Gosnell story was rated low so they did not report on it very much, case closed idiots.

Then the right-wing fool Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because he is not a journalist, he is a comedian who is only on to make jokes about liberals because O'Reilly thinks it's funny.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Give, and ye shall receive. Billy said this: "Even when money is tight, giving a portion of your income to worthy causes will eventually accrue to your benefit."

Which is the same tip O'Reilly put out about a month ago, drop the stupid tip of the day and use the time to report some real news, it's lame.

O'Reilly Still Attacking President Obama Over Boston Bombings
By: Steve - April 25, 2013 - 10:00am

Instead of reporting the story (as a real journalist would do) the biased right-wing hack Bill O'Reilly is still slamming President Obama with political attacks, as he complains about other people using the Boston bombings for political reasons, it's laughable and ridiculous.

Tuesday night O'Reilly decided to slam President Obama for failing to condemn Islam in the aftermath of the Boston bombings and claimed that American Muslims aren't doing enough to stand up against jihad.

During his Talking Points Memo segment, O'Reilly said the President was "seriously wrong" for urging the country on Friday to not to jump to conclusions about the bombing suspects motivations.

"It's all about motivation and it's all about a specific group of people," O'Reilly said, referring to Muslims. He then went on to say that Dzhokar Tsarnaev and his deceased brother Tamerlan were definitively jihadists, stating that "only radical Islam allows terror murder."

But what O'Reilly failed to mention is that Obama's Friday statement was made before anything was known about the brothers or what led them to place explosives at the Boston Marathon.

The FBI didn't release the two suspects pictures until Thursday afternoon, kicking off a massive manhunt. While on Friday morning the media learned that the two were ethnic Chechens, that information alone provided no further knowledge of the motivation behind the attack.

Only after questioning Dzohkar Tsarnaev in custody did authorities learn that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan provided at least part of the reason for the bombing.

While attacking Obama for not speaking out against radical Islam, O'Reilly begrudgingly acknowledged that there are Muslim countries that are our allies, particularly those that utilize secret police to combat terrorism.

He was disappointed, that more Muslims (including Muslim-Americans) aren't doing their part to help combat radicalism. "Most Muslims on this Earth are good people, but they are not helping to neutralize the jihad," he said. "They are not standing up against it in any numbers. And that includes American Muslims. They largely remain silent."

The far-right columnist Charles Krauthammer, who was a guest on the show, shared O'Reilly's views that Obama isn't doing enough to speak out about the threat that Muslims pose.

And counter to O'Reilly's claims, there are many instances of Muslim communities standing up against radicalism in their ranks. Just this week, a Toronto imam was lauded for reporting suspicious behavior to the Canadian authorities, leading to a possible major terrorist plot being foiled.

Leaders of the Muslim-American community also talked about their opposition to terrorism at a press conference held on Friday. But O'Reilly never reported on it, while he claims they never speak out against terrorism.

O'Reilly is a biased hypocritical right-wing fool with double standards. Because if a Catholic bombs an abortion clinic he does not say a word, and he does not call for the President to condemn the Catholic religion. But when a Muslim bombs something, O'Reilly demands the President condemn all Muslims, which is ridiculous.

In fact, O'Reilly ignores all the terrorism against abortion clinics and who is doing it, because they are usually pro-life Catholics, and he is also a pro-life Catholic. And that's not all, if someone does slam all the Catholics for the actions of a few, O'Reilly gets mad and says you can not slam them all for a few bad apples.

The Tuesday 4-23-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 24, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Fighting the Jihadists. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: It is now becoming clear that the Homeland Security Department let all Americans down by not flagging the slain terrorist Tamerlan Tsarnaev. When Russian intelligence alerts American homeland security people about an individual, you mark that individual forever.

The fact that this guy was selected for scrutiny by Russian intelligence is huge, and then he traveled to Russia, returned six months later, and U.S. intelligence didn't watch him!. What a massive screw-up. In addition, the guy was posting jihad garbage on the Internet and he was not being watched. That's a mistake that cost four people their lives and more than 200 others their health.

On the broader question, it's clear to any sane person that Muslim jihadists are a threat to the world, yet President Obama will not say that. The two Boston bombers were jihadists who believed they had a right to kill children to serve their religion. What other theology in this world justifies killing innocent people? Only radical Islam allows terror murder and that's the truth.

President Obama doesn't want to say the truth and the reason is politics. There are Muslim nations that help the USA and President Obama rightly doesn't want to alienate those nations. Also, most Muslims on this earth are good people, but they are not helping to neutralize the jihad, they are not standing up against in any numbers.

I think President Obama does understand that jihad is a threat to the world; I also believe he will never define it that way. That's a terrible mistake.
Now I actually agree with O'Reilly about the Homeland Security Department and the FBI letting all Americans down by not flagging the slain terrorist Tamerlan Tsarnaev. I agree it was a massive screw up, but that message from O'Reilly gets lost when he also uses the bombings for partisan political attacks against President Obama, and this blame all Muslims garbage.

Then the far-right Charles Krauthammer was on to talk about President Obama.

Krauthammer said this: "The lengths to which he will go to avoid telling us the truth about the enemy is becoming comical and embarrassing. He refuses to even use the word 'Islamist,' which is used throughout the Muslim world. He won't touch it because he won't use any words that might imply a connection between radical Islam and terrorism, which anyone over the age of nine knows is the single greatest cause of terror in the world today."

Then Nihad Awad, from the Council on American-Islamic Relations was on to discuss it.

Awad said this: "When the horrific news came on Monday. I was angered as a Muslim and as an American because this attack was on all of us. We condemned this immediately, swiftly, unequivocally."

But of course O'Reilly never reported it.

Awad also categorically denied that radical Islam is the world's primary source of terrorism, saying this: "You are trying to define my faith for me, but Islam is a peaceful religion and the word 'jihad' is a legitimate struggle. Those terrorists using the word are trying to legitimize their attacks on innocent people, Islam is being hijacked."

O'Reilly said this: "Radical Islam is the primary driver of terrorism in the world. Not admitting that puts you in the category where you have no credibility because 90% of worldwide terrorism is radical Islam."

Then O'Reilly had the far-right stooge Col. David Hunt on to slam Tom Brokaw even more, because they do not like the fact that Brokaw told the truth about the drone strikes and what they are doing.

Former NBC News anchor Tom Brokaw has implied that American drone attacks, which have unintentionally killed civilians, may be partly responsible for terror attacks like the one in Boston.

Hunt said this: "Everything about his statement is wrong. It's ignorance, it's myopic, and it's inexcusable for a man with his alleged intelligence to say that. We are at war and we do not target civilians, but civilians will continue to be hurt and killed in combat. Drones are saving American lives and allowing us to prosecute this war across borders."

Earth to Col. Hunt, Brokaw is right and we are not at war. Only Congress can declare war, and they have not done so. Only right-wing loons like you and O'Reilly say we are at war, by saying we are in a war on terror. But that is not a war, and Congress has not declared we are at war, idiots. Notice there was no opposing view in the segment, just one sided biased right-wing garbage from O'Reilly and Hunt.

I would also like to report on a great e-mail to O'Reilly, that he ignored:

Charles Ceroli, Athens, GA: "Bill, if you can show me how a public family gathering in Pakistan is the equivalent of bombing a war materials factory during World War II, then I'll agree Brokaw is wrong."

Then the biased right-wing loon John Stossel was on to talk about the balance between personal privacy and the call for more surveillance cameras.

Stossel said this: "These cameras are going to grow in number, and that's okay. The Constitution forbids unreasonable searches, but I don't think a camera is that. We reporters have always said that in public we have the right to take pictures of people, and these cameras are in public. If you are outdoors today, you can assume you might be photographed."

Then Kimberly Guilfoyle and Lis Wiehl were on for is it legal. There could be a link between slain terror suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev and an unsolved triple murder in 2011.

Wiehl said this: "One of the three murdered guys, went to the same boxing gym as Tsarnaev and the coach there described them as best friends. A prosecutor today confirmed to me today that when those killings took place there was not a forced entry, someone apparently let the killer in. The other odd thing is that the slain terrorist did not go the funeral of his supposed best friend."

Guilfoyle said this: "This was essentially a cold case but now they're saying there could be a connection and they're giving it a second look now that they know Tamerlan has the propensity to commit a crime of violence."

Then Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes were on to talk about Jon Stewart, who gave CNN a beating for the network's inaccurate coverage of the Boston manhunt.

Colmes said this: "Nothing was happening and they had to fill time, but the reporters should not be the stars of the story. Some reporters seem to think something like this will make their careers."

Crowley said this: "This was very unfortunate for CNN, but the cable news environment lends itself to a sense of urgency. Whether you're covering an actual urgent situation like this or not, there's always an injection of energy. There's a lot of pressure to be out there with something that's breaking even when nothing is breaking."

And finally, the Factor tip of the day, that was once again not a tip. Just O'Reilly promoting some signed poster by all six living First Ladies he wants people to buy from him.

Cable News Hack O'Reilly Slams News Legend Tom Brokaw
By: Steve - April 24, 2013 - 10:00am

The insane O'Reilly used his Talking Points Memo segment Monday night to criticize NBC's Tom Brokaw, who suggested on Meet The Press this weekend the U.S. should examine its drone policy in light of latest attacks in Boston.

Brokaw said this:
BROKAW: I think we also have to examine the use of drones that the United States is involved and -- and there are a lot of civilians who are innocently killed in a drone attack in Pakistan, in Afghanistan, and in Iraq.

And I can tell you having spent a lot of time over there, young people will come up to me on the streets and say we love America. If you harm one hair on the head of my sister, I will fight you forever and there is this enormous rage against what they see in that part of the world as a presumptuousness of the United States.
The point Brokaw was making is that if we go to foreign countries to bomb and kill their people with no trial or anything, then we can expect to be hit by terrorists to get revenge. Brokaw is right, Our drone policy is fomenting anti-American sentiment and helping radicalize even more Muslims against us, and yet O'Reilly slammed him anyway.

O'Reilly challenged Brokaw to come on his show and defend his assertions, asking this: "Do you want to sit back and let terrorists hatch their plots and watch Americans die at home and on the battlefield?"

O'Reilly predicted Brokaw would reject his offer of a debate so he doesn't have to associate with the peasants on The Factor.

He went on to explain why he thinks it's absurd to equate an act of terror that kills civilians to an act of war that does the same.

Which is where O'Reilly got it wrong, because Brokaw did not equate and act of terror to an act of war, all he did was point out that our drone policy is creating more terrorists, and he is 100% right.

O'Reilly then started attacking President Obama for not using the term "Muslim terrorism" to describe the Boston bombings.

Juan Williams was on, and he said that it would be jumping the gun to call the attacks Muslim terrorism since we don't yet know the motives of the suspects.

Then the right-wing stooge Mary K. Ham joined in on the debate, saying this: "Everybody in the media is happy to leap to conclusions when they think it might be somebody right of center." She added that the media only hesitates to make assumptions when the guy in question has YouTube links going to al Qaeda and other extremist imams."

O'Reilly got it wrong as usual, and Tom Brokaw would never lower himself to do The Factor.

The Monday 4-22-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 23, 2013 - 11:00am

O'Reilly opened the show with the top story called: Unanswered questions in the Boston terror bombing. Maria Cramer and Bryan Bender were on to discuss it.

Cramer said this: "The brothers came across MIT police officer Sean Collier, and for reasons that we do not understand they opened fire on him. They hijacked a Mercedes Benz, drove it into Watertown, and then released the owner, who left behind a cell phone, allowing officials to track the vehicle to Watertown."

Cramer also said this: "There was a very dramatic shootout and the older brother Tamerlan emptied his gun on an officer. Police were able to capture Tamerlan, but as they were trying to handcuff him, his brother Dzhokhar ran over him. Dzhokhar ditched that car and ran into the night, and then there was then an all-night manhunt with hundreds of officers walking around Watertown in the pitch black."

Bender added new information about Tamerlan's widow Katherine Russell Tsarnaev, saying this: "She is apparently living with her parents in Rhode Island and we know the FBI visited her parents' home at least three times Sunday."

Bender also reported that 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev remains hospitalized with severe injuries, saying this: "Apparently he is communicating and he has answered some written questions, but he's in pretty bad shape."

Then the TPM called: Politics and the Boston terror situation. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: A female reporter asked Jay Carney if a U.S. military action in Afghanistan was also 'a form of terrorism.' This woman had the nerve to equate military battlefield action with the bombing of civilians in Boston.

And here's something even more provocative: Former NBC News anchor Tom Brokaw said America's drone attacks have inspired 'enormous rage.' So let me get this straight, Tom. We shouldn't use drones to attack Al Qaeda leadership or Taliban terrorists in the mountains? So how exactly would you fight the war against terrorism?

I challenge Tom Brokaw to come on this broadcast, but he will not do that. We have a cadre of Americans who don't feel the USA has a right to defend itself. Every decent person laments civilian casualties, but in war that happens. So it's time to knock off the nonsense!

The war on terrorism is real, the dead and wounded in Boston are real, and this ridiculous left-wing moral equivalency is insulting.
O'Reilly is a fool, all Brokaw did was point out that using the drones to kill muslims is going to create more terrorists, which is 100% true, and yet O'Reilly flipped out and lost his mind over it, when Brokaw is right.

So what does O'Reilly do, have a fair and balanced debate on it, no, he has his stooges from Fox Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham on, who of course agreed with his nonsense.

Williams said this: "You're right and I don't understand what these people are talking about. There's a big difference between an act of terror, which is what happened in Boston, and an act of war when the U.S. uses drones to go after terrorists. Some of these terrorists insinuate themselves into civilian communities hoping that the United States will not go after them, and the Pentagon makes an effort to avoid any injuries to civilians."

Ham also took issue with those who make excuses for terrorists, saying this: "The path they're going down is not just to make this horrible moral equivalency argument, but it's also to consider the grievances of those who are killing 8-year-olds in the street with bombs."

O'Reilly concluded with a message to Tom Brokaw, saying this: "Hey, Tom, did you ever hear of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, or Dresden? The Japanese weren't thrilled when they saw hundreds of thousands of civilians dying."

O'Reilly is an idiot, in your example we were at war in Hiroshima, Nagasaki, and Dresden, now we are not at war. And Brokaw did not compare the two acts, or make excuses for terrorists. All he did was say that if we are going to use drones to kill muslims we can expect to be hit by terrorists from revenge, and that is 100% true.

Notice that O'Reilly did not have one person on to clarify or defend what Brokaw said, which is biased and bad journalism that violates the rules of ethics for journalists.

Then Brit Hume was on to hammer the FBI. Despite its heroics in tracking down the Tsarnaev brothers, the FBI is being second-guessed for missing earlier clues about older brother Tamerlan.

Hume said this: "Based on what we now know, certainly the FBI needs to explain itself. A lot of questions need to be answered about exactly what the Russians told us about this guy and what he said when he was questioned by the FBI. How did he get out of the country and back in without the FBI knowing about it?"

O'Reilly compared the situation to that of the Fort Hood shooter, saying this: "This is similar to the case of Major Nidal Hasan where the Bureau didn't take really strong action because they were afraid and they didn't want to offend Muslims."

Then Alberto Gonzales was on to talk about the government, who has decided against charging surviving suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as an "enemy combatant," so he will be tried as a civilian.

Gonzales, agreed with the decision, saying this: "The White House has made a calculation, that they can bring this person to justice and also get the information that may prevent future attacks. There are challenges with the designation of 'enemy combatant' when you're dealing with an American citizen."

Gonzales added that authorities have a powerful bargaining chip with the threat of the death penalty, saying this: "He has information that we want and we have something he wants, which is his life. So there's the possibility that we'll get the information we want."

Then the biased right-wing hack Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about the media and the boston bombings.

Goldberg said this: "Covering breaking news while the facts are changing second-by-second is not easy, and we should be aware of that. But CNN was bragging about its 'exclusive' and how they were the first one to have the story of a capture. They got it wrong and so they deserve to take a hit, but only up to a point. There were many other news organizations that got many things wrong. But not one reporter concocted these stories, every single mistake came from supposedly credible sources in law enforcement."

Then the right-wing stooge Adam Carolla was on to discuss the Boston bombings.

Carolla said this: "The headline is just how good a city Boston is. One woman ran the marathon and then worked a 40-hour shift as a surgeon, and other people ran into danger when there could have been a third bomb. That just doesn't exist in Los Angeles and it just says a lot about Boston and the people who live there."

Carolla also said this: "They hate our culture, they hate our way of life. They hate that our women's boobies get bigger, our swimming pools get deeper, and we're building skyscrapers and bridges. Allah is supposed to take care of all this decadence, but Allah never does, so they take it upon themselves."

And I disagree with Carolla, I think they hate us because we keep sending American troops and drones on to Muslim land to kill them. If we just left them alone and stopped killing them, I would bet they would leave us alone.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Aiding the wounded. Billy said this: "You can help the Boston bombing victims by contributing to The One Fund Boston, which is accessible at"

Fox Host Blames Obama For Boston Marathon Bombings
By: Steve - April 23, 2013 - 10:00am

Fox News host Brian Kilmeade thinks he's found the reason someone set off bombs at the Boston Marathon: President Obama's so-called policy of "disengaging from the Middle East."

Even though the two brothers who planted the bombs were from Russia, and not the middle east. It's ridiculous and insane, and more proof Fox News anchors are biased and stupid.

Kilmeade linked the alleged actions of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar to President Obama's foreign policy during his April 19 radio program.

Kilmeade said this: "We had a guy in yesterday that worked with Richard Holbrooke and Hillary Clinton and he's so disappointed that we're disengaging from the Middle East. But you talk to these radicals in the Middle East and they say, 'America, don't get involved, leave us alone.' So like it or not, this president has left them alone. And now the IEDs are blowing up in our streets."

NBC News reported that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was born in Kyrgyzstan and became a naturalized American citizen on Sept. 11, 2012, while his late older brother, Tamerlan, killed during a recent firefight with law enforcement, was born in Russia. They came to the United States in 2002 with their family, which is of Chechen origin.

