The Thursday 5-30-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 31, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Is there a smoking gun in the IRS scandal? The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: We expect criminal charges to be leveled against some people working in the IRS because they abused their power by targeting conservative groups and individuals. But the major question remains unanswered: Did the campaign of intimidation come from the White House.

Well, today there is disturbing information. Former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman visited the White House 157 times! By comparison, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton went to the White House 43 times and CIA Director Leon Panetta 20 times. So what the heck was Mr. Shulman doing at the White House?

He must explain under oath what he was doing there on 157 separate occasions. You can not have an agency that has the power to put Americans in prison and take their money persecuting people for political reasons.

The President should explain tomorrow what Mr. Shulman was doing at the White House all those times, and any federal employee involved in helping Shulman target Americans should be immediately fired and prosecuted.
Then Mark Everson, who headed the IRS for four years under President George W. Bush was on to discuss it.

Everson said this: "I only went the White House once on a policy matter, and I am saddened and disturbed by all that has come out. We never had any conversations about enforcement matters, people were scrupulous about not trying to influence our enforcement judgment."

Which is ridiculous, because when Everson was at the IRS there was no Obamacare to deal with, so his comparison is a joke. And of course O'Reilly never pointed that out as I did.

Everson then tried to rationalize why his successor could have visited the White House 157 times, saying this: "The administration was considering tax reform and health care, in which the IRS plays a major role, so that's totally legitimate. But I'm concerned about the IRS being wrapped up in the Affordable Care Act. Every commissioner knows that you should maintain total independence."

You can still be independent after visiting the White House, fool.

Then the part-time Fox Democrat Kirsten Powers was on to discuss it, and she downplayed the news that former IRS boss Douglas Shulman visited the White House so often.

Powers said this: "I rate the story about a two on a scale of ten, I'm not saying there isn't something to look at, but this could be easily explained by Obamacare. There were so many implications for taxes that it would make sense that he would be invited to these meetings. Are we really supposed to believe that he was showing up twice a week to scheme against the Tea Party?"

But of course O'Reilly said that the sheer volume of visits is problematic, saying this: "Under President Bush the head of the IRS was at the White House once, but under President Obama the guy was there 157 times! Shulman did not drive Obamacare, he was part of the apparatus."

Then Juan Hernandez was on to talk about Yanira Maldonado, an Arizona mother of seven, who was thrown in a Mexican jail, suspected of smuggling 12 pounds of marijuana that was found under her seat on a bus.

Immigration activist Juan Hernandez defended the Mexican authorities and ridiculed calls for a boycott of Mexico, saying this: "Of course we don't boycott Mexico, Mexico is our friend. The message to Mexico is, 'Thank you, Mexico, we have been pressuring you to be more aggressive with regard to drugs flowing into the United States. You found 12 to 15 pounds of marijuana and you're investigating.' Mexico is a sovereign nation, a land of laws, crime is down and tourism is up."

And of course O'Reilly disputed the Hernandez analysis, saying this: "Mexico is a chaotic system, it's more violent than Afghanistan and Iraq. But you're telling me that this system down there is okay with you! I'm not going to Mexico because I don't believe they're our friend."

And btw folks, After a week in jail, Yanira Maldonado was released late Thursday night after the charges against her were dismissed by a Mexican judge.

Then Wendy Walsh and Bonnie Forrest were on to talk about a new poll that shows America is losing its moral bearings.

Walsh said this: "People are afraid of change, but the truth is that times are better than they have ever been. Crime rates are lower, abortion is down, divorces are down, more kids are graduating from high school. Even though people aren't sitting in church pews as often, research shows that young people have the same moral compass as their parents and grandparents."

Forrest said this: "If you look at pornography, 66% think it's immoral but the Internet allows you instant access. With respect to sexuality, the Internet is driving a change in moral values."

O'Reilly disputed Walsh's claim that morality is basically unchanged from the past, saying this: "I don't think young people in America have nearly the moral compass that the World War II generation had, not even close."