And btw, Kilmeade is hardly an authority on foreign policy or national security issues. He has lied to his audience about the Iraq war intelligence, he claimed (repeatedly) that "all terrorists are Muslims," and once remarked that Sen. John McCain "should not be allowed to talk about torture" because "he was tortured."

Notice that O'Reilly totally ignored it, but when someone at CNN and MSNBC blamed Bush and his policies for the 9-11 terrorist attacks, O'Reillly went crazy and slammed them for years.

More Texas Fertilizer Plant News O'Reilly Has Ignored
By: Steve - April 22, 2013 - 11:00am

And he claims to be a real journalist, while ignoring almost all the real news that has come out about the explosion.

(Reuters) -- The fertilizer plant that exploded on Wednesday, obliterating part of a small Texas town and killing at least 14 people, had last year been storing 1,350 times the amount of ammonium nitrate that would normally trigger safety oversight by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

A person familiar with DHS operations said the company that owns the plant, West Fertilizer, did not tell the agency about the potentially explosive fertilizer as it is required to do, leaving one of the principal regulators of ammonium nitrate - which can also be used in bomb making - unaware of any danger there.

Fertilizer plants and depots must report to the DHS when they hold 400 lbs. or more of the substance. Filings this year with the Texas Department of State Health Services, which weren't shared with DHS, show the plant had 270 tons of it on hand last year.

"It seems this manufacturer was willfully off the grid," Rep. Bennie Thompson, (D-MS), ranking member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, said in a statement.

"This facility was known to have chemicals well above the threshold amount to be regulated under the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Act (CFATS), yet we understand that DHS did not even know the plant existed until it blew up."

Company officials did not return repeated calls seeking comment on its handling of chemicals and reporting practices. Late on Friday, plant owner Donald Adair released a general statement expressing sorrow over the incident but saying West Fertilizer would have little further comment while it cooperated with investigators to try to determine what happened.

And if you watch the O'Reilly Factor for your news you would not know any of this information, because O'Reilly has not reported a word about it.

Republican Claims Drudge Is A Reputable News Source
By: Steve - April 22, 2013 - 10:00am

In a House hearing Thursday morning, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano was sidetracked from her testimony on the DHS budget when Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-SC) asked her to respond to an online conspiracy theory about the DHS supposedly stockpiling ammo for an attack on Americans.

Duncan argued this was more credible than just Internet rumors because the Drudge Report, said it was true:
DUNCAN: You know, when Forbes Magazine or Drudge or some reputable news sources start to repeat the numbers, the numbers cease to become Internet rumors and they start having some credibility.

I just ask, why was there a long delay or silence from the DHS for a period of time, almost three months, before y'all came forward saying these numbers aren't correct, these are the actual facts. Why was there a delay or silence from your department?

NAPOLITANO: Well I don't know that there was that kind of delay, but I will tell you we found it so inherently unbelievable that those statements would be made it was hard to ascribe credibility to them. I don't know if I'd put Forbes and Drudge in the same sentence.
While Drudge's endorsement can elevate fringe conspiracy theories into mainstream discourse, the website has hardly built up credibility. Last year, Drudge prominently featured at least 10 bogus stories, often racial attacks against Obama.

The debunked theory Duncan invoked in the hearing claims the DHS had ordered 2,700 mine-resistant vehicles and 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition over the next 5 years.

Conservative radio host Alex Jones warned that the DHS was "gearing up for huge wars" and warned of "an arms race against the American people."

In fact, the DHS has used 16 such vehicles since 2008, when they inherited them for free from the Defense Department. The 2,700 figure came from an order by the U.S. Marine Corps.

The ammo was part of a strategic sourcing contract that allows the DHS to get low prices by buying in bulk. Most will go to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, while the rest will be used to train law enforcement officers in target practice.

Even Fox News and Republican Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) dismissed the hysteria, noting the amount of ordered ammo is actually lower than in previous years.

It's no surprise that Duncan is a Drudge supporter, last week he attacked an effort to expand background checks for gun purchases online or at gun shows because he thought the government was planning a systematic slaughter akin to the Rwandan genocide.

The confiscation theory, also pushed by Drudge, goes hand in hand with the baseless idea that the DHS is readying itself to attack Americans.

And Duncan is not the only Republican lawmaker to buy into the Drudge-promoted conspiracy theories. In January, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) confronted then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton with a bogus Drudge accusation that the CIA was secretly smuggling guns from Libya through Turkey to arm Syrian rebels.

Fox Anchor Lies About Support For Background Checks
By: Steve - April 21, 2013 - 10:00am

Here is yet another example of bias from a so-called straight news Fox anchor, that O'Reilly has said has no bias.

When confronted with the fact that a majority of the nation's gun owners support expanded background checks for gun purchases, Fox anchor Bret Baier hid behind the National Rifle Association (NRA) to allege that such support does not exist.

The NRA has lobbied aggressively against a bipartisan proposal in the Senate that would have expanded background checks on gun show and online gun purchases. Among other efforts, they spent $500,00 in one day -- the day the Senate voted on the bill -- on ads calling the proposal Obama's gun ban.

The expanded background check bill failed to pass the Senate, a result Fox contributor Juan Williams talked about on Special Report, stressing how even gun owners say, 'Yes, it's a good thing':
WILLIAMS: It's a tragedy. The U.S. Senate can't take action on simple background checks that overwhelmingly the American people, in poll after poll, say that it's a good idea, it would be a good thing.

Gun owners say, 'Yes, it's a good thing.' But again, the power of big money, the NRA, and the gun manufacturers has carried the day. So let's look at the record.

BAIER: Well, hold on. Gun owners overall don't say that. You mentioned the NRA. They say this.
Baier then read the NRA's propaganda statement opposing the Senate bill, which claims that "expanding background checks, at gun shows or elsewhere, will not reduce violent crime or keep our kids safe in schools."

Despite Baier's claim, the NRA's view are contrary to that of the majority of gun owners on this issue. In February 2013, the Pew Research Center determined that gun owners overwhelmingly support expanded background checks. The poll showed that 85% of gun owners support background checks on private gun sales and at gun shows.

The vast majority of gun owners have repeatedly expressed their approval of more background checks. At the beginning of the year, a Quinnipiac University poll showed 91 percent of gun owners were in support; in March, they found that number to be little changed, with 85 percent of gun owners in favor of universal background checks.

Fox News has worked in lock step with the efforts of the NRA to undermine the impact of background checks, even their so-called straight news anchors.

The Friday 4-19-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 20, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The latest in the Boston Marathon bombing suspect manhunt. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Hell likely has a new resident. 26-year-old Tamerlan Tsarnaev was shot dead by police Friday morning in a suburb of Boston. He and his 19-year-old brother Dzhokhar were identified by the FBI as the prime suspects in the bombing Monday that killed three and injured 170.

At around 11 PM Thursday night a police chase ended in Watertown, a suburb of Boston. The suspects and police exchanged more than 200 rounds of gunfire and the brothers also threw explosives at the cops. The older brother Tamerlan was shot dead, but his brother Dzhokhar escaped on foot.

Then, just about one hour ago, all hell broke loose again when a woman in Watertown called police and said she saw blood on the shed in her backyard. Police cars from everywhere converged on the site - there is a boat in the backyard with canvas covering the boat and that is where the suspect now lies.
Then Geraldo was on, with more information on the Tsarnaev brothers.

Geraldo said this: "The younger one is a naturalized American citizen, and what's intriguing is that the FBI admits that in 2010 they questioned the older brother at the request of a foreign government, probably Russia. And yet in 2012 Tamerlan traveled back to Russia and stayed for six months. It's probable that in that period this American-reared Muslim terrorist from Chechnya learned how to build this bomb, which was quite sophisticated."

O'Reilly pointed out that Chechnya is a hotbed of radical Islam, saying this: "Al Qaeda has training bases in Chechnya, which is a rebellious province of Russia. These guys wanted to kill innocent Americans just to kill them, which is the mark of jihad!"

Then Fox News Eric Shawn, reporting from Watertown, added some details about the younger Tsarnaev brother.

Shawn said this: "Friends of Dzhokhar told me today, that when he was in high school he loved sports and was a normal kid who smoked pot and listened to rap music. The big question for our country is how these young people turn into terrorists who want to come and kill the 'infidels.' That is a major issue for our country to deal with."

Then the right-wing stooge Howie Carr was on to talk about how his radio show callers are reacting to the terror attack and its aftermath.

Carr said this: "The headline to this is that no good deed goes unpunished. This is another case of Uncle Sam doing a favor, we brought these people in even though they're radical Muslims. We bring them in and make them political refugees, which makes them eligible immediately for welfare. You don't have to wait in any lines, you immediately become a welfare recipient. But these people have apparently developed this overwhelming hatred for us and they've now destroyed people's lives."

Then Bill Forry, a reporter and a personal friend of some of the bombing victims was on to discuss it.

Forry said this: "I spoke with the husband of a woman who lost her leg, and he told me that he wants this suspect taken into custody. He was also adamant about his respect and admiration for law enforcement."

And finally, O'Reilly ended Friday's show with the breaking news that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had been taken alive in Watertown: "The police convinced him to come out from under the canvas of the boat that he was hiding on in Watertown. He will be charged with capital murder in a federal court and he will be executed by the United States of America. I will guarantee that this evening. The brother is in Hell and this guy is going to be in Hell."

Scarborough Slams Senators Who Killed Gun Reform Bill
By: Steve - April 20, 2013 - 10:00am

The morning after the U.S. Senate failed to pass a bipartisan compromise to expand background checks to gun shows and online sales, MSNBC's Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough raged against the lawmakers who blocked the bill.

Scarborough, a former Republican Congressman, predicted both his party as well as the "Democrats who cowered in the corner would pay a heavy price" in the 2014 midterm elections.

As the show flashed images of each senator who voted against the measure, Scarborough reminded viewers that 90 percent of Americans support universal background checks, an even more extensive proposal than the one ultimately included in the failed bill.

The former GOP legislator warned that his party will face extinction for opposing such an overwhelmingly popular bill:
SCARBOROUGH: You don't ignore 90 percent of what the voting population wants when you're talking about the safety of Americans, of our families, of our communities, of our schools. The safety that we feel when we send our kids to malls, to churches, to college.

I just want to be clear. I said this party is heading towards extinction. Talking about the 2013 version of the Republican Party. A new Republican Party, though, is going to come in its place. This sort of extremism is going to be called out by the 90%. We're the 90% and we are going to win. This is just the first battle.
The Senators voting for the gun violence prevention measure represent 194 million people, roughly 65 percent of the entire American population, yet were defeated by a minority representing just 118 million people.

Scarborough's fury over these counterintuitive numbers echoes President Obama, who called out the Senators yesterday for choosing special interests over the American people.

Background checks are also exceedingly popular with gun owners and NRA members, though the gun lobby threw its full weight behind killing the measure. A full 87 percent of gun owners and 57 percent of NRA members support universal background checks.

The Thursday 4-18-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 19, 2013 - 11:00am

The show opened with the top story called: Latest on the Boston terror attack investigation. O'Reilly reported that the FBI has released the photographs of two suspects in Monday's bombing.

Retired FBI agent Bill Daly talked about their decision to show the photos, saying this: "This is a huge step, and the FBI learned its lesson with the bombing at the Olympics when one person was named as a suspect but turned out to be not guilty. So I think they are highly confident about these people and they have something else showing these people in that place putting the packages down."

Then Bill Hemmer was on with the latest from Boston, saying this: "The thing that has struck me, is the discipline the FBI has employed over the past two days. They did not speak, they did not address the public despite the amount of pressure on them to produce something. In the press conference today the FBI said they have photographic evidence of 'suspect #2' leaving the bomb on Boylston Street."

The TPM was called: Can the government protect us from violence? The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama gave a rousing speech in Boston Thursday, saying the city would never give in to violence and the nation will never be defeated by terrorists. He did a good job with that speech, but on Wednesday the President's tone was very different; he was angry about losing the gun control legislation in the Senate.

Why did background checks fail? Surely it would be better if criminals and insane people were stopped from buying guns, but checks will not keep guns out of the hands of bad people, who will buy guns illegally. If the President were really serious about protecting Americans from gun violence, he would federalize gun crimes.

If you're caught with an unregistered gun you go to a federal prison for at least five years; use a gun in the commission of a crime and it's ten years! That would take gun criminals off the streets fast and drastically cut gun violence.

But President Obama's gun legislation is targeted at law-abiding people, not the criminals, and that's the reason he isn't getting anywhere. And finally, a word about terrorism. Since the attacks of 9/11, 34 people have been killed by terrorists in the USA.

So authorities are doing a darned good job protecting us and we should be grateful. The bottom line is that the government can protect us from harm somewhat if it acts in a tough and smart way.
Which is nothing but a bunch of right-wing propaganda, notice that O'Reilly never said a word about the 90% supporting background checks, or that even 85% of NRA members support it. All he did was spin out some right-wing talking points on it, while claiming he never uses right-wing talking points.

Then Bob Beckel was on to evaluate the O'Reilly Talking Points Memo.

Beckel said this: "I like some of your ideas, but we also should use background checks on people who buy guns at gun shows. In Virginia you can go and buy seven guns without checks and then sell them to criminals - every single gun used in a crime in America was bought legally to begin with. It was a cowardly act by the Democrats who jumped ship in the Senate."

O'Reilly claimed once again that background checks would be useless, saying this: "There are more than 100-million guns on the street, so any kind of registration is a moot point."

Then the biased Fox reporter Ed Henry was on to talk about President Obama, who reacted angrily after the Senate rejected his call for stricter background checks.

henry said this: "He's frustrated, because he sees an issue that is not going anywhere. The White House made a calculation that background checks was the most popular thing and the easiest thing to get through. Maybe that was a mistake, maybe a bigger and more comprehensive bill would have convinced more people. He's running out of time before he's a lame duck, so if he doesn't get it done now, he's not going to get it done."

O'Reilly added that President Obama lacks credibility with gun rights advocates, saying this: "People don't trust him on the issue. They say, 'If gun control is so good, why all the violence in Chicago?' He has no answer."

Then Megyn Kelly was on, who was on the air live Wednesday afternoon when rumors started flying about an arrest in the Boston terror attacks.

Kelly said this: "We were seeing reports of an arrest, and CNN said three federal law enforcement sources told them an arrest had been made. But we didn't have confirmation so I told the viewers that other news outlets are making these reports, but we are being careful. Then we saw the other news outlets reporting that no arrests had been made."

Basically she made excuses for getting it wrong and reporting there was an arrest, when that was not true.

Then Wesley Adcock and Parnell McNamara were on to talk about the massive explosion at a Texas fertilizer plant has killed at least five people and injured dozens of others.

Adcock said this: "I was working down the road, and I saw a big mushroom cloud. I told the sheriff I knew CPR and first aid and he sent me to the community center, which was like a war zone. People were hurt and didn't know what to do, so I took people to hospitals in the area."

Sheriff Parnell McNamara described the widespread devastation, saying this: "This was an extremely large explosion and it does look like a war zone. Buildings were leveled, houses were blown off their foundations, roofs and windows are missing as far as six or eight blocks away. We heard there was some looting and we addressed that very quickly and stopped it."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Down by the banks of the River Charles. Billy said this: "If you visit Boston this summer you'll help the local economy, learn some history, and make a loud statement to the murderous villains behind the terror attack."

Texas Fertilizer Plant News O'Reilly Totally Ignored
By: Steve - April 19, 2013 - 10:00am

Wednesday night, a huge explosion ripped through West, Texas, a small town near Waco, killing somewhere between five and 15 people and injuring hundreds.

And here is the news O'Reilly failed to report. The plant was cited for failing to obtain or qualify for a permit in 2006 after a complaint of a strong ammonia smell, a smell that was reported to be "very bad that night."

The plant has not been inspected in the past five years, and only six Texas fertilizer plants were inspected in that time. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is chronically understaffed, which means that a given plant like West Fertilizer can only expect to get a state inspection once every 67 years on average.

With this kind of neglect, worker safety is in serious condition. More than 4,500 people were killed at work in 2010, up three percent from the previous year, meaning that more American workers died on the job in one year than died during the entire Iraq war.

This doesn't even count the others who might suffer from dangerous workplace conditions like those residents of West injured in the blast who didn't work at the plant.

And OSHA is understaffed because the Republicans (who are in the back pocket of the corporations) cut the funding for OSHA so they do not have enough inspectors to do their job.

And that's not all, OSHA will have to cut its $564.8 million budget by 8.2 percent, which the White House predicted would mean 1,200 fewer workplace inspections. And it would be even more hobbled if House Republicans get their way.

The Republican party's 2011 budget, which was little changed in the most recent iteration, sought to reduce OSHA's budget by $99 million while slashing other workplace protection agencies. And O'Reilly never reported any of this news, none of it.

Fox News Cuts Away From Obama Gun Vote Statement
By: Steve - April 19, 2013 - 9:00am

This was an outrage, Fox went to the Obama statement for about a minute, then they cut away from it before he got 10 words out. And btw, CNN and MSNBC showed the entire statement by Obama, Fox was the only cable news network that cut away, and only showed a minute or less.

Here is the video of FOX cutting to Obama, then cutting away, for what you might ask, breaking news or something important, of course not, they went right back to the stooges on their daily afternoon show called the five.

To his credit, even Greg Gutfeld was shocked that Fox cut away from Obama so quick and said he was sorry that it should have been handled better.

Here is the video of Gutfeld saying he was sorry they did not handle it better.

And Fox wonders why they are slammed for their right-wing bias, it's because of this exact stuff, they have no respect for the President, and they would never do this kind of thing if the President were a Republican.

And btw, O'Reilly never said a word about it, even though he does a media bias segment with Bernie Goldberg. But if MSNBC had done this to a Republican President, O'Reilly and Goldberg would have spent an entire segment slamming them for bias and disrespect.

The Wednesday 4-17-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 18, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Politics and Terror. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: There was some confusion surrounding the investigation today, but it looks like authorities are closing in on possible villains in the Boston bombing. On the casualty front, we now know the identities of the three people killed.

They are 8-year-old Martin Richard, a third-grader from Boston; 29-year-old Krystle Campbell, a restaurant manager from Medford, Massachusetts; and 23-year-old Lingzi Lu, a Chinese national studying at Boston University.

At least 13 other people have had limbs amputated and a number of the casualties remain in serious condition. Please keep all that in mind while digesting the following: Some media people are exploiting the terror attack and others are speculating in an irresponsible way.

MSNBC's Chris Matthews said 'domestic terrorists tend to be on the far right,' while Jessica Stern of Harvard implicated the 'far-right neo-Nazi patriot movement.' The worst comes from syndicated columnist David Sirota, who wrote this: 'If you care about everything from stopping war to reducing the defense budget to passing immigration reform, you should hope the bomber was a white domestic terrorist.'

This loon hopes that a deranged American killed other Americans so his own political agenda is not scrutinized. It's hard to believe this is the tone of the debate in America today.
Earth to O'Reilly, that is not the tone of the debate, it's just a few isolated examples of morons saying stuff. The majority of America does not agree with them, even most liberals, so stop trying to smear everyone on the left because of what a very few did, jerk.

Then O'Reilly had two former FBI officials, Bill Daly and Bill Gavin on to discuss it.

Gavin said this: "From the amount of evidence and the kind of evidence that is coming in. I think this will be solved in a relatively quick amount of time. But you have to be careful saying that because I don't want to put the pressure on anybody."

Daly said this: "You can speak to people but once you start pressing them, if they say they don't want to cooperate they have no responsibility to speak with you. And as soon as they say anything that could be used against them, they have the opportunity to lawyer up."

Then Kate Obenshain and Kirsten Powers were on to slam Barney Frank, because they did not like something he said. Former Congressman Barney Frank used the Boston terror attacks to ridicule those who want smaller government and lower taxes.

Powers said this: "The timing is very bad, and he is setting up a caricature of Republicans. I'm a Democrat but I can recognize that most Republicans support funding police departments and the FBI, so this idea that there are Republicans arguing against funding law enforcement is not based in fact."

Obemshain said this: "Democrats are trying to score political points off of a national tragedy. And we saw the President do a similar thing after Sandy Hook. Let's focus on the fact that we have grieving people and there are villains on the loose."

O'Reilly said this: "He's a left-wing bomb thrower, but you shut up until people are buried. He's so narcissistic that he doesn't care about anything but himself and his agenda."

Then Karl Rove, speculated on the possible ramifications of the Boston bombings, saying this: "I hope it doesn't change who we are and how we act, but I hope it does encourage people to recognize that America is filled with soft targets. We have lots of places where terrorists would like to attack if they just want to take innocent lives."

Then Boston Globe photographer John Tlumacki, who captured a dramatic photo of an elderly runner knocked over by one of the bombs was on.

Tlumacki said this: "This was my fifth year covering the marathon at the finish line, and your average people were coming across the finish line. There was a loud explosion and the force knocked me back a little bit, then I just reacted instinctually and went forward. I tried not to interfere with the rescue workers, I tried to be as discreet as possible, but in a situation like this you're the eyes for the world and you have to immerse yourself."

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because he is nothing but a has-been right-wing comedian, who is only on to make jokes about liberals, with no liberal comedian on for balance.

Then Juliet Huddy was on for did you see that, she talked about the Boston terror bombings, and an excerpt from the animated show "Family Guy" that went viral on the Internet. The clip, which turned out to be doctored and a hoax, showed the lead character winning the Boston Marathon after blowing up everyone else in the race.

Huddy said this: "They took two separate story lines and spliced them together, and it does look very convincing. You can take anything on line and splice it together and this was too easy of an opportunity for some sickos out there."

Huddy also reacted to the radio host who asked Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick whether the attacks were engineered by the government, saying this: "Talk show host Alex Jones is the king of conspiracy theorists and he's been on the air since day one saying this was done by the FBI. It's so sick and this guy's an idiot, but he is on 60 stations and he is considered legit among the crazies."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Earning your trust. But there was no tip, just O'Reilly bragging about the ratings for Fox News after the Boston terrorist attack. According to O'Reilly that shows people trust Fox News, which is ridiculous, because all it shows is that a lot of Republicans tuned to Fox that night.

Republican Calls Obama Critics Partisan Politial Hacks
By: Steve - April 18, 2013 - 10:00am

And he is also talking about you O'Reilly, for slamming Obama over his tragedy comments. Only partisan right-wing political hacks are trying to take a terrorist attack and use it to smear the President, and there is a place in hell waiting for you for doing it.

Not to mention this, you would never do this to a Republican President, in fact, you would defend whatever he said, and you did for 8 years under Bush.

The aftermath of a tragedy often provides opportunity for the rest of us to see the awful side in some of our fellow human beings, but amid the sea of pettiness that is the right-wing obsession with making President Obama say Candyman three times, or whatever it is they think he needs to say, one influential conservative stood against the tide of O'Reilly and the editors, who can only experience human emotion after hearing the words "act of terror."

Redstate chief and Fox News contributor Erick Erickson, in the moments after the bombing, served his Breitbartian mates a Twitterific glass of shut up.

In the hours following the bombing, Erickson tweeted to his followers, "Sorry folks, I'm not interesting in beating up the President today. God bless him. He's got his work cut out for him," and later added this: "A reminder to Christians on the right on days like this: pray not just for Boston, but for the President & his team too."

Erickson took to the pages of his blog later, saying this:
We can speculate. We can call it terrorism. But for now we really do not know who or why or even how, just the what and the where. As partisan sides go, both sides will try to find some ground on which to score political points. That is what partisans do these days. It does not matter whether it is right or wrong. It happens.

But we do not know who did it yet or why.

What we do know is that the President, when he first addressed it, did not call it "terrorism," as if he must offer up the word as some salve or recognition for horror and terror. It is clear from the look on his face he knows the horror. He knows the terror. The word has become a shibboleth for some. At times like this though, does it really matter? It was a horrifying, monstrous act of terrorism whether the word is used or not.

Multiple bombs, multiple dead, many wounded, that is the reality we are all confronted with regardless of party or politics. Today, pray for Boston. Pray for the victims, their loved ones, and the first responders.

Pray also for the President of the United States and his team of advisors who must now find out who did this and take action.
Basically what he is saying is for the partisan hacks like O'Reilly to shut up and stop the cheap partisan political attacks on the President. And what makes it really bad is that O'Reilly would use a terrorist attack to do it, where people were killed. Just report the story (jerk) and stop using the tragedy to smear the President.

Senate Votes Down Expanded Firearm Background Check Bill
By: Steve - April 17, 2013 - 4:00pm

The Senate voted down an amendment offered by Sens. Joe Manchin (D-WV) and Pat Toomey (R-PA) to expand background checks for gun purchases at gun shows and online, in a vote of 54-46.

The measure needed 60 votes to be included in the underlining bill. As Vice President Joe Biden called the finally tally, Tucson survivor Patricia Maisch yelled, "Shame on you!" Outside of the Senate chamber she said, "They have no soul."

Four Republicans voted in favor of the measure, Collins, McCain, Toomey, and Kirk. Four Democrats voted against it: Heitkamp, Pryor, Baucus, and Begich. The Senate also voted down a Republican alternative in a vote of 52 to 48.

Currently, the legislation contains a much more expansive background check provision, supported by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), that will almost certainly also fall short of the 60 votes needed.

The Monday 4-16-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 17, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Another terror attack on American soil. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: We now know the human toll of the Boston terror attack - more than 170 people were hurt and three are dead, including an 8-year-old boy. Terrorists are obviously targeting America and so far U.S. authorities have done an excellent job in protecting us, but it was inevitable that someone would get through.

Fox News is reporting that the bombs were homemade, put into a knapsack, and placed in garbage cans. The bombs contained nails and ball bearings, which are designed to maim people. Bombs like this have been used in Afghanistan, but they seem to be homemade with ingredients you can buy at any hardware store.

Talking Points believes the perps will be found and brought to justice and executed. If this is an international terror attack, the repercussions will be severe. And if it's homegrown, that will be another stain on American history.
Then Charles Krauthammer was on, and instead of just reporting the story, the biased O'Reilly once again asked Krauthammer for his thoughts on President Obama's description of it as a "tragedy."

Krauthammer said this: "Obama is not the first to use the word 'tragedy' to describe events like this. A bus accident is a tragedy, but an attack on a bus is a crime or an act of war. When the agent is human evil, it's beyond a tragedy."

Notice they ignored the fact that the next day President Obama called it a terrorist attack during a press conference. They also ignored the fact that on the day of the bombings Obama administration officials called it an act of terror. O'Reilly and Krauthammer both ignored those facts.

Krauthammer gave U.S. intelligence authorities mixed reviews, saying this: "They've done a very good job in protecting us from terror attacks; this is the first time there has been a successful bombing attack in the U.S. since 9/11. So in that sense we've been well-protected. So operationally they've been incredibly good, but not in terms of assessing the potential of our enemies."

Then emergency room physician Dr. Allan Panter was on, he was near the finish line watching his wife run in the Boston Marathon when the bombs went off.

Panter said this: "She had injuries on her lower extremities, but we could not find any obvious injury to her chest or abdomen, which was kind of puzzling. She was basically in arrest, but we thought she had a faint pulse and we started CPR. We ended up transporting her to the medical tent where, unfortunately, she expired."

Panter praised the ordinary citizens who did so much to help scores of maimed victims, saying this: "There were bystanders who rushed in, and those are the people who deserve a lot of credit. There was so much help that the medical tent could actually turn people away, which is what you need in this situation."

Then Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes were on to talk taxes and President Obama. The First Family paid an effective tax rate of 18.4% last year on an adjusted gross income of $608,611, but they donated generously to various charities.

Colmes said this about taxes: "States don't have enough money coming in from the federal government, because federal tax rates are lower than they've been practically since the 1950's. We're paying less in taxes as a percentage of our income than we've paid for decades."

Crowley said this: "This year the federal government will take in a record $2.7 trillion in revenue, but it's never enough for the left. We have a monster federal government, and once you build this monster it becomes ever more ravenous and it constantly needs to be fed. Government at all levels is totally out of control!"

Earth to Crowley, you are a spin doctor, and you ignored the point Colmes made. It's not what you take in, it's how much you spend and the percentage of taxes you pay.

Crowley also took aim at President Obama's personal tax burden, saying this: "For all of his talk about class warfare and radical wealth redistribution, he never pays one cent beyond what his accountant says he owes."

Which is just laughable, because when wealthy Republicans pay less than 20% in taxes Crowley defends it and says it is great. But when a Democrat does it she slams him. Not to mention this, it kills the spin from O'Reilly and Crowley that paying 36% is too much for the wealthy to pay, when most of them do not pay the 36%, they pay 18% or less.

Then GOP Congressman Steve King was on to talk about immigration. Republican Marco Rubio and the Senate's "gang of eight" have been pushing their immigration reform bill. But King is opposed to it. And of course no Democratic guest was on for balance.

King said this: "This just won't work. You don't need legislation to enforce the border, all it takes is a president who is determined to do that. This bill has instant legalization of almost everybody who's here illegally. President Obama has lawlessly and unconstitutionally announced that he's not going to keep his own oath of office with regard to immigration."

Evn O'Reilly advised King to reconsider the proposed legislation for political reasons, saying this: "You said 'instant,' but there is a probationary period of ten years and that doesn't even kick in unless it's certified that the border is secure. If Republicans don't get back in the game with Hispanic American voters, you're never going to prosper here because of the demographics."

Then Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on to look back at the punishment meted out to convicted terrorists.

Wiehl said this: "Timothy McVeigh faced eight federal murder charges, and he was executed, but his accomplice Terry Nichols is serving life in Colorado. 'Shoe bomber' Richard Reid tried to blow up a plane in 2001. He pled guilty and is serving a life sentence in the same Colorado prison."

Guilfoyle said this: "Faisal Shazad tried to bomb Times Square in 2010. He pled guilty to ten counts and is doing life without the possibility of parole. 'Underwear bomber' Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab pled guilty in October of 2011 and he is also doing life without parole, and 'Unabomber' Ted Kaczynski pled guilty and is also serving life."

O'Reilly predicted that the terrorist or terrorists in Boston, if apprehended and convicted, will be put to death.

Then the right-wing moron Jesse Watters was on, who went to Boston to take the pulse of some city residents. "I feel really unsettled," one young woman told Watters, while other folks used words like "devastated" and "sick."

Asked what should be done to the perpetrators, these were a few of the suggested punishments: "Crucify him" ... "Leave him in a room with me and four of my friends for a while" ... "Hang him upside down and let people beat him to death."

Back in the studio, Watters summarized the dilemma many Bostonians are facing. "After 9/11 we immediately knew it was Al Qaeda and bin Laden, so people were bloodthirsty, but here they haven't even identified a suspect. So people don't know who to punch back at."

Here is a great e-mail that was sent to O'Reilly: David Goldwasser, Westport, NY: "Mr. O'Reilly, I watched your Boston coverage last night and you immediately took President Obama to task for using the word 'tragedy.' The dictionary defines 'tragedy' as an event causing great suffering. You are splitting hairs."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: No Regrets. Billy said this: "You can avoid looking back at life with regret by living up to your God-given potential and by helping everybody you can."

Some Electric Car Company Facts For O'Reilly & Fox
By: Steve - April 15, 2013 - 10:00am

Hey O'Reilly, this is for you, jerk. Sarah Palin, this is for you too, dummy. Lou Dobbs, read this fool. Mitt Romney, read this moron.

Sometimes there are two companies that have different names, but they are involved in the same exact business. It's enough to make your head spin, if you are a right-wing spin doctor. But not to worry. I'm here to help you.

There is a company called Fisker that makes electric cars, and it is not doing very well. Last week they laid off 75 percent of their employees, and it looks like they are headed for bankruptcy.

If that happens, the government might lose a lot of the money it loaned to them a few years back as part of a program to encourage the development of alternative-energy vehicles.

That electric car company is called FISKER.

Now pay attention to this part idiots, there is a second electric car company called Tesla, yeah I know it's complicated, but read on. They have a different name, same business.

Tesla is doing very well. They did not lay off 75 percent of its employees. And they are not behind on repayment of its government loans.

In fact, they are repaying them ahead of schedule. They also just celebrated their first quarterly profit, their stock has been soaring, and their latest model is the Motor Trend Car of the Year. Once again, their name is Tesla, and they are doing great.

Let's recap for O'Reilly and the idiots on the right at Fox. Fisker is a loser. Tesla is not a loser.

That means you can stop saying that Tesla had "$523 million in losses" O'Reilly, because it's a lie.

Palin you can stop saying Tesla is a loser, because it's a lie.

Lou Dobbs, whatever other opinions you might hold of the Department of Energy's loan programs, you now know it's not true to say that all they pick are losers.

Romney, shut up unless you know what you are talking about.

Maybe next we can tackle some even more challenging distinctions, like the one between solar-energy companies named Solyndra and solar-energy companies not named Solyndra.

Ann Coulter Makes Joke About Killing Meghan McCain
By: Steve - April 14, 2013 - 11:00am

And yet O'Reilly never said a word about it, and even continues to have her on his show to let her spin out her offensive right-wing propaganda. But when a liberal does something similar, O'Reilly bans them from the Factor and reports that they are a bad person.

The Fox website even pulled the post they had about it. Fox Nation has taken down a post it previously highlighted in which Ann Coulter joked about the death of Meghan McCain, the daughter of Sen. John McCain (R-AZ).

On April 10th, Fox Nation linked to a column by Ann Coulter under the headline "Coulter: Liberals Go Crazy For The Mentally Ill."

In the post, Coulter wrote, "MSNBC's Martin Bashir suggested that Republican senators need to have a member of their families killed for them to support the Democrats' gun proposals. (Let's start with Meghan McCain!)"

After the post was highlighted across various news outlets, Fox Nation pulled it from its website.

Following Coulter's post, Meghan McCain responded on Twitter, saying, "Apparently Ann Coulter made a joke about me being killed in a recent column. I should expect nothing less but disgusted regardless."

And this is a hero to the far-right, they love Coulter and every offensive thing she says. So does O'Reilly, because he keeps putting her on his show, no matter what she says. Making O'Reilly just as bad as she is, for giving her a forum to spew out that hate speech on his #1 rated cable news show.

The Friday 4-12-13 O'Reilly/Gutfeld Factor Review
By: Steve - April 13, 2013 - 11:00am

There was no TPM because O'Reilly had another far-right loon host his show, Greg Gutfeld filled in for O'Reilly, proving once more that O'Reilly is a Republican. Because only a Republican would have three right-wing fill in hosts, Laura Ingraham, Scott Brown, and Greg Gutfeld.

Gutfeld started the show with his top story called: Liberal activist Jane Fonda angers veterans. Gutfeld said that some veterans are boycotting Jane Fonda's new movie, in which the far-left actress portrays Nancy Reagan.

So Pete Hegseth and professor Richard Walter were on with different views of the Fonda-as-Reagan casting.

Hegseth said this: "There is no statute of limitations on treason, and that's precisely what Jane Fonda did when she went to Hanoi and sat on that anti-aircraft gun and recorded propaganda statements calling our brave Vietnam veterans 'war criminals.' Veterans are completely justified to be outraged about this."

But Walter advised vets and all Americans to consider forgiveness, saying this: "Jane Fonda has said a lot of dumb things over her life and certainly she was wrong to go to Vietnam, but she has apologized for that and asked for forgiveness. God bless our veterans, but how are they served by having a political test for actors who are portraying a character?"

Gutfeld complained that Fonda's upcoming film is full of liberals, saying this: "The Weinsteins are putting out the movie, John Cusack is playing Richard Nixon, and all that's missing is Michael Moore playing Gerald Ford."

Notice he never complains about any movies that are full of conservatives, not to mention this, most of hollywood is liberal, because liberal actors have the most talent, so who else would you expect to be in a movie but liberal actors. Almost all movies are full of liberal actors, dumbass.

Then Gutfeld had Gordon Chang on to talk about North Korea. He asked Chang if the world should be concerned about Kim Jong-un's nuclear threats.