Then Laura Ingraham was on to cry about the news that only four Republicans were invited to give commencement speeches at the nation's top 100 universities.

Ingraham said this: "What's disturbing is that colleges and universities are supposed to be places where you can debate the important issues of the day, and places where all viewpoints are given a fair hearing. That's what classical institutions used to be about, but there is no balance, not even an attempt at balance. It's liberal totalitarianism!"

What it shows is that they do not want crazy far-right loons speaking to the kids, if you want to speak at the schools change your far-right extreme views and positions back to the mainstream.

O'Reilly cried that even when conservatives are invited on campus, they are often treated badly, saying this: "Ben Carson, the esteemed physician, was invited to Johns Hopkins but he had to withdraw, while Rand Paul and Karl Rove were shouted down. You never hear conservatives on campus doing that to the left."

Then the lame Jesse Watters hit the streets of Washington, DC to find out just how much folks know about the new health care reform. And before you read this remember what O'Reilly does, these segments are edited to only show you the comments from people they want you to see. They do not show you the un-edited video, these are the people O'Reilly picked you to hear.

A few comments: "I think it's one of the worst pieces of legislation in the last 30 years" ... "I support the idea but I think he's going about it the wrong way" ... "I know there are a lot of forms" ... "How can they fine me when I don't have any money?"

Back in the studio, Watters summarized his findings, saying this: "I'd say one out of five people could talk about Obamacare, and what I'm realizing after doing a lot of these interviews is that most people only understand slogans and buzzwords. They understand that you can stay on your parents plan until you're 26, but they don't understand anything about a tax or individual mandate or anything like that."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Making a difference. Billy said this: "Any individual or corporation that truly wants to make a difference should consider donating money to the Independence Fund, which purchases Trackchairs for badly wounded veterans. Pay a visit to independencefund.org to learn more."

Which is still not a tip, it's asking people to give money to buy Trackchairs for wounded veterans.

Michele Bachmann Will Not Run For Re-Election
By: Steve - May 31, 2013 - 10:00am

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, the crazy Minnesota Republican whose status as a leading Tea Party voice in Congress has faded in the wake of a failed bid for president and a widening investigation into her campaign spending, said Wednesday that she would not seek re-election.

Bachmann, said the legal inquiries had nothing to do with her decision. She vowed to continue to fight for the principles she said she holds dear: religious liberty, traditional marriage, family values and opposition to abortion.

"I fully anticipate the mainstream liberal media to put a detrimental spin on my decision not to seek a fifth term," she said in a gauzy network-television quality video posted on her campaign Web site. "They always seemed to attempt to find a dishonest way to disparage me. But I take being the focus of their attention and disparagement as a true compliment of my public service effectiveness."

Which is what all crazy people do, deny reality and claim you did a good job.

Like other conservative politicians with a national profile - Sarah Palin, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum - Bachmann may find numerous options, many of them lucrative, available to her in talk radio, television, advocacy for conservative causes and the speaking circuit.

Bachmann spent heavily in her last Congressional campaign and eked out a victory by less than two percentage points. Her opponent in that race had already declared his intention to run against her again in 2014. And so far this year her fund-raising has been terrible.

She raised less than $700,000 during the first three months of the year, according to the most recent federal disclosures. That is less than half of what she raised during the same period in 2011.

In addition to a tough fight for re-election, Bachmann faces growing legal troubles. The Office of Congressional Ethics, an independent House agency that acts like a grand jury to examine allegations of ethics violations, has been conducting a review of Bachmann and her staff since early this year.

That inquiry, first disclosed in March, is either near its conclusion or has already resulted in a recommendation for a formal investigation by the House Ethics Committee, as there is a strict time limit of about 100 days for how long such preliminary investigations can go on.

And I would bet the reason she is not running for re-election is that she was told she is in trouble with the ethics investigation, so she is going to get out before the you know what hits the fan.

The Star Tribune of Minneapolis reported this month that the Federal Bureau of Investigation was conducting its own investigation, joining the Federal Election Commission and the Iowa Senate Ethics Committee on the growing list of investigative bodies looking into her campaign activity.