Chang said this: "This is a volatile situation because we have a lot of new leaders. Kim Jong-un has been in power for less than 16 months, he hasn't consolidated his position, and he's been purging many officials. So the regime is in disarray and at no time since 1949 has a North Korean leader had a smaller base of support, which means this guy might risk everything."

Chang also said this: "Then you have the South Koreans, who are on a hair-trigger alert, and the Chinese military, which is supporting the North Koreans. So this is moving in the wrong direction. Within three or four years the North Koreans will have a nuclear warhead that they could deliver to any U.S. city with a long-range missile."

Then Karl Rove was on to talk about a couple of students at the University of Massachusetts at Amherst who tried to shout down Karl Rove when he spoke on campus last week.

Rove said this: "These two lunatics had to read their heckle off a piece of paper, and how pathetic is that? But most of the crowd was respectful and we had a great evening."

Gutfeld asked Rove why leftists often try to silence their political opponents. Rove said this: "Liberalism claims to be tolerant, but there is an intolerant element on the left that doesn't want you in their playground. What do they have to fear? They don't like having conservatives on campus because they know our arguments will sway some people."

What Gutfeld did with Rove is exactly what O'Reilly does. Claim that if you voice an opinion about a conservative you are trying to silence them, which is ridiculous. All they did was voice an opinion about Rove, they did not try to silence him.

And btw, it was 2 people, not 20 or 30 or 40. And Rove even admitted most of the crowd was respectful. So they unfairly and dishonestly claimed that all liberals want to silence all conservatives, based on 2 people heckling Rove at one speech. It's laughable and insane to make that claim, and when a conservative heckles a liberal they never make the same argument.

Then Gutfeld invited author James Hirsen and professor Mark Sawyer to analyze Jay-Z and Beyonce's Cuban vacation.

Hirsen said this: "If Beyonce and Jay-Z had grown up in Cuba, they would not be free to create the kind of artistic expressions that have made them successful. As Senator Marco Rubio pointed out, a famous Cuban rapper is rotting in a prison and it would have been nice if they had visited him."

But Sawyer, who spent a year in Cuba, defended the visit, saying this: "Interacting with Cubans is about changing hearts and minds, and having rich American celebrities hanging out in Havana undermines the message of communism. Our embargo policy is insanity and Marco Rubio is an idiot who is completely emotional about the policy."

After Sawyer insulted Rubio, Gutfeld slammed him, saying this: "Do you think calling Marco Rubio an 'idiot' helps your argument? It kind of makes you look stupid. Why is pointing out that two celebrities are pawns in a propaganda machine idiotic?"

Then Geraldo was on to talk about the Jodi Arias trial, which I do not report on because it's tabloid garbage.

Then Gutfeld had the conservative Jeff McCall on to talk about the media coverage of Philadelphia abortionist Kermit Gosnell, who is on trial for killing at least seven infants moments after they were born.

And btw, liberals and pro-choice Americans do not support what this guy did, if he did it, nobody supports killing babies after they are born. But Gutfeld and the far-right claim liberals support the guy, which is ridiculous.

McCall said this: "This topic needs news coverage, and this is a conscious decision by news executives to not cover this. News decisions are made in part on the biases and whims of the editors and producers. This shows the darker side of the abortion controversy and there are some grisly and inhumane details that directly confront the notion of 'freedom of choice.' Living human beings were allegedly being killed by this doctor."

Gutfeld concluded that media bias is the reason behind the conspicuous lack of coverage, saying this: "The underlying factor is that most people in the media are pro-choice and this makes them uncomfortable. This doctor is essentially a serial killer and you can't even read the court documents without turning your stomach."

O'Reilly Spins & Lies About Hollywood & The Prison System
By: Steve - April 13, 2013 - 10:00am

In an effort to oppose federal drug sentencing reform, Bill O'Reilly attacked a group of Hollywood celebrities by taking them out of context and ignoring the racial realities behind federal incarceration rates.

On the April 10th O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly belittled musicians and movie actors Will Smith, Mark Wahlberg, Cameron Diaz, Jamie Foxx, Jim Carrey and others for writing a letter to the White House suggesting President Obama take further steps to alleviate inefficiencies and inequalities in the federal criminal justice system.

O'Reilly cherry picked quotes from the letter to misrepresent their message and ignored any discussion of their actual recommendations. Instead, he went into a tirade of insults and out-of-context statistics in an attempt to distort the true picture of America's prison structure.

O'Reilly devoted much of the segment to slamming guest Bob Beckel and to the semantic task of crafting his own definition of "violent crime" - a definition federal criminal law does not recognize.

He completely ignored the celebrities substantive recommendations for prison and sentencing reform and avoided a balanced discussion of federal prison policy.

Wahlberg and others pointed to racial inequalities in drug sentencing that persist despite the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (FSA). The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) agreed in November 2012 that more had to be done, writing that despite the passage of the FSA, "selling a small quantity of crack cocaine (28 grams) carries the same mandatory minimum sentence - five years - as selling 500 grams of powder cocaine."

From a racial justice standpoint, this matters because crack cocaine is disproportionately found in African-American communities, while powder cocaine turns up more frequently in white communities. O'Reilly ignored the problem totally.

The celebrity letter to President Obama also raised concerns about severe mandatory sentencing laws and suggested the president get behind the bipartisan Justice Safety Valve Act of 2013, which would provide federal judges with more sentencing discretion in appropriate circumstances.

PO'Reilly also ignored the fact that personalities from across the political spectrum, from the Republican Grover Norquist to Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy (VT), all support the legislation.

Mandatory sentencing provisions have been widely criticized by judges, the media, and even the United States Sentencing Commission, which published a 2011 report finding that mandatory minimum sentences are often "excessively severe" and not "narrowly tailored to apply only to those offenders who warrant such punishment," especially for drug offenders.

An honest conversation about the U.S. prison system would have revealed that it's almost universally perceived to be broken. But O'Reilly's segment ignored the concept of severe sentencing, asking instead, "Who's in the prisons? Terrible people, that's who."

The Thursday 4-11-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 12, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The far-left running wild again. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The far-left is becoming increasingly bold and fresh in trying to silence those with whom they disagree. One of the consequences of having a liberal President twice-elected is that the fringe left feels emboldened. It thinks it can do whatever it wants.

At the University of Southern California, Darry Sragow, who teaches political science, has turned his classroom into an anti-Republican strong-hold, telling students, quote: 'The Republican Party in California is the last vestige of angry, old white people and that's what it is. Republicans are trying to prevent people of color and people of lower income from voting by requiring voter ID.'

This week, Karl Rove was insulted by protesters at the University of Massachusetts, and Sen. Rand Paul was heckled at Howard University. Also, Rick Santorum was banned from speaking at a high school in Michigan until the Factor intervened. Now students must get a signed permission slip from their parents if they want to hear what the former presidential candidate has to say.

The far-left is intruding on the national discourse, perverting the educational system, and generally behaving as badly as any movement has since the late 1960's. Fair-minded Americans will eventually reject this explosion of zealotry as they always have. But in the meantime, students and others are getting hurt. A disturbing trend that must be confronted.
And here is the problem with all that right-wing spin, O'Reilly cherry picks a few examples of something someone on the left does and claims the left is running wild. When all it is are a few far-left people doing a few things, nothing more, and nobody is running wild. Not to mention, he ignores all the crazy stuff the far-right is doing, while we have a Democratic President.

Even the far-right Charles Krauthammer disagreed with O'Reilly, saying this: Krauthammer took issue with the statement that the situation on college campuses is now worse than it was in the 60s. He said that instead of a fringe protest here and there, in the 60s, radicals took over campuses and kept out conservatives. He described the protesters today as rude and infantile with no impact on national discourse.

But O'Reilly still refused to let it go, saying this: O'Reilly cautioned that a vibrant democracy needs respect for opposing points of view and we're not seeing that on college campuses today. He also said the indoctrination at major universities will change our electorate.

Then Todd Starnes and Bob Zelnick were on, O'Reilly asked them why American colleges are hiring radicals. Professor Zelnick said that when the left feels threatened, it acts up.

Starnes expressed optimism over the conservative students who are starting to speak up, like the student at USC who filmed Professor Darry Sragow with a hidden camera.

Then the far-right Lou Dobbs was on to talk about the Senate, who advanced a bill that would require more background checks on gun buyers and provide more funding for school security.

While conceding that the issue is important, O'Reilly admitted finding gun control boring because it never goes anywhere.

Dobbs said that he doesn't see the point of gun control because we already have enough statutes to deal with it. He said if gun laws worked, crime would be reduced, but they don't work because criminals are the ones killing everyone.

O'Reilly argued that gun registration, coupled with stop and frisk, would have prevented the murder of the teenage girl in Chicago. Dobbs flipped out that O'Reilly wants to apply what he called "draconian measures" to the Second Amendment.

Then Bonny Forrest and Wendy Walsh were on to talk about legalizing marijuana. And of course the fool O'Reilly opposes legalizing marijuana because putting another intoxicant on the market sends the wrong message to children.

Even though a new Pew Research poll shows that 52% of Americans now favor pot legalization, up from 24% in 1980. And those kids who want to smoke pot are already doing it anyway, legal or not. Which makes the O'Reilly argument insane.

Dr. Forrest said people born after 1977 don't see pot as a problem, but rather see it on par with alcohol. She also mentioned that baby boomers have also changed their view on the subject, with more and more Americans seeing the war on drugs as a waste of money.

Dr. Walsh agreed, pointing out that plenty of baby boomers have tried marijuana or currently use it so the additional support for legalization is simple math. She insisted that taxpayers don't want to spend money prosecuting pot smokers.

But the crazy Bill O'Reilly held strong on his stance opposing legalization and said that putting the legal tag on pot is not good for society.

Then Monica Lindstrom and Jeanine Pirro were on to talk about the Jodi Arias trial, that I do not report on because it's tabloid garbage and not real news.

Then Jesse Watters was on to talk about the city of Detroit, which has been controlled by Democrats for more than 50 years, and now owes close to $14 billion. Its former mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick, faces up to 20 years on various corruption convictions.

Watters went to Detroit to speak with Charlie LeDuff, the author of "Detroit: An American Autopsy," and also got a sampling of Detroit residents.

Watters demonstrated how crime, unemployment, arson, and drugs have taken their toll on City. The citizens of the city seem to have no faith in the leadership there, and there's been a massive amount of white people leaving Detroit in the last 20 years or so.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: What do you do when someone hurts you? Billy said this: "The victims of violent crime must fight back and hold the criminals accountable in both civil and criminal court, but that almost always takes lots of money. That's why the Factor supports the Alexa Foundation, which was started by a rape victim at Boston University whose family was wiped out financially by helping to prosecute her rapist."

Jindal Drops Help The Rich Tax Plan After Public Outcry
By: Steve - April 12, 2013 - 10:00am

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal(R) is dropping his deeply unpopular tax plan after several weeks of outcry from advocates for the poor and business groups alike. The proposal would have abolished income and corporate taxes in exchange for a higher sales tax, effectively hitting the poor with higher taxes while giving the wealthiest Louisiana residents enormous tax cuts.

In a speech to open the 2013 legislative session, Jindal announced he would give in to the pushback:
I realize that some of you think I haven't been listening. But you'll be surprised to learn I have been. And here is what I've heard from you and from the people of Louisiana - yes, we do want to get rid of the income tax, but Governor, you're moving too fast and we aren't sure that your plan is the best way to do it.

So I've thought about that. And it certainly wasn't the reaction I was hoping to hear. And now I'm going to give you my response and it's not the response people are accustomed to hearing from politicians. Here is my response: Ok, I hear you. So I am going to park my tax plan.

Now, to be clear, I still like my plan. but I recognize success requires give and take. And I recognize that in this instance, I need to be the one who gives so that we can have the chance to achieve success. But I'm not going to pout, I'm not going to take my ball and go home.
Jindal's plan would have raised taxes on an estimated 80 percent of the state's residents while cutting taxes by more than $25,000 for the richest 1 percent. The poorest Louisianans already pay a higher share of their incomes in taxes than the wealthiest 1 percent, and Jindal's regressive tax would have added an average of $395 of taxes on the poorest 20 percent.

While acknowledging the opposition to his plan, Jindal still called for the abolishment of the income tax, without specifying how he would replace it without shifting the same tax burden onto low-income Louisianans.

And btw, the governor's approval rating plummeted in the past few months. With two-thirds of Louisianans opposed to his tax plan.

Though Jindal has conceded defeat, similar plans by other Republicans to replace income taxes with higher sales taxes are being considered in Kansas, Nebraska, and North Carolina.

The Wednesday 4-10-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 11, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Have illegal drugs harmed your family? The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: According to the U.S. Department of Health, more than 38,000 people died from drug overdoses in 2010...Yet many on the left are demanding softer drug laws. They don't believe that selling hard narcotics causes enough damage to be classified a violent crime.

A bunch of celebrities like Cameron Diaz, Jamie Foxx, Jim Carrey, Will Smith, Mark Wahlberg, Kim Kardashian, and LL Cool J have signed a letter to President Obama, quote: 'Mr. President...the greatest victims of the prison industrial complex are our nation's children. Hundreds of thousands of children have lost a parent to long prison sentences for non-violent drug offenses, leaving these children to fend for themselves...'

That is completely absurd and misguided in the extreme...48% of federal prison inmates in this country are serving time for drug offenses, but just 13% are in those prisons because of marijuana and virtually all of them are major weight dealers. This isn't the feds kicking in the door of somebody smoking reefer in their living room. That's what the left wants you to believe, but that's false...

By putting hard drug dealers in prison, authorities have made all Americans safer...Every criminologist knows most street crime and many murders are committed by drug involved people. But the Hollywood people don't know that because they have no clue what goes on the streets. The left-wing loons who say that selling hard drugs is not a violent crime are hurting all of us.
And btw, illegal drugs have not harmed my family, or any family. Because the people who choose to do drugs do so all on their own, and that is their choice, which they have the right to do.

Then Bob Beckel was on, a recovering addict himself, and he argued there are too many people in federal prisons for repeatedly selling small amounts of drugs. He claimed these prisoners are going in hard core drug users, but coming out hardened drug dealers.

Then Kirsten Powers and Kate Obenshain were on to discuss the Obama budget. President Obama offered his budget vision for next year and beyond. He proposed $3.78 trillion in spending in 2014; he said he'll cut $1.2 trillion over 10 years.

O'Reilly claimed that the President seems intent on spending regardless of mounting deficits. Kirsten Powers defended Obama, indicating that he philosophically believes you need to continue spending when you're in the midst of a fragile recovery.

O'Reilly disagreed, even though all the economists are saying it, and he is not an economist. Kate Obenshain warned that billions of dollars are being held on the sideline of the economy because of sky-high taxes on the affluent. She also suggested there aren't enough spending cuts in this budget.

Then the insane O'Reilly asked Powers if she really believes Obama understands the economy and is being fiscally responsible. Even though he is just doing what the economic experts are telling him what he should do.

Powers conceded that there could be more defense spending and entitlement spending cuts. Obenshain stressed that it's very important the President take some of the burden off of the job creators.

Which was done in the Bush years and it did not work, all it did was make the rich richer and add to the debt, and almost no new jobs were created.

Then Megyn Kelly was on to cry about Sen. Mitch McConnell, who is accusing someone of bugging his office and releasing audio recordings of private conversations concerning a potential challenge to his re-election by the actress Ashley Judd. The FBI is investigating. Even though there is no evidence anyone bugged his office.

The Senator insists this information is not the product of a mole within his campaign, but rather a bugging of his campaign headquarters. Kelly explained how this type of activity would be a felony under both federal and Kentucky state law unless one party consented. O'Reilly complained about the lack of privacy in today's society and declared that if the government cared, there would be a two party federal consent law.

Then they talked about a Supreme Court ruling, that the Boy Scouts, a private organization, is entitled to ban gay people. Now the state of California is trying to punish the organization for its stance and revoke its tax exempt status.

Megyn said even some left-leaning groups are nervous that this might be a slippery slope, allowing the state to pick and choose which groups can be tax exempt. O'Reilly said he just wants everyone to leave the Scouts alone.

So he does not care if they ban gay people from the boy scouts, which is not the position people who support gay marriage and gay rights have, which O'Reilly claims he supports, proving once again he is a liar when he says he supports gay marriage and gay rights.

Then O'Reilly cried about the Former Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, who was invited to speak at Gross Pointe South High School outside of Detroit. But the superintendent cancelled his appearance, suggesting Santorum is a bigot for opposing gay marriage.

O'Reilly reported that after calling the school district, there's been an about-face. Santorum will be allowed to speak, but students must have a permission slip signed by their parents in order to hear him. Santorum said he was disappointed that, as someone who served two terms in the Senate and two terms in the House, students will need permission to hear him speak, as though he could do to harm them.

O'Reilly said that the pro-gay marriage people have defined it as a civil rights issue. Thus, if you oppose equality, you're a bigot - and they've been very successful at painting the issue this way. Santorum agreed, and said he has been a victim of the mentality that if you oppose changing the definition of marriage, you must hate gay people.

That's because it is a civil rights issue, as in all men are created equal, you moron. And if gays are discriminated against for gay marriage and gay rights then they are not created equal, and it is a civil rights issue. For someone who claims to support gay rights O'Reilly sure takes a lot of far-right positions on it, even having the bigot Santorum on his show to cry about it.

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because Miller in only on to make bad jokes about liberals, with no liberal comedian on for balance.

Then Juliet Huddy was on to discuss the Tuesday concert at the White House, the edited version of which will be shown on PBS. Huddy did some digging and found out that the concert cost $1.3 million, $432,500 of which will be paid for by taxpayers.

Despite O'Reilly and most on the right crying about it, Huddy justified the expense, saying people who can't afford to go to concerts like this and can't afford cable will get to watch it on PBS.

They also talked about former Weather Underground guy Bill Ayers who called the Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel "a right-wing troglodyte." Huddy said this: Ayers has become the poster child for the free school model of education and he's angry that Emanuel is closing some schools in Chicago."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Play-Bill. And there was no tip, O'Reilly simply promoted a magazine with his ugly old face on the cover.

MSNBC Crew Call O'Reilly A Racist For 1950's Comments
By: Steve - April 11, 2013 - 10:00am

The guests who joined MSNBC host Martin Bashir Wednesday tore into Bill O'Reilly over a segment he did on Tuesday night eulogizing the late actress Annette Funicello.

The guests slammed O'Reilly for asking if the country was a better place to live in the 1950s, and said his misplaced nostalgia for a period marked by segregation and racial tensions made him, in the words of LL Cool J and Brad Paisley, an "Accidental Racist."

During O'Reilly's Tuesday night monologue, he lamented how the country has changed for the worse in many ways since the era when Funicello was popular. O'Reilly said that minorities were not in the best position during that period, and that behaviors like pre-marital sex and explicit behavior were kept kind of quiet.

Bashir opened the segment by asking Georgetown University professor Michael Eric Dyson for his thoughts on O'Reilly's comments. Bashir said this: "These sound like the crumbling thoughts of an individual who finds the modern world simply too much to bear."

Dyson replied that the 1950s were simply not an era-worthy of nostalgia, not just for minorities but for women. He said, by way of examples, that Nat King Cole could not get a television show, but two dogs, Lassie and Rin Tin Tin, and a horse, Mr. Ed, could.

Bashir then turned to Democratic strategist Angela Rye, asking if O'Reilly's statement (that white Americans were less fractious than they are today resulting in a society that functioned more effectively) was an insensitive comment.

Rye said this: "Bill O'Reilly should have been a cameo on LL Cool J's latest song, 'Accidental Racist.' Whether or not he means it or not, he walked right into this one."

And let's face it, when you say you wish we were back in the 50's when most of America was white, you are making a racist statement.

Rye then said this: "White America was unified by what exactly? It's an absolute slap in the face to 2013 and everything that we stand for in this particular America."

Krystal Ball noted that O'Reilly forgets that the top marginal income tax rate was 90 percent in the 1950s. Bashir even wondered if that was why the 1950s are regarded so highly in the first place.

Later in the discussion, Dyson hit O'Reilly for forgetting that white people were fractured along class lines, and that poor whites were as marginalized as American minorities were during that period.

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Electic Car Company Success
By: Steve - April 11, 2013 - 9:00am

Tuesday night O'Reilly claimed the electric car company Tesla Motors was a failure, claiming it had net losses. But Tesla has actually turned a profit, and even Fox News ran a story calling it a "success story" just last week.

O'Reilly said that Tesla, which received a $465 million Department of Energy loan guarantee, had "$523 million in losses."

But Tesla actually made a profit in the first quarter of 2013, and has arranged to repay its loan five years early. And O'Reilly never said a word about that.

O'Reilly's figure is from a 2011 Investor's Business Daily editorial, which is 2 years ago. In 2011, Tesla had annual net losses of $254 million, adding to previous losses, but Tesla was turning a profit in 2013 once its car production ramped up.

Fox News even labeled Tesla a "success story," and Fox Business anchor Lou Dobbs admitted that it was one of the winners of the Obama administration's clean energy programs.

And here is more news O'Reilly never reported, Bush gave them the loan, not Obama.

Tesla received its loan guarantee from the Department of Energy's Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) program, which was established in a 2007 bill that received broad bipartisan support and was signed into law by President George W. Bush.

Another company that received a loan guarantee under that law is Fisker Automotive, an electric carmaker that is reportedly preparing for a possible bankruptcy filing, leading to another onslaught of Fox News coverage.

If Tesla pays back its loan guarantee as expected, it won't cost the government a dime. Yet that loan guarantee will have helped Tesla obtain capital to manufacture its award-winning cars that it likely would not have been able to obtain otherwise. In short, the company's success makes it clear that the program is functioning as intended.

And here is more news O'Reilly did not report. If Fisker files for bankruptcy, we run the risk of not recouping the $192 million that it received from the Department of Energy before its loan guarantee was frozen. But Congress knew that not every company that received loans through the ATVM program would succeed, and set aside $7.5 billion to cover any losses -- none of which has been used so far.

The Tuesday 4-9-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 10, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The USA and Mickey Mouse. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The death of 70-year-old Annette Funicello is a red flag to the baby boom generation; she gained fame at age 13 as one of the leading members of the iconic Mickey Mouse Club. The question tonight is this: Were we a better country and a better people in the 1950's than today? There's no question that for minority Americans things were awful back then, so on the civil rights issue America is much improved today.

Americans have more income now, but the big ticket items like homes take a lot more money. On social issues, in 1959 only 5% of American babies were born out of wedlock; today it's about 41%, a shocking turn of events. In the 1950's and early 1960's premarital sex and explicit behavior were kept kind of quiet and the '50's were wholesome, especially by today's 'anything goes' standards.

There was a different attitude in America after World War II. Because we had won a hellacious war, white America was kind of unified and standards of behavior were very similar. There was respect for teachers, cops, and clerics. But now that's gone and the mantra for today is 'Where's mine?
That's right folks, O'Reilly wants to go back to the 50's, when Leave it to Beaver was the #1 show, and white people dominated everything, but he's not a racist, haha. Earth to O'Reilly, it's 2013 so shut up and quit dreaming about the 50's.

Then Alan Colmes and Monica Crowley were on to discuss it. Colmes said this: "I don't know that the 5% out-of-wedlock births is an accurate number, because I don't think people told the truth about that kind of stuff. People are more open about those kinds of things now. I love Frankie Avalon and Annette, but that America doesn't exist anymore."

Crowley claimed the 50's actually ended in the mid-60's, saying this: "Two major things happened in the mid- to late-1960's. There was Lyndon Johnson's 'Great Society' with the massive welfare state and the massive government spending that goes with it. That led to unwed mothers because the incentive was to break down the traditional family, and there was also the counter-cultural revolution that fed into the breakdown of the family."

Then two Republicans from Fox, Ed Henry and James Rosen were on to talk about the Obama budget, with no Democratic guests for balance.

Henry said this: "The biggest thing that has leaked out, is that he's going to cut some Social Security benefits. They're going to change the way inflation is calculated and that will result in a cut to government benefits. That's important because the White House is putting out the message that he's willing to take on some of his fellow Democrats."

Rosen said this: "A number of liberal groups have warned the White House and have vowed to launch primary campaigns against any Democrat who votes to approve the President's proposal. And another proposal that could be in this budget is to means test Medicare so that people of a certain income will not receive their Medicare benefits in the same way."

Then James Carville was on, who disagreed with O'Reilly on just about everything.

Carville said this: "The President is talking about limiting deductions for wealthy Americans. It may hurt a little bit, but most economists would say these are the kind of tax increases that would probably have a limited impact on the economy. Most people are not going to be affected by this at all. And by the way, this recovery is better than the Bush recovery ever was in terms of private sector job growth."

But of course O'Reilly took issue with Carville's notion that reducing deductions won't hurt the economy, even though Bill Clinton did it in the 90's and the economy boomed.

O'Reilly said this: "If you knock out deductions for affluent people, what do you think will happen to the home industry? If you can't deduct your home mortgage, the home industry will collapse."

Which is a lie, because the rich will not stop buying homes simply because they get less of a tax deduction on their home loan, and it's ridiculous to even make that claim.

Then John Stossel was on to lie with O'Reilly about some electric car company loans, mainly Tesla.

Stossel said this: "We are getting fleeced. People who have cronies in government get the loans, government is not capable of deciding what the new technology should be, and Fisker has fired 75% of its workers. Another solar power company called Solar Trust got $2 billion from the government. Only when government is smaller and you let the market make these decisions will you get results."

O'Reilly singled out electric car maker Tesla Motors, saying this: "They have net losses of $523 million and they got $465 million from the government."

That's a lie, those numbers are from 2011 and Tesla is making a profit now. And not only are they making a profit, they will pay back their loan 5 years early, with interest. And btw, O'Reilly implied it was Obama who gave out those loans, when it was Bush who signed the green company loan bill in 2007, but O'Reilly failed to report that.

Then Lis Wiehl and Anahita Sedaghatfar were on for is it legal. One year after Trayvon Martin was killed in Florida during a fight with George Zimmerman, Martin's parents have settled their case against the development where the altercation took place.

Wiehl said this: "They made a cost-benefit analysis, and they realized that if they went to trial they could have lost many millions of dollars. So a million dollars was a good settlement for them."

Jana Winter published a report in July in which she said there existed a notebook written by James Holmes, the alleged killer in Colorado. If that notebook comes into evidence, it could indicate whether he was criminally insane.

Sedaghatfar added that the court has threatened to jail Winter if she refuses to identify how she obtained the notebook: "If the judge does the right thing he will not compel Jana Winter to identify her anonymous sources. She's protected by the First Amendment."

Then Laura Ingraham was on, and she ridiculed the British left-wing loons who celebrated in the street upon hearing of Margaret Thatcher's death.

Ingraham said this: "I think Lady Thatcher would have expected this, and she would probably have been glad to see it. If these people are still so angry, she probably did what she set out to do, which was to lift Britain out of the malaise it was in. There's no understanding of respect for the dead among these people."

Ingraham also talked about the trip to Cuba by Jay-Z and Beyonce, saying this: "The rules don't apply to liberals and if you're a friend of Barack Obama like Jay-Z and Beyonce, you can get permission to hang out in Cuba. This is a pattern among leftists."

What a joke, how is it your business what Jay-Z and Beyonce do in their own time. Who cares what they do, not me.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Persuasion, not pressure. Billy said this: "Tuesday's tip was aimed at a New Orleans pressure group that is protesting any less-than-glowing coverage of the city: "Be honest, pressure groups don't help fix what needs to be fixed." "

Notice What O'Reilly Is Not Doing In The Gun Debate
By: Steve - April 10, 2013 - 10:00am

In December of 2012 O'Reilly said this about the former Marine, 27-year-old Jon Hammar, who was in a Mexican prison. Corporal Hammar secured permission from the U.S. Customs Office in Brownsville, Texas to carry an antique rifle handed down by his grandfather across the border. He then checked in with the Mexican officials with the paper work.

O'REILLY: "The gun was clearly a recreational weapon that Hammar wanted to take to Costa Rica on a trip. But Mexican authorities arrested Hammar, threw him in prison and actually chained him to his bunk. With six days to go before Christmas, that's where Hammar remains in a filthy, corrupt, Mexican jail."

Then O'Reilly had his parents on to discuss it, which he does a lot, have parents of victims of injustice on his show.

Now think about this, if you do a google search on "Newton Parents Speak Out" you get 44 million results in 0.26 seconds. Then you scroll down through the list of results and you will see that almost every media outlet in America has talked about the parents, or had them on their show.

But one, Bill O'Reilly.

Here is a few quotes from just one article about it:

Members of the newly formed Sandy Hook parents group spoke out as politicians from Maine to New Mexico marked the one month that has passed since the shooting with renewed demands for tighter gun control.

The Sandy Hook group says it wants to have open-minded discussions about a range of issues, including guns, mental health and safety in schools and other public places. Several speakers said they did not believe there was a single solution.

"We want the Sandy Hook school shootings to be recalled as the turning point where we brought our community and communities across the nation together and set a real course for change," said group co-founder Tom Bittman.

And yet, to this day O'Reilly has not had one member of the group on his show to discuss it, none, zip, zilch. O'Reilly has ignored them and refused to have any of them on the Factor.

But if a former Marine (who was not a child and not killed in a mass murder in a school) gets in trouble in Mexico, O'Reilly screams bloody murder and has his parents on to discuss that. Think about that for a minute folks, then remember that O'Reilly claims to be looking out for you, and the kids.

While ignoring the Sandy Hook parents group because his right-wing viewers would not like him having any of them on his show, and he does not want to deal with the blowback from his viewers. So instead of putting them on to put political pressure on our elected officials to pass stricter gun laws, he covers for the Republican party and the NRA.

The Monday 4-8-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 9, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Margaret Thatcher and President Obama. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The former Prime Minister of Great Britain died last night from a stroke. Along with Ronald Reagan, she defined conservative politics in the 1980's and is still a legend in conservative circles. Margaret Thatcher believed that a robust private economy would provide the most opportunity for working people; her opposition, the Labour Party, wanted government to largely control private industry.

So the question tonight is, did Lady Thatcher approve of President Obama, who certainly echoes many Labour Party policies. The answer is no. It is quite clear that Thatcher, Reagan, and other free-marketers would disagree with Barack Obama on economic policy. His attempt to stimulate the economy by pouring trillions of taxpayer dollars into it has failed dismally, but Mr. Obama is not changing course.

Ironically, the only good economic news in America is the stock market, which mostly benefits the wealthy. So while the President believes his policies are helping working Americans, they're actually hurting them. Government regulations and Obamacare are also inhibiting hiring. So the successful economic policies of Margaret Thatcher are very relevant today, but you won't hear the press say that.
And you will also not hear O'Reilly report that Thatcher raised taxes, because O'Reilly does not want you to know she did that. You will also not hear O'Reilly report that the economy is better now than it was 4 years ago, and that the Obama policies are working. Because O'Reilly is a biased right-wing hack who will not admit it.

Then the biased Republican Brit Hume was on to talk about Thatcher, saying this: "Her policies were an absolute antidote, to the policies that had been effect for some time. When she took over Great Britain was farther down the road toward full-blown socialism than the United States has ever gone. Her attitude was that this had to change radically, and it did. She privatized industries, she was for lower taxes and regulation, and the economy recovered smartly, but not immediately."

Which is a lie, because she raised taxes, she did not lower them.

Then Sally Kohn was on to talk about two homosexual students at George Washington University, who are demanding that the school's Catholic chaplain, Father Greg Shaffer, be tossed off campus for calling homosexual acts sinful.

GWU alumna Sally Kohn said this: "I support the right of the preacher to say what he said, and I support the right of the students to say what they're saying. I don't think this priest is the right person for ministering to young people, it's disruptive of him to call these kids 'unnatural and immoral' in their formative years."

O'Reilly claimed it was an attempt to silence Father Shaffer, saying this: "This is about the priest upholding the church's teaching that homosexual acts, as well as heterosexual acts outside of marriage, are not approved. It is a fascist act to demand that a college remove a chaplain because you don't like what he says."

Then Juan Williams and Mary Katharine Ham were on to talk about O'Reilly and his ridiculous claim that some liberal Americans, such as the George Washington students, seem eager to banish opposing opinions. Which is not true, they just do not like a preacher calling gay people sinners for simply having sex.

Williams said this: "This is outrageous. You can't tell somebody who's Catholic not to be Catholic, the guy's a priest and he's going to represent Catholic orthodoxy on campus. People don't want an honest discussion, they want to shut people up!"

Ham said this: "This is supposed to be a place of intellectual and spiritual diversity and inquiry, but college campuses are often exactly the opposite. Universities are often at the vanguard of putting in speech codes that punish people for having opinions."

Crazy O'Reilly then said this: "The left wants laws that shut you up if you criticize any so-called minority."

Which is just ridiculous, all they want is for preachers to stop calling gay people sinners, because it's a biased and bigoted opinion.

Then Pamela Lachman was on to talk about 25-year-old State Department employee Anne Smedinghoff, who was working to improve the lives of people in Afghanistan, was killed there by a suicide bomber over the weekend.

Lachman said this: "Anne has been incredibly committed to public service, and this was how she wanted to spend her career. She was so interested in international relations and working with people, this is exactly the kind of person you would want to work for the foreign service. She was so excited to be there, she didn't talk about the danger."

Then the biased right-wing fool Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about the late Margaret Thatcher, who was frequently denounced by the liberal media on both sides of the Atlantic, which Bernie Goldberg depicted as par for the course.

Goldberg said this: "There's a rule of thumb, which is that when a conservative politician tries to shake things up, they're seen as cold-hearted. But when a liberal politician tries to shake things up, they're seen by the media as 'progressive.' In 1981 the New York Times said that class warfare under Margaret Thatcher was 'endemic,' but Barack Obama has been waging class warfare since he took office."

Then the right-wing stooge Adam Carolla was on, who predicted that legalizing same-sex marriage will start as many arguments as it ends.

Carolla said this: "We have done ten times more arguing about race since we've had a black President, and I don't think giving gay people the right to marry is going to ratchet down the arguing. But I love gay people and our society would be better if we had more gay people. When you get to the gay part of Santa Monica Boulevard it looks like Shangri-La meets Seattle, and they don't have a bunch of kids crapping up the system."

Carolla also took a shot at airline passengers, saying this: "I fly first class because somebody else pays for it, and half the time the storage bin above my seat is filled, and half the time people are barging in from coach. It's a microcosm of what our world has become - why should you get to sit up there in first class? Because I paid more! It's not that airlines are getting worse, people are getting worse."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: The Big Un-Easy. Billy said this: "There's too much crime and corruption in The Big Easy. I'd go to New Orleans for fun any time, it's a great place, and I'd even take my kids. But corruption is corruption and New Orleans needs to get better."

Scarborough Slams GOP Over Parents Rights In Gun Debate
By: Steve - April 9, 2013 - 10:00am

Former Republican Congressman Joe Scarborough tore into the growing number of conservative senators who have pledged to filibuster a comprehensive gun safety bill without reading the proposal. The 13 senators (including Marco Rubio and Rand Paul) will win support "from a segment of your voting population," Scarborough said, but are ultimately damaging the Republican party by prioritizing the rights of criminals and the mentally ill rather than gun safety.

The Senate is expected to take up a comprehensive measure this month that will expand restrictions against gun trafficking, invest in school safety and provide for universal background checks on all gun purchases.

"There are a lot of guys out there in the Senate and they are going out because it's a free shot," Scarborough, who embraced gun safety in the aftermath of the Newtown shooting, said Monday on Morning Joe. It's not like making a tough choice on Medicare or Medicaid or Social Security. This costs you nothing. But it does cost the Republican Party, overall:
SCARBOROUGH: We got an issue that is a 92-7 against us, an issue and I can't believe that Republicans, first of all, aren't going to support it, but secondly won't let background checks against rapists, people who have committed manslaughter in the past, people with mental illness, dangerous mental illness, I can't believe those Republicans are going to allow the entire Republican Party to be the party that basically put rapists rights over parents rights to keep their kids safe when they go to school.
"Think of the killings and shootings since Newtown," he continued. "There hasn't been a mass killing yet but there will be, it's going to happen again and when it happens again and 92 percent of Americans have asked them to do something and they don't do it, it's just going to have devastating political impact on everybody."