Bachmann's lawyer, William McGinley, declined to comment on Wednesday.

And the great so-called journalist Bill O'Reilly has not said one word about it, because he is a Republican and he does not want to make her look bad.

The Wednesday 5-29-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 30, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Hate speech and the IRS scandal. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: If you surf the 'net or listen to talk radio, you know there is plenty of hatred being spewed. Facebook is having a terrible problem with that and when you visit the site you'll see the most vile personal attacks imaginable. Segue to the IRS scandal. There is no doubt that one of the most powerful federal agencies abused the Tea Party and other conservative entities. Why?

Because some people inside the IRS apparently hate conservatives and want to hurt them. Facebook is making one major mistake; it is limiting its campaign against hate speech to specific groups, specifically 'any protected category of people based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, disability or disease.'

So what Facebook is essentially saying is that those groups are protected but everybody else can get smeared. That is wrong! Hate speech is based on personal attacks that are designed to injure. In a noble country, hate speech and those who traffic in it should be rejected and shunned. And in a just country, the abuse of federal power to punish conservatives or anybody else should be a crime.
And that is just laughable, because O'Reilly ignores all the hate-speech from Fox and the far-right. He only reports on so-called hate-speech on the left, and some of it is not even hate-speech.

Then the Republican Congressman and former Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan was on to talk about the current IRS scandal.

Ryan said this: "We know they targeted people based on their political beliefs. We also know that they were intimidating and harassing donors to these political groups and that the IRS leaked sensitive taxpayer information. And we know that the IRS misled Congress. This was an arrogant abuse of power by the IRS and we've requested thousands of documents that have started to come to the Ways and Means Committee."

Ryan also suggested that Attorney General Eric Holder should step down, saying this: "Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner, a giant in the legal community, has called for his resignation and I agree with that. We think Eric Holder's testimony before the Judiciary Committee contradicted his actions."

Then O'Reilly had an actual Democratic guest on the show, the only one in the entire hour, Bob Beckel.

Beckel said this: "The question is whether people lied in front of Congress, which is perjury and a federal offense. I think it's probably fairly apparent that some people did lie. People in the IRS were saying this was all done by one office in Cincinnati but no one can believe that."

Beckel also predicted that Eric Holder will eventually step aside, saying this: "Do I honestly believe that there are serious political and legal problems? Yes. I'm not ready to say Eric Holder broke the law, but he's dying from a thousand cuts and I don't think he survives."

Then Megyn Kelly was on to analyze the apparent contradiction between Attorney General Eric Holder's sworn testimony to Congress and his actions in office.

Kelly said this: "You have to parse the language when you're talking about potential perjury charges, and there has to be a specific contradiction that is made willfully and intentionally. But I think Eric Holder is in more trouble than I originally thought, he clearly misled Congress. Even some people on the left want him out."

Kelly then talked about the Arizona woman who is in a Mexican jail, suspected of smuggling marijuana that was found under her seat on a bus.

Kelly said this: "This is a mother of seven who was going to Mexico for a funeral. She was one of only two Americans on the bus and says she was targeted. How did she get 12 pounds of pot on the bus with no one noticing it, and what moron would put it under their own seat? If they convict her, it's ten years in prison."

O'Reilly accused Mexican authorities of falsely accusing the woman, saying this: "I think this is the end of Mexico tourism if they charge her, you can't keep throwing Americans in jail."

What he did was tell Mexico to let her go or else, haha, the or else is he will slam them on his show and tell everyone to stay away from Mexico, now that's funny. O'Reilly thinks he has the power to get Mexico to release her, as if they care what he says on his little biased hack of a cable news show that is seen by 3 million old right-wing fools.

Then Carl Cameron and James Rosen were on with the latest from Washington and the various scandals. Which is all Fox reports about anymore, making them unwatchable.