Senior Republicans like Senators John McCain (AZ) and Tom Coburn (OK) have also criticized the filibuster strategy. "Is that about filibustering a bill to protect the Second Amendment, or is that about Rand Paul?" Coburn asked.

Megyn Kelly Proves Her Right-Wing Bias Again
By: Steve - April 9, 2013 - 9:00am

And this is a woman who O'Reilly claims has no bias, he even calls her a straight shooter who has no political ideology. Then almost every day she proves her bias, but O'Reilly never says anything about it.

Monday Fox News Megyn Kelly whitewashed the extremism of one of America's most notorious anti-gay hate group leaders, suggesting that pro-gay activists are actually the intolerant ones.

During the April 8th edition of America Live, Kelly invited Tony Perkins (president of the anti-gay Family Research Council) to discuss the reaction to the suicide of right-wing Pastor Rick Warren's son. Kelly condemned "haters" on the Internet who were using the tragedy as an excuse to attack Warren over his anti-gay views.

Near the end of the segment, Kelly asked Perkins how he felt about being "the subject of attacks" over his opposition to marriage equality, suggesting the pro-gay activists are the ones being intolerant:

KELLY: A lot of people thought, think, that Pastor Warren is on the wrong side of the gay marriage issue. You can relate to him in this way - not the being on the wrong side, I'm not passing a judgment on that - but you also oppose gay marriage and have been the subject of attacks, and it seems like some, not all, but some of those who want tolerance and acceptance, in their effort to get it, are very willing to pass judgment, alienate, attack, and go about it in a way that may be undermining the very thing they seek.

PERKINS: Absolutely, I think you're absolutely correct. I mean, just to show a little bit of human compassion to a parent who has lost a child would go a long way in showing that they just want to be accepted and enjoy tolerance.

The irony and bias of asking a hate group leader if he's bothered by the alleged "intolerance" of his critics seems to be lost on Kelly.

And btw folks, Perkins isn't just an opponent of same-sex marriage - he's made a career of peddling false and degrading smears about LGBT people, including this:

-- Falsely claiming that gay men are more likely to molest children

-- Comparing gay activists to terrorists and labeling them pawns of the devil

-- Applauding Uganda's "Kill the Gays" bill, calling it an effort "to uphold moral conduct"

Perkins has also repeatedly used discussions about LGBT suicide to score cheap political points, claiming that LGBT teens kill themselves because they know being gay is "abnormal" and that they are "in rebellion to God's design."

In a letter to supporters, Perkins called the anti-suicide "It Gets Better" project an attempt to "recruit" kids into a "lifestyle" of "perversion." He's even blamed high suicide rates in the military on the repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

Kelly's softball segment is the second time in five days that she's attempted to whitewash Perkins well-documented history of extreme anti-gay commentary.

Connecticut Governor Calls NRA Vice President A Clown
By: Steve - April 8, 2013 - 11:00am

Connecticut Governor Dannel Malloy (D) tore into the National Rifle Association during an appearance on CNN on Sunday. The NRA this week introduced its legislative response to the massacre in Malloy's home state. Its plan focuses on arming school staff.

Malloy specifically called out NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre for his absolute opposition to common sense gun regulations, including the new gun law just enacted by Connecticut. After watching a clip of LaPierre mocking Connecticut's new law, Malloy said this:
MALLOY: That's what he's paid to do. But the reality is is that the gun that was used to kill 26 people on December 14th was legally purchased in the state of Connecticut even though we had an Assault Weapons Ban. But there were loopholes in it that you could drive a truck through. This guy is so out of whack, it's unbelievable. 92% of the american people want universal background checks.

I can't get on a plane as the Governor of the state of Connecticut without somebody running a background check on me. Why should you be able to buy a gun? Or buy armor-piercing munitions? It doesn't make any sense. He doesn't make any sense. Thus my reference to the circus.
Malloy then went on to say that there is precious little he can agree on with the NRA, and that the organization is coming pretty darn close to recommending that every single American carry a gun. He also pointed to a recent report by the Center For American Progress that shows states with weaker gun laws also have the highest rates of gun violence.

Fox News Spins Sequestration & The Recent Jobs Report
By: Steve - April 8, 2013 - 10:00am

Fox Business host Stuart Varney claimed that any signs of a weakening labor market cannot be explained by sequestration. Even though economists have linked the slowdown in hiring to sequestration, and note that any negative impacts will most likely be temporary.

Reacting to an unexpected rise in weekly unemployment claims, America's Newsroom host Bill Hemmer asked Varney if any of the rise was due to sequestration. Varney responded by saying this: "No...There's no seasonal factors, it's not weather, it's not the sequester, it's just weakness in the underlying economy."

Varney said that even though eonomists do not support Varney's insistence that sequestration has had no impact on the job market. An April 3rd Associated Press article reported on some economists opinions of the link between sequestration and hiring:
Jim O'Sullivan, chief United States economist at High Frequency Economics, now expects just 160,000 net jobs in the March employment report, instead of 215,000.

Jennifer Lee, an economist at BMO Capital Markets, said her group had lowered its forecast to 155,000, from 220,000.

Lee said some businesses have temporarily suspended hiring because they wanted to see the impact of $85 billion in government spending cuts, which began on March 1st.
And btw, Varney ignored that report, which is bias and bad journalism, because he should have at least reported that some economists disagree with him. Instead Varney used the rise in weekly jobless claims to paint a negative only picture of the labor market, even when the same AP report noted that "most economists say any slowdown is likely to be temporary."

When a more stable measure of the labor market is looked at (such as the preferred four-week moving average of initial jobless claims) a much less negative picture emerges.

While the four-week average rose in the April 4th report, the underlying trend of weekly claims has been positive. Since the beginning of 2013, the trend of initial claims has declined greatly, producing four-week averages at levels not seen since 2008.

O'Reilly Goes Insane Over Bible Thumpers Comment
By: Steve - April 7, 2013 - 11:00am

This is how insane Bill O'Reilly is, one night he calls the people on the religious right who oppose gay marriage bible thumpers, he said all they do is thump the bible.

On March 26, Bill O'Reilly said that marriage equality opponents offer weak arguments, stating they have not been able "to do anything but thump the Bible."

Then on April 2nd he admits it and tells Laura Ingraham it's "Accurate And Honest" to call marriage equality opponents Bible Thumpers:

Then on April 5th O'Reilly named Dana Milbank from the Washington Post his biggest pinhead of the week for saying O'Reilly called marriage equality opponents Bible Thumpers. After telling Ingraham it's "Accurate And Honest" to call marriage equality opponents Bible Thumpers.

Folks, it's confirmed. Bill O'Reilly has lost his mind. How can you say something one day, then admit it the next day, and even say it's accurate and honest, then name someone a pinhead for simply quoting what you said and admitted to, and even call the guy a pinhead for honestly reporting what you said.

O'Reilly is insane, and the only pinhead here is Bill O'Reilly.

O'Reilly Facing $10,000 Charity Debate Challenge
By: Steve - April 7, 2013 - 10:00am

A religious ministry is putting up $10,000 to challenge Bill O'Reilly, for a debate over his description of Christians who follow the Bible as "Bible-thumpers."

Rev. Bill Keller, whose has created the Live Prayer presence on the web, and previously has been a guest on Fox shows such as the Factor, Hannity and Cavuto, said he's putting up $10,000 and challenging O'Reilly to do the same.

Then there would be a six-minute debate over homosexual marriage on O'Reilly's show - O'Reilly talking for three minutes, then Keller making the biblical argument against homosexual marriage for three minutes.

O'Reilly's audience would determine the winner and the sum would go to a charity of that person's choice.

Note: That would be a mistake, because O'Reilly's audience will vote for him, even if he loses the debate, so they need to find some impartial judges or they will lose the vote to O'Reilly and his biased audience.

"O'Reilly says that those who support God's plan for marriage lose the argument because all they can do is 'thump the Bible.' Let him put his money where his mouth is. We will each put up $10,000 to the charity of our choice, he can make his case for gay marriage, and I will ONLY use the Bible to make the case for traditional marriage," Keller said.

Multiple WND requests to O'Reilly for a comment did not produce any response, and Keller also reported to WND he had not heard from O'Reilly.

But Keller told WND he's been watching O'Reilly in recent shows, and said the Fox star has been defending himself over and over.

"He would have been much better served if he had just apologized," Keller said. But he cited O'Reilly's "mix of liberal Catholicism, new age mysticism and secular gobbedly-gook" for his defense of the comment.

Keller said he is so confident that he will prevail, he is not only willing to debate O'Reilly on his own turf, but let O'Reilly's audience vote over 24 hours to determine the winner.

"If he is so sure, of himself it will be an easy $10,000 for the charity of his choice. Let him put his money where his mouth is, or he is no different than the gutless wonders on MSNBC who will never take on those who stand for biblical truth on the issues of the day!"

Keller's website has more than 20,000 daily visitors and there now are more than 2.5 million who have subscribed to his daily devotional.

"And for the record, O'Reilly is being inconsistent at best and hypocritical at worst. For instance, O'Reilly claims to oppose most abortions. What is his basis for this public policy position? It can't be based on 'thou shalt not kill.' That would mean he's taking a position based on the Bible and we all know that O'Reilly will have none of that."

So O'Reilly is betraying his own blinding ignorance, while at the same time mocking the very Americans he hopes will watch his program.

The Friday 4-5-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 6, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Is Obamacare already descending into chaos? The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: A devastating new jobs report says that if the same number of Americans were looking for work right now as in 2009 the unemployment rate would be about 11%. After trillions of taxpayer dollars have been poured into the private marketplace by the Obama administration, job growth remains awful. The main culprit could be Obamacare, which became law in 2010.

The problem is that someone has to pay for it and business is the primary target. In my case, my corporate health insurance premiums have tripled since Obamacare was passed, so millions of small business owners like me are not hiring as many people. Hiring is stunted because of federal health care mandates.

The Factor has learned that the Department of Health and Human Services may order the states to hire hundreds of thousands of Obamacare 'navigators' who would advise other Americans about how to deal with the outrageously complicated Obamacare law.

But nobody will actually know what the navigators do because there's no objective way to measure advice. This has the potential to be an enormous ruse, another colossal waste of taxpayer money. To say that Obamacare is off to a bad start is the understatement of the century.
Then David Callahan from the left-leaning Demos think tank, was on to defend the Obama health care reform plan.

Callahan said this: "There's no evidence that this is holding back job growth. The number one reason business owners give for not hiring is that there aren't enough customers. It's not Obamacare, it's not regulation, it's not taxes, it's that consumers are tapped out because the majority of income gains during the recovery have gone to the top 1%."

Callahan also endorsed the plan for Obamacare navigators, saying this: "This is a complex new system and somebody needs to help people figure it out. The navigators are very similar to people who help seniors figure out Medicare."

And now the facts for the liar O'Reilly, the reason employers say they are not hiring is because of low demand, and almost none of them say it's because of Obamacare. The people that say Obamacare is the cause of the lack of new jobs are nuts, they are called partisan Republican hacks, and O'Reilly is one of them, even though he will deny it. Low demand is the #1 reason businesses say they are not hiring, not Obamacare.

Then the economist Ben Stein and financial advisor Stacy Francis were on to discuss buying into the stock market. Which is a waste of time for the average working man who does not buy any stocks, and yet O'Reilly had a segment on it anyway. This was a segment for the rich folks, not the working folks O'Reilly claims to be looking out for.

Stein said this: "Just buy the market itself, and don't try to pick individual stocks. You can buy an index fund with almost no commission that buys stocks in the 500 largest publicly owned companies. I would also say you should keep a good 30% of your money in cash or short-tem bonds."

Francis said this: "Right now we're investing 47% in bonds and only 25% in U.S. stocks, and we're making sure there are some high-yielding bonds and emerging market bonds. We think gold is at nosebleed levels and now is not the time to buy gold."

Then O'Reilly had the far-right Obama hating jerk Col. Ralph Peters on, who predicted that North Korean aggression would be a suicide mission.

Peters said this: "If the North Koreans were foolish enough to attack the South, it wouldn't all be about the North's numerical advantage in troops. It would be about the preparedness and the quality of the weapons of South Korea and the U.S. If the North Koreans were crazy enough to come across that border, President Obama can't do his Hamlet act, he would have to step up immediately. After an initial bloody phase, the North Koreans would lose the war and it would be the end of the North Korean regime."

Then Greg Gutfeld and Bernard McGuirk were on for the stupid what the heck just happened segment, they focused on President Obama and his decision to take a 5% pay cut. And of course since they are both right-wing idiots like O'Reilly is, they slammed Obama for it, but if a Republican President had done it they would have praised him as a great man.

Gutfeld said this: "This is like the drunk stock broker who throws five bucks at a homeless guy as he's walking into the Four Seasons restaurant. This is all symbolic to impress people, but ultimately it means nothing. In his mind symbolism always beats substance."

McGuirk said this: "It couldn't have been more insulting if the White House released a photo of Obama in a tool belt vacuuming the Oval Office. Just stop spending money on everything from the studies of duck genitalia to fat lesbians! But this puts the notorious skinflint Joe Biden on the spot. I'm sure he took time out from watching the Cartoon Network to talk with Jill about what they should do."

Then O'Reilly had those two idiots back for biggest pinheads of the week. Gutfeld nominated Columbia University Associate Dean Marianne Yoshioka, who hired former Weather Underground terrorist and convicted murderer Kathy Boudin to teach at the school.

Gutfeld said this: "Kathy Boudin shouldn't be at Columbia, she should be in a cemetery. She was involved in making bombs that were meant to kill our troops at a dance."

McGuirk went with Robert Redford, whose new movie celebrates the Weather Underground bombers.

McGuirk said this: "Redford is a rich, spoiled, self-hating, ingrate and a punk. These same people who sympathize with the Weather Underground are the people who spit on returning servicemen from Vietnam."

O'Reilly singled out Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank, saying this: "The guy is incapable of telling the truth. This week he wrote, 'Bill O'Reilly criticized opponents of same-sex marriage as Bible-thumpers.' No I didn't, I didn't do anything close to that. What I said was that you don't thump the Bible in debating the issue, I didn't criticize critics of gay marriage. This guy is just a liar, yet he gets paid by the Washington Post to do this all the time."

Which is laughable, because Milbank is exactly right, O'Reilly called people on the right who oppose gay marriage bible thumpers. Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingraham even slammed him for it. So O'Reilly calls Milbank a liar, when all he did was tell the truth, making O'Reilly a massive fool who is as dishonest as it gets. O'Reilly even admitted he got hate mail from 25% of his viewers for it, and yet he still refuses to admit he said it.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Producing belly laughs. Billy said this: "If you need some laughs this weekend or anytime, consider watching the movie "The Producers," even if you've seen it a few times already."

Jim Carrey Puts Out The Facts On His Gun Control Positions
By: Steve - April 6, 2013 - 10:00am

Carrey was tired of all the right-wing propaganda about him so he wrote an article to get the truth out, and here it is.

I Never Wanted to Take Your Guns Away

by Jim Carrey 4-2-13

I disagree wholeheartedly with those who say that there are just too many guns out there to control and that more gun laws won't make a difference. Change must start someplace. I'm pretty sure that no worthwhile endeavor has ever been accomplished without a beginning and reducing gun violence in America is a worthwhile endeavor.

These mass shootings and daily body counts on your local news are terrible tragedies. The utter devastation that must be endured by the victims' families is unfathomable. These horrific events are also an invitation for us to become more civilized and to deal with our addiction and entitlement to violence. Not to shut our eyes and ears and scream at those with a different opinion than ours to "fuck off and go back to Canada."

I will gladly go back and visit Canada as I have many friends and loved ones there. I am so proud of that country and everything it's given to me, but I am also a naturalized American citizen and I have been bringing as much joy as I can to people in this country for 30 years. I care deeply about our future and I feel it's my duty as a citizen to do everything in my power to make this a better place.

For those who say I'm a hypocrite because I have an armed bodyguard, lets make one thing clear: No one in my employ is allowed to carry a large magazine and NO ONE IS ASKING ANYONE TO GIVE UP THEIR RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS, though it is in the vested interests of those who profit by gun sales to make it seem so.

It's just the type of arms, the easy access and the means with which to cause massive devastation to good and innocent people that I hope we can limit. It's the quality of mercy, the tiniest spark of empathy that I know lives in every one of us that I wish to ignite in you.

And to the bullies who will try to marginalize and discredit me by saying, "Shut up, you're just an actor," while they brag about what a great president the ACTOR Ronald Reagan was, who threaten me with the demise of my acting career and much worse, I say SO BE IT! How shallow do they think I am?

I would trade my money, my fame, my reputation and legacy if there were the slightest chance of preventing the anguish of another Columbine, Virginia Tech, Aurora, or Sandy Hook Elementary School. I ask you, truly, what manner of human being would not?

I have been aghast at the level of hatred heaped upon me, my family and the people I work with over a mere difference of opinion on this issue. Perhaps my words were a bit harsh at the onset, but calling someone a "Motherfucker" is far different than wishing them to die. It is shocking to see this concerted effort to brutally intimidate anyone who speaks of a compassionate compromise.

These thugs, though menacing, are a minority but they will have their way if good people don't step forward now and make a difference. Every American has the right to speak their mind. Every American has the right to bear arms. But it is up to every American to draw the line when it comes to the type of guns that are considered a reasonable means of self-defense.

No one is allowed to own a bazooka. In a movie theater an assault rifle with a 100-round drum magazine can cause just as much damage.

So don't just sit there and do nothing. Contact your representatives and let them know that their jobs depend upon change. It won't always be someone else's kids in the line of fire.

The time is now. LET YOUR HEART BE HEARD.

The Thursday 4-4-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 5, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: A tale of two intense issues in the culture war. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Secular progressives are trying to change this country in very significant ways; opposed to that are many traditional Americans who see the progressive vision as destructive. The media pretty much always sides with the secular progressives; therefore, traditional Americans must make their case in very persuasive ways in order to win the day.

One example is abortion, where far more Americans are pro-life than they were in 1997. Why? Science established that DNA is present upon conception, so pro-abortion people can no longer say that a human presence is not affected. Also, pro-life forces did not link abortion to sin and largely kept theology out of it.

But on the gay marriage front it's a far different story. Last week I said this to Megyn Kelly: "The other side hasn't been able to do anything but thump the Bible.' That is essentially correct - anti-gay marriage forces have not seized upon a central persuasive argument and many are using the Bible as their basis to reject homosexual nuptials.

That's a loser all day in our secular court system that is largely hostile to religious expression. There is a strong argument against gay marriage, that it expands marriage opportunity to just one group - gay people - and excludes all others.

Also, traditional marriage has been a societal stabilizer and in many states is favored by the majority of the folks. The bottom line is that the federal government has no constitutional authority to impose gay marriage on the nation. Now that is a strong argument!
So what does O'Reilly do, have a fair and balanced debate with someone from each side, haha, of course not. He had the biased Megyn Kelly from Fox on to kiss his butt and agree with him to make it look like he is right.

Kelly said this: "You've gotten all this blowback, because you said some people 'thump the Bible' and that can't be the argument to win this. That doesn't jump out at me as a problematic statement because I don't think you're being pejorative of the religious right. The haters are always going to hate on you and they'll perceive everything you say in the least favorable way, but when it comes to defending religious liberty, who in the country has been more out in front than you? I'm not kissing your butt, this is fact!"

Earth to Megyn Kelly, if you tell someone you are not kissing their butt, you are in fact, kissing their butt.

Then Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about the "thump the Bible" controversy.

Goldberg said this: "I agree with you 100% with your analysis on that subject. Too many people are using the Bible to make a civil argument about state-sponsored marriage. But on the essence of gay marriage, you and I could not possibly disagree more. I believe gay marriage is a civil right and the courts can say marriage is between two human beings."

O'Reilly said this: "This is power-based, it's about the left-wing and right-wing ideologues trying to diminish the power of this program and this network."

And that's ridiculous, nobody cares about your so-called power, it's about slamming you for saying something the left and the right disagree with. It's about getting you to stop lying and refusing to admit it, and it's about getting you to stop being a biased hack.

Then Sheriff Tom Bergin was on to talk about 40-year-old Mark Beebout, who murdered two women soon after being released from jail because of prison overcrowding in Oregon.

Bergin said this: "This man was picked up for failing to register as a sexual predator, and he later went to jail on a probation violation. He was released when we were over capacity, he failed to report to his parole officer, and he went to Portland and was involved in the murder of two women."

O'Reilly blasted the system that allowed a predator like Beebout to be on the streets, saying this: "This guy originally served only four years for raping a child under the age of 16, then he didn't register as a sex offender. People should have been looking to keep him in prison, not giving him a get-out-of-jail free card."

O'Reilly slams the system, but when he is asked to pay more in taxes to pay for more prisons he says no, go figure.

Then Megyn Kelly returned to analyze the case of Adam Levy, a prosecutor in New York's Putnam County and the son of TV's Judge Judy. His personal trainer, who reportedly lived in Levy's home for a time, has been charged with rape.

Kelly said this: "Levy said that as soon as he learned that his friend was charged, he called the DA in the next county and told him to handle the case. But there is some bad blood between Levy and Putnam County Sheriff Donald Smith, who has asked for an investigation into all this. The personal trainer is from Romania and he's in the country illegally."

Kelly also focused on a case involving an Arizona man named Jose Zarate, saying this: "He is a 31-year-old illegal immigrant who was having an affair with a 13-year-old girl. The girl's mother told him to get lost and he came back and killed the mother. He's being charged with second degree murder because he claims she was threatening him and he was afraid for his life."

Then the right-wing stooge Jesse Watters was on, who went to spring break in Florida, where he asked some young people about liberal indoctrination at their colleges.

Here are some of the responses: "I had a professor freshman year who introduced himself as the most raging liberal you'll ever meet" ... "Rick Santorum came to speak at our school and our professor ripped him apart in class" ... "Our professor passed around voter registration cards" ... "At the United States Air Force Academy there are still very many liberal individuals who get offended when you're conservative" ... "They tried to convert the entire class to the Muslim religion."

Jesse also ran into one student, presumably not an Ivy Leaguer, who asked this stupid question: "What does liberal mean?"

I will answer that question, it means caring about the people and the average working man and women.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: The benefit of re-gifting. Billy said this: "Consider taking some of those unused gift cards laying around the house and give them to the USO or some other worthy charity."

Now that shows how out of touch O'Reilly is with the average American, because I do not know anyone who has any unused gift cards just laying around the house. Dishonestly Edits Tommy Christopher Commentary
By: Steve - April 5, 2013 - 10:00am

On Tuesday, published a piece of commentary that was highly critical of Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler's analysis of statements made by President Obama concerning background checks for gun purchases. The conclusion of that piece by Tommy Christopher was that the President's statements, that as many as 40% of gun purchases do not require background checks, were accurate, based on the data available.

The Fox News website, however, selectively and inaccurately edited his analysis in order to give the opposite impression, and failed to provide readers with a link to the full commentary.

The analysis he wrote, of Glenn Kessler's fact-check, dealt with Kessler's manipulation of the available data to arrive at a false conclusion. He was evaluating the President's March 28 declaration, in a speech, that "as many as 40 percent of all gun purchases to take place without a background check," and a later tweet that read "FACT: Nearly 40% of all gun sales don't require a background check under current law."

In a news article that's still on the front page of Fox News politics section, an un-bylined Fox News reporter summarized Kessler's post, then presented the Christopher commentary this way:
But not everyone agrees with The Post's fact checker.

"While slagging the president may be good for business, the effect of (the newspaper's) false ruling is to undermine legitimate efforts to keep the public safe, and to obscure the real enemy of reliable data on gun violence," Tommy Christopher of Mediaite wrote in a rebuttal Tuesday.

"It is possible to conclude that as few as 26.4% of gun owners in that study 'purchased' their gun without a background check, 20.4% if you factor in the margin of error," he said.

The administration has not responded to questions surrounding the number and why they continue to use it to promote their gun control measures.
Instead of presenting his actual conclusion, that the President's 40% figure is accurate, the Fox reporter leaves readers with the opposite impression. To make matters worse, the site doesn't even allow readers to evaluate the piece for themselves by including a link.

The Fox News report also ignores standard journalistic procedure by not noting that they're quoting Christopher in mid-sentence, which can often be a tip-off to selective and misleading editing.

To be clear, this was not some Fox Nation aggregation, or an opinion piece on one of their blogs, this was a straight news story presented on their straight news site.

Christopher wrote this about it: "In addition to being injurious to their readers by not reporting the story accurately, this incident is particularly injurious to me, since it undermines the months of work I've put into educating the public on gun regulation. At a minimum, Fox News should correct their story, add a link, and apologize for twisting my words."

O'Reilly Says He Never Called Anyone A Bible Thumper
By: Steve - April 5, 2013 - 9:00am

No spin zone? Now that's funny. Bill O'Reilly is a fraud and a liar. Because he said the other side of the gay marriage debate does nothing but thump the bible, which is directly calling them bible thumpers. To now say you did not call anyone a bible thumper is just laughable, and dishonest.

Here is the O'Reilly denial from April 3rd, where O'Reilly says he did not call anyone a bible thumper, he claims he was just warning people against bible thumping.

And now here are the facts, that show O'Reilly called people on the religious right bible thumpers.

1) 4-2-13 -- Tuesday night O'Reilly defended describing the opponents of same sex marriage as "Bible thumpers," during a segment with Laura Ingraham, saying it was both accurate and honest.

Then on Wednesday night he told an e-mailer he never called anyone a bible thumper, when that is exactly what he did, Rush Limbaugh even slammed him for it. Limbaugh said Bill O'Reilly marginalized Fox viewers who oppose Marriage Equality as "Bible Thumpers."

O'Reilly even turned it into a left-wing loons attacked him and it's all lies story. Even though Laura Ingraham and Rush Limbaugh also attacked him for it, two of the most conservative people in America.

2) During the first segment on it with Megyn Kelly, O'Reilly made the statement that public policy should not be based on religion. Kelly answered that by saying arguments against same sex marriage were not very persuasive when the religious element was removed.

Then O'Reilly said this to her:
O'REILLY: I agree with you 100 percent, the compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals. That is where the compelling argument is. We're Americans, we just want to be treated like everybody else.

That's a compelling argument, and to deny that you've got to have a very strong argument on the other side. And the other side hasn't been able to do anything but thump the Bible.
3) There it is, O'Reilly called them bible thumpers. He said the other side has not been able to do anything but thump the bible, which is not warning against bible thumping, it's calling them bible thumpers.

4) O'Reilly defended calling them bible thumpers, two times. Ingraham told O'Reilly it was "disrespectful" to suggest Christians couldn't cite the Bible.

O'Reilly said this: "In their private life they can. We're talking about policy here. Don't you understand the difference between private beliefs and public policy? I guess you don't understand because you've done it twice."

Ingraham then questioned why O'Reilly used the word "thumper."

O'Reilly said this: "Because that's the way you get it across. There are Bible thumpers and all they do is say, 'I object to gay marriage because God objects to it.' You don't win a policy debate in America with that."

So O'Reilly defended saying they are bible thumpers two times, as he calls the left-wing media dishonest for reporting exactly what he said. He also claims it's a left-wing conspiracy to report he said it, when he did, and two big name conservatives also slammed him for it.

Then he tells an e-mailer Wednesday night that he never called anyone a bible thumper, when he clearly did, and defended it as accurate. And that's a no spin zone, are you kidding me, it's 100% spin. O'Reilly is a dishonest hack, who got caught slamming the religious right, then he tried to spin his way out of it, and did it badly.

The Wednesday 4-3-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 4, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Keeping lunacy in check. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: In a strange twist of history, it seems like this program is now in charge of stopping the madness. You'll remember that in December we had to threaten the Mexican government in order to get Marine Corporal Jon Hammar out of prison down there, and there have been dozens of other things. For example, a professor at Florida Atlantic University recently punished a student for not stomping on the word 'Jesus.'

After we reported the story, the professor was suspended and the student was reinstated. We also reported on the Alabama elementary school principal who banned the Easter Bunny; two days later the bunny was magically back. So you get the picture - when strange occurrences break out, no longer do you call the Ghostbusters, you call The Factor.

We can't right every wrong and we have to be very careful about the causes we take up. But it is true that The Factor is now mandated to keep American lunacy in check. And, believe me, there is plenty of it.
Now that's funny, because O'Reilly had nothing to do with getting that Marine out of Mexico, the student in Florida was never suspended or reinstated, and there is no war on Easter as O'Reilly claims.

Then Bob Beckel was on to talk about Carney and Fox reporter Ed Henry.

Beckel said this: "I have to defend Obama pretty much every day, but in this case I will not because this was an attack on my network. Carney wouldn't tell anyone else that they're 'politicizing' or 'editorializing,' and Ed Henry asked a legitimate question."

Beckel also talked about Columbia University's decision to hire former Weather Underground radical Kathy Boudin, who served two decades in prison for murder.

Beckel said this: "Good for her. She was convicted, she served her time and in this country you can do whatever you want after that. If she was a good candidate I'm glad she got the job."

O'Reilly denounced Columbia for hiring a killer, saying this: "You have to assume there were other very well-qualified non-murderers who applied for the job."

Assume means you do not know, and you said you only deal in facts so you are speculating.

Then Kirsten Powers and Kate Obenshain were on to talk about a Planned Parenthood lobbyist, who refused to condemn the killing of a baby born alive after a botched abortion.

Powers said this: "People find this an uncomfortable thing to hear, but aborting a baby that late in the term is infanticide. And if the baby survives, it's outrageous to let it die on the table. Planned Parenthood is extreme when it comes to late term abortion."

Obenshain said this: "I have no use for my tax dollars going to something as abhorrent as this. Babies are being born alive after abortions and they are actually being killed."

O'Reilly said this: "If Planned Parenthood wants to operate abortion mills, it should do that on its own ticket and get off the taxpayer dime."

Then Robert Johnson was on to talk about the unemployment rate for black Americans that is about 14%, double the rate for whites.

Johnson said this: "African Americans have been living with this unemployment gap for fifty years. To me the principal drivers are the failure of corporate America to hire qualified African Americans and the failure of African Americans to get access to capital to start small businesses. There is also a legacy of long-term institutionalized racism. There are millions of African Americans with the talent, the work ethic, the integrity, and the ingenuity to be successful in jobs or in business."

O'Reilly said this: "I believe the primary problem in the African American community is out-of-wedlock birth, which drives unemployment. And every corporation that I've worked for has actively recruited African Americans, they're looking for them."

Then James Rosen and Carl Cameron were on to talk about the Obama administration's response to North Korea's nuclear threats.

Rosen said this: "North Korea could inflict a lot of damage, and U.S. officials are taking it seriously because North Korea has nuclear weapons and an army of over a million men. It is a cash-starved regime that has never met a nuclear technology it didn't want to sell, so proliferation is a big concern."

Cameron turned to President Obama's Easter Sunday visit to a church where the pastor railed against the "religious right."

Cameron said this: "Jay Carney knew that questions about this were going to come, but he hid behind the argument that he didn't talk about it with the President. It's risky business for the White House spokesman to clam up and say he didn't talk with the President. Press secretaries sometimes banish themselves from meetings so they have plausible deniability."

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because he is a comedian that is only on to make jokes about liberals, with no liberal comedian on for balance.

Then Juliet Huddy was on to talk about the White House hosting a concert next week featuring Justin Timberlake, Al Green, and other eminent entertainers.

Huddy said this: "It's a big concert, and taxpayers are essentially paying for it because most of it is being funded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. There are also corporate sponsors but no one will tell us how much this is costing. It's a celebration of music and there will be people watching this on PBS who can't afford to go to a concert."

O'Reilly questioned the wisdom of paying for an entertainment gala when the country is so deeply in debt, saying this: "I don't want my money going to this concert unless I know exactly what good it is doing for the country."

O'Reilly and all of Fox News are flipped out about it, even though they never said a word about Bush doing the same type of things when he was in office. It's bias and hypocrisy.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Roger that! Billy said this: "Anyone wanting to know more about Fox News and the man behind the network would be well advised to pick up the book "Roger Ailes Off Camera" by Zev Chafets."

Fox News Ratings Are Dropping More Than Anyone Else
By: Steve - April 4, 2013 - 10:00am

Fox News, which has had several well-publicized ratings issues over the past few months, saw its primetime numbers fall to new lows in the all-important A25-54 category for many shows.

MSNBC gloated in its press release, saying that hosts Sean Hannity and Greta Van Susteren had their worst demo ratings ever. Bill O'Reilly's demo ratings were also off by 26 percent.

MSNBC topped CNN in total viewers and demo viewers, and saw a 30 percent increase in daytime viewers in the A25-54 demo.

There was good news for CNN, too: "AC360" posted gains in the 8:00 p.m. hour, increasing 17 percent in total viewers and 9 percent in the demo. Erin Burnett and Wolf Blitzer's shows also saw small ratings increases.

HLN, the crime-driven CNN sister station, was the biggest winner for the month, as its nonstop coverage of the Jodi Arias trial drove it to new ratings highs.

The network boasted double-digit gains and was up 17 percent in total viewers and 23 percent in the coveted A25-54 demo. The network also scored its best ever March in total viewers, up 53 percent from this time last year.

O'Reilly Let Brown Put Out GOP Propaganda Using His Show
By: Steve - April 4, 2013 - 9:00am

One of Scott Brown's first acts as a Fox News host was to build a segment entirely around a GOP press release, a continuation of Fox's long history of using Republican talking points to build their news. And O'Reilly allowed it by letting Brown use his #1 rated cable news show to spin out that propaganda.

Brown, a Republican former Senator, served as guest host on the April 1st O'Reilly Factor, where he immediately focused on the National Republican Congressional Committee's "waste list," meant to detail areas of government's continued wasteful spending despite recent spending cuts and the closing of White House tours.

Brown complained about a "dancing iPhone with robots," "snail sex research," and $1 million worth of puppet shows for kids.

The right-wing media are claiming that the federal government spent money on research grants and other expenses for puppets during the automatic budget cuts known as sequestration, despite the fact that the grants were all paid prior to the budget cuts.

On Wednesday, attacked the administration for stopping tours of the White House as a result of budget cuts in a post titled "U.S. Spends $1.18 Million On Puppets Amid Sequester," and claimed the government could "cut federal 'puppet expenditures' to keep the people's house open."

The website listed spending from the National Science Foundation and the National Endowment for the Arts, among other sources, as federal spending on "puppets and puppetry-related expenses."

Fox Nation even hyped the post, labeling it a "report."

Fox & Friends joined in on Thursday when co-host Steve Doocy said this: "1.18 million, that's how much the government has spent on puppets since 2009. That's enough to pay for more than a year's worth of White House tours."

Even though the grants and contracts that cited were all paid prior to 2013. A screenshot of the search terms used by reveals the most recent grants were paid in fiscal year 2012, which ended on September 30, 2012. Sequestration took place on March 1, 2013, almost six months later.

Despite the claims of Brown, Fox News and, these expenditures have nothing to do with the cancelation of White House tours. The spending cited by did not come out of the budget of the Secret Service, which made the decision to stop providing security for the tours due to its own budget cuts under the sequester.

Almost all of the spending detailed in the release was actually spent before the sequestration cuts went into effect, but that fact didn't make it into the so-called No Spin Zone under Brown's watch.

The Tuesday 4-2-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - April 3, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The left wing media grasping for power. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The two people the liberal media fear most are Rush Limbaugh and me. That's because we both have powerful daily forums where we can explain what we believe is harmful to the country. Left-wing folks have tried to drum up a phony feud, citing divisions within the so-called 'conservative community,' and they point to me and Limbaugh as the primary example.

The loons are taking my commentary out of context as they always do. Zealots picked up on my statement that opponents of gay marriage must do more than 'thump the Bible' if they want to win the debate.