Cameron said this: "So far there are eight Senators, two Governors, and 130 members of the House calling for Eric Holder's resignation. All are Republicans, there have not been any liberal Democrats in Congress who have done that. The President is reported to be not happy with what Holder did, and it was made clear by the administration and Holder that he wouldn't stay the entire second term."

Rosen said this about Benghazi: "The headline is whether the State Department complies, they have until June 7th to turn over the documents. Congressman Darrell Issa wants all of the communications sent to and from ten individuals at the State Department relating to Benghazi. If the State Department refuses, it would likely provoke the House Oversight Committee to vote on whether John Kerry should be held in contempt of Congress."

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on, because he is a right-wing comedian who is only on to make jokes about liberals to make O'Reilly happy. With no liberal comedian on for balance to make jokes about conservatives.

Then Juliet Huddy was on for did you see that. She talked about an Oregon county that ran out of money, and the pleas of a woman who called 9-1-1 when her former boyfriend broke into her home were ignored.

Huddy said this: "He raped and assaulted her, and this is a man who had put her in the hospital two weeks before. Basically this woman was begging for her life on that 9-1-1 call. This is a logging area but the timber industry has died down and this county has no money, the safety nets have vanished."

O'Reilly said this: "This is impossible to believe in America that a county doesn't have any money and they can't send law enforcement out to help a woman. This woman should have a gun to protect herself."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: The Lowe-down on Killing Kennedy. Billy said this: "The National Geographic Channel has announced that the movie version of "Killing Kennedy" will star Rob Lowe as President John F. Kennedy."

Where is the tip O'Reilly, that's not a tip, it's a cheap promotion for the movie based on your stupid book.

Oklahoma Republican Slams GOP War On Women
By: Steve - May 30, 2013 - 10:00am

O'Reilly has said for months and months that there is no war on women in the Republican party, he says it's all just made up propaganda put out by partisan Democrats and left-leaning news networks like MSNBC.

Okay, so explain this Billy, a Republican in Oklahoma is slamming his own party for their war on women, and of course you ignored it because it kills your spin that the GOP does not have a war on women and that it's all made up by partisan Democrats.

In an op-ed published on Wednesday, an Oklahoma Republican sharply criticizes his fellow party members for focusing on enacting unnecessary legislation to limit women's access to abortion and contraception. "What happened to the Republican Party that I joined?" state Rep. Doug Cox (R) wonders, pointing out that the mounting pile of reproductive restrictions represents a government intrusion into women's personal lives.

Cox, who is a practicing physician, writes that the GOP-led pushes to eliminate women's health resources don't work in the "real world," as the U.S. continues to face high rates of unintended teen pregnancy. Instead of expanding access to contraception to help address that reality, his fellow Republicans are working to do the opposite — pushing to eliminate Medicaid coverage for Plan B and allow pharmacists to refuse to fill birth control prescriptions for any reason.

The state lawmaker doesn't believe those legislative priorities reflect the fundamental issues at the heart of the Republican Party:
What happened to the Republican Party that I joined? The party where conservative presidential candidate Barry Goldwater felt women should have the right to control their own destiny? The party where President Ronald Reagan said a poor person showing up in the emergency room deserved needed treatment regardless of ability to pay? What happened to the Republican Party that felt government should not overregulate people until (as we say in Oklahoma) "you have walked a mile in their moccasins"?

What happened to the Republican Party that felt that the government has no business being in an exam room, standing between me and my patient? Where did the party go that felt some decisions in a woman's life should be made not by legislators and government, but rather by the women, her conscience, her doctor and her God?
In February, when Oklahoma was considering additional abortion restrictions that would make it harder for minors to get an abortion without parental consent, Cox testified in opposition to the legislation. "We keep passing stuff like this, they’ll be done in back alleys with coat hangers, people," he pointed out.

At the same hearing, Cox also explained that, despite Republicans attempts to construe abortion care as inherently unsafe, abortion doctors don't actually need to be burdened with additional regulations.

This year, Cox was the recipient of Planned Parenthood's Barry Goldwater Award, which is presented to "outstanding" public officials