The reason the polls have turned around is that proponents of gay marriage have succeeded in making it a civil rights issue, while opponents have not put out a compelling argument against gay nuptials. That is correct and honest analysis, but my personal opinion on gay marriage hasn't changed; I have always said that heterosexual marriage is a society stabilizer and the issue should be decided state by state.

My position on immigration has also been consistent - protect the border with the National Guard but have compassion on individuals who are good people. I don't mind being criticized for my opinions, but guttersnipes who lie and distort and slander are the lowest rung, and there are legions of them.
Wow is that insanity. To begin with nobody in the so-called liberal media fears Limbaugh or O'Reilly, because you two right-wing stooges are seen as nothing but laughing stocks in the media, nobody fears you. And the feud is real, you just refuse to admit it. Limbaugh slammed you for saying the people on the right who oppose gay marriage are bible thumpers, that happened, and it's real.

And your opinion on gay marriage has changed, you used to be opposed to it, you even said it should never happen because if it does than it's a slippery slope and the next thing you know it will be ok to marry a duck, you said that, many times. Now you support it because the majority of people do, and the reason they do is because the younger more liberal people are not old bigots like the older right-wingers are.

You are a lying dishonest right-wing hack, and that is a fact.

Then Laura Ingraham was on, she agreed with Limbaugh and accused O'Reilly of diminishing religious Americans.

Ingraham said this: "I don't think you needed to use the term thump the Bible. You're right that people who are for traditional marriage haven't been very good at making their arguments and you're right that a lot of them do have a very deeply held religious belief about what traditional marriage is. But the left loves to see conservatives fighting and they're exploiting this. Why did you use the word 'thump?'"

Now here is what gets me, every time the majority of people oppose a right-wing position they always say they just did not make a good argument about the issue. Which is laughable, because the truth is the majority are against them, they just refuse to admit it.

O'Reilly answered Ingraham, saying this: "I made a very honest point that if you're going to stand up for heterosexual marriage you have to do it outside the Bible, you can't just cite the Bible because you'll lose if you do. I did not insult Christians who believe in the Bible! Of all the conservative radio talk show hosts, you have the most common sense, yet you bought into this garbage! I'm disappointed in you."

Earth to Bill O'Reilly, you did insult christians, you called them bible thumpers, which is an insult. So Limbaugh and Ingraham are right, you just refuse to admit it, making you a senile old right-wing idiot that can not admit the truth.

Then Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes were on to discuss it. And btw folks, Colmes was the only liberal on the entire show, and he had to share his time with Crowley and O'Reilly so he barely got a word in.

Crowley said this: "I do think there is a significant rift on the right, between establishment and modern conservatives. There is a sense that the establishment still believes in top-down, we know best, while the Tea Party believes in bottom-up."

Colmes said this: "You and Rush Limbaugh are different flavors - you're more flexible and more of a traditionalist, I would call you more of a populist while Rush Limbaugh seems to be more ideological. Liberals will look for that divide because everybody likes to see a food fight on the other side. The word 'thumping' is condescending and some people probably took it that way."

Earth to Alan Colmes, Limbaugh and O'Reilly are exactly alike, they are both right-wing spin doctors, Limbaugh is just a little worse than O'Reilly. The only difference between the two of them is that one is on TV and one is on the radio.

Then Chris Edwards of the libertarian Cato Institute was on for a biased one sided debate on food stamp use.

Edwards said this: "Both President Bush and President Obama hugely expanded eligibility for the program. In the last five years the number of Americans in poverty has gone up by 10-million, but the number on food stamps has gone up by 20-million. So it's not just a poverty problem, it's this expansion in eligibility that is the real problem. This has been a massive expansion in old-fashioned welfare, where people get benefits for not working."

Then John Stossel was on, he has been investigating how the government interferes in the economy via tax incentives and penalties.

Stossel said this about an amphibious vehicle: "You can't use it on the road in the United States, because it doesn't have an air bag. But of course in the water the air bag would go off every time you hit a wave. These could be really useful as rescue vehicles, but the Big Three gets cozy with government and keeps things off the market."

Stossel also took aim at U.S. Senators, saying this: "The Senate has a barber shop that loses a third of a million dollars a year because they offer cheap haircuts. They have guys who have been there for years and they pay them a lot. They give manicures and massages as well."

Then Kimberly Guilfoyle and Lis Wiehl were on to talk about the Supreme Court and whether they will overturn California's Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage.

Wiehl said this: "In 1982 the Supreme Court ruled that a referendum in Washington State that banned mandatory busing was unconstitutional. So mandatory busing came back and that still stands."

Guilfoyle pointed to another case where Colorado voters decided that homosexuals were not entitled to preferential treatment. "In 1996 the Supreme Court said that was unconstitutional and that it violated equal protection. The court said it was discriminatory against gays, lesbians, and bisexuals."

As for California's Prop 8, both Wiehl and Guilfoyle predicted that the Supreme Court will return the decision to the California Supreme Court, which has already ruled that gays have the right to marriage.

Then Charles Krauthammer was on to talk about President Obama, who attended an Easter church service at which Pastor Luis Leon accused the "religious right" of racism and sexism.

Krauthammer denounced the minister but gave the President a pass, saying this: "I thought what the pastor did was disgraceful. He said this is a racist and sexist country and he blamed it on the religious right. It was a libel and a slander, but was Obama somehow complicit in this? My answer is that the President is not required to react to what the pastor says. This is different from sitting in the pew of Jeremiah Wright's church for twenty years and having him marry you and baptize your children."

O'Reilly claimed that President Obama should have objected to Reverend Leon's inflammatory language, saying this: "If I were the President I would have put out a statement saying it wasn't the best way to phrase things on Easter Sunday. The President is supposed to represent the whole country, and that's what Barack Obama doesn't seem to get."

Earth to O'Reilly, the Reverend was right, and President Obama is not to blame for what someone else said.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Get out of town! Billy said this: "For the sake of their education and growth, take your children to the most interesting place you can afford to go on vacation."

Media Watchdog Says MSNBC Anchor Not A Real Black Person
By: Steve - April 3, 2013 - 10:00am

And this right-wing fool is a so-called media watchdog at the so-called non-biased Media Research Center, that everyone knows has a right-wing bias. And he is also a friend of O'Reilly and a regular on the Factor.

Former Democratic strategist Karen Finney, who was once the first African-American spokeswoman for the Democratic National Committee, reported today to be the new host of a 4 p.m. weekend show on MSNBC.

But don't mention Finney's race to Tim Graham. Graham, a so-called media "watchdog" for the conservative Media Research Center, doesn't think it's fair for MSNBC to say Finney's entrance arrival of another African-American host, considering her skin is so light.

Baiscally he is saying they should not call her an African-American because her skin color is not black enough for him.

Graham tweeted this:

4-2-13 -- @TimJGraham - MSNBC touting Karen Finney as another African-American host. Would the average viewer be able to guess that? Or is Boehner a shade more tan?

Then he made himself look even more like a racist right-wing idiot by tweeting this:

4-2-13 - @TimJGraham - Judge pic here:

Thank god for right-wing white guys clarifying who does and doesn't qualify as a real black person, otherwise I would never know, what an idiot.

Another Insulting & Insane E-Mail From An O'Reilly Lover
By: Steve - April 3, 2013 - 9:00am

Subject: Really
Date: Tuesday, April 2, 2013 8:19 PM
From: Benjamin Michael Bohall - [email protected]
To: [email protected]

You're a fucking idiot if you actually believe the shit you type. Fox News is the only station that doesn't hide shit from the ruined country. It's fucking dumbasses like you that are ruining this country. Republican is the way to go. You see what democrat has gotten United States. You real otta think about deleting this worthless ass site. Also don't post shit you have no fucking clue what your talking about.

The Monday 4-1-13 O'Reilly/Brown Factor Review
By: Steve - April 2, 2013 - 11:00am

O'Reilly had the former Republican Senator Scott Brown fill in for him, proving once again that O'Reilly is a Republican, because both his fill in anchors are Republicans. And of course Scott Brown sounded just like O'Reilly, with the same arguments, opinions, and positions as O'Reilly, so it was just like having O'Reilly there. That is why O'Reilly let him host his show, because they think alike.

Brown wrote a TPM that sounded as if O'Reilly wrote it for him, crying about out of control Government spending. The Brown TPM was called: The Joke's on us. Brown said this:
BROWN: As you know, I was the United States Senator from Massachusetts for about three years. I speak with many of my former staff and colleagues on a regular basis and remain plugged in.

So what if I told you that the leaders in both the House and the Senate along with the Vice President are actually close to solving our country's most vexing financial problems? Things likes a astronomical gas prices, long lines at the airport and out-of-control national debt?

That's not all. Medicare, Social Security and Obamacare will all be fixed and made self-sufficient for generations to come.

If you are saying to yourselves wow, that seems too good to be true, you would be right. It's April Fools' Day and the April Fools' joke is, guess what -- it's on all of us. I find it ridiculous that we are grateful when gas prices come down just a few pennies, we shouldn't feel lucky to pay $3.63 a gallon for gas.

And while we are talking about April Fools' jokes, here is another one. Our energy policy or lack thereof. It's also a joke that there is no effort to address the long lines and other cuts at our airports being brought on by sequester. The joke is also on us that there is no effort to reel in our out-of-control debt.

When I was in D.C. the national debt was just under $12 trillion. Today, it's almost $17 trillion and counting. Sadly, the joke is on us that after four years of not having a budget, the Senate passes a sham budget that does not balance and actually increases the debt.

And Medicare, Social Security, and Obamacare are going to bankrupt the country if we don't have an immediate, mature and bipartisan conversation on how to save and strengthen them. Individuals and businesses are coming to realize finally that they were sold a bad bill of goods. Premiums are going up. People are losing the doctors that they grew up with. The one size fits all approach being implemented across the board, you know what? It's not working.

And the new taxes to pay for it, listen, they are hurting businesses, growth and expansion. Everyday in D.C. is April Fools' day. And once again, the joke is on us and on you.
And almost all of that is a lie, it's nothing but right-wing propaganda, and the same garbage O'Reilly spins out every night, Brown is lying to you.

Then Jennifer Korn and Brent Wilkes were on to talk about a bipartisan group of eight Senators who have been crafting an immigration reform bill that includes border security and a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants.

Korn said this: "The term 'pathway to citizenship' is a misnomer. What we support is 'earned legal status' because we're talking about 11-million people who broke the law. They need to come forward, pay a fine, learn English, and pass a background check. They'll get a provisional visa before they can get in line for residency."

Wilkes said this: "I think it's important to have a pathway to citizenship and once we put folks on that permanent legal status they will have the opportunity to become citizens, which we think should be part of the law. There is a lot of momentum and I think we'll have comprehensive immigration reform this year."

Then Brown showed a re-run of a recent interview with Harrisburg TV reporter Chris Papst, which I will not report on because it's a re-run.

Then Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer was on to talk about the Pentagon, who is refusing to award Purple Hearts to survivors of the Fort Hood massacre, reportedly because doing so could taint the trial of accused killer Major Nidal Hasan.

Shaffer said this: "This is undue deference to the defense. The issue needs to be on doing the right thing, and that is to state the truth. The victims of this attack were attacked by a member of Al Qaeda who was in touch with Anwar al-Awlaki. That clearly puts it in the category of terrorism and these people should get the awards and the benefits they are due. To me it is appalling that this administration is more worried about a political narrative and giving aid and comfort to a terrorist."

Brown agreed, saying this: "We're looking out for the guy who perpetrated the crime but not for the victims who just want a small purple ribbon acknowledging that they did something for their country."

Then Maryam Rostampour and Marziyeh Amirizadeh (both Iranian-born women who were also imprisoned for nine months in Tehran after converting to Christianity) were on to talk about the American pastor Saeed Abedini, who remains locked in a Tehran prison for supposedly endangering Iranian national security by promoting Christianity.

Rostampour said this: "The most important reason we could bear that difficult situation, was our faith and our personal relationship with Jesus Christ. There were times when they took us for interrogations in a separate building that is famous for its mental and physical torture."

Amirizadeh said this: "We were not tortured physically, but we were tortured mentally. For 15 days we were in detention where we could not use the bathroom, it was like torture."

Then Brown showed another re-run of an interview O'Reilly had with Adam Carolla, which I also will not report on because it was a re-run. And this show sucked with Scott Brown. It was so bad that on the O'Reilly website show summary page only one person gave it a like on facebook. Brown was boring, and just another right-wing fool with far-right opinions.

Republicans Still Pushing State Tax Cuts For The Wealthy
By: Steve - April 2, 2013 - 10:00am

Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R) is the latest Republican governor pushing for cuts to the state income tax, and like the plans from other states, Fallin's plan would give most of its benefits to the state's wealthiest residents. The proposal is gaining steam in the state legislature, where it has passed the House and is awaiting consideration in the Senate.

Fallin's plan reduces the top income tax rate from 5.25 percent to 5 percent, and while it is modest compared to tax cuts other Republican states are pursuing, it would still cost the state roughly $100 million a year.

And according to the Oklahoma Policy Institute, more than 40 percent of its tax cuts would go to the state's richest 5 percent of residents while the bottom 60 percent would see just 9 percent of the benefits. The poorest fifth of Oklahoma residents would see no tax cut at all.

Oklahoma's tax code is already slanted to the wealthy: the poorest Oklahomans pay an average of 10.3 percent of their income in taxes, while the wealthiest 1 percent pay just 4.6 percent of theirs, according to the Institute for Taxation and Economic Policy.

And while Fallin is cutting taxes and reducing state revenues, Oklahoma will spend less this fiscal year on education than it did last year and is still spending 10.7 percent less on higher education than it did before the recession.

That is where Republicans spin it, because they claim the wealthy pay more in taxes, but the real number is what percent of their income do they actually pay, not the total dollar amount. When you look at what percent of taxes they pay of their income it's always less than the average working man.

Republican governors across the country are pitching tax cuts that benefit the wealthy, and like Fallin, they sell them as a way to boost their economies. Even though a recent report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that after a similar round of tax cuts in the 1990s, states that cut taxes saw slower economic and job growth than states that did not.

Basically they are lying to you to try and trick you into supporting more unfair State tax cuts that mostly favor the wealthy.

Former Republican Senator Will Host The Factor Tonight
By: Steve - April 1, 2013 - 11:00am

And no, this is not an April Fool's joke. The former Senator Scott Brown (R-MA) will guest-host The O'Reilly Factor tonight. Brown, who joined Fox News as a contributor earlier this year, tweeted that he would be guest-hosting for Bill O'Reilly Monday night.

4-1-13 -- @ScottBrownMA: On my way to NYC to host the O'Reilly [email protected] tonight. Should be a good show. Enjoy.

Everyone who heard about it thought it was a joke, including Mediaite and Politico, so Brown then tweeted this:

4-1-13 -- @ScottBrownMA: Arriving in NYC for show prep for O'Reilly. He is on vacation and I am hosting tonight 8&11 PM.

Which is laughable, and just more proof O'Reilly is a Republican, because his 2 fill in hosts are the Republican Laura Ingraham and Scott Brown.

Palin Consultant Hypocrisy Off The Charts Ridiculous
By: Steve - April 1, 2013 - 10:00am

In the new ad for her SARAH PAC, crazy Sarah Palin rails against consultants, with a clip from her 2013 CPAC speech where she says this: "Don't let the big consultants, the big money men, and the big bad media scare you off! Now is the time to furlough the consultants."

But, as it turns out, Sarah Palin is quite a fan of consultants, if her PAC's spending is any indication.

As The Daily Beast's Jon Avlon reported, having combed through the PAC's financials, out of the $5.1 million the PAC spent in the last election cycle, only $298,500 was spent on candidates:
"But the real news comes when you look at how donors' money was actually doled out: just $298,500 to candidates. The bulk of the rest of it, more than $4.8 million, went to-you guessed it-consultants.

That's some seriously hypocritical overhead.

Palin's chief PAC consultant, Tim Crawford, pocketed more than $321,000 this election cycle in direct payments alone, according to the documents. Aries Petra Consulting was taking in between $6,000 and $8,000 a month for speechwriting and "grassroots consulting" -something that sounds like an oxymoron, but ended up costing north of $160,000.

C&M Transcontinental racked up $10,000 a month in management consulting, which is hard to imagine for a PAC whose job is simply to raise money and spend it on candidates.

Inside SarahPAC, there were consultants for research and consultants for logistics and consultants for issues and on and on and on.

In fact, it's hard to find any area where consultants weren't employed."
On CNN yesterday, Avlon noted that Palin "spent more on her top consultant than she did on all the candidates she doled out money to. There are consultants for every issue imaginable in SarahPAC" and added that the PAC is "somewhere between a business and a racket right now."

And some conservatives are mad at Palin, even saying she should go to jail for fraud. Nathan Wurtzel said this about Palin:

"If someone asks you for money for a purpose and 94% of that money goes for something else, they should be thrown in jail for fraud."

He goes on to say that a normal PAC overhead is about 30%, but "94% is outrageous, it's criminal."

And it goes without saying, O'Reilly never said a word about it, because O'Reilly loves Sarah Palin, and he never reports anything negative about her.

More Republican Racism O'Reilly Has Ignored
By: Steve - April 1, 2013 - 9:00am

Last Thursday Congressman Don Young (R-AK) invited a wave of criticism after using a racial slur to characterize Latinos, saying that he and his father, "used to hire 50 to 60 wetbacks to pick tomatoes." And Young refused to apologize outright for the slur, even after several GOP leaders called on him to do so.

And this is not new for Young, one of the most senior Republicans in the House, to go off the rails. He has said a long string of crazy, offensive, or outright bizarre things during his 40-year tenure as a member of Congress.

And finally, on Friday Young issued a full apology for using the racial slur wetbacks, saying this:

"I apologize for the insensitive term I used during an interview in Ketchikan, Alaska. There was no malice in my heart or intent to offend; it was a poor choice of words. That word, and the negative attitudes that come with it, should be left in the 20th century, and I'm sorry that this has shifted our focus away from comprehensive immigration reform."

But of course O'Reilly never reported the racism, or the apology, even though it happened on Thursday and O'Reilly did a show Friday night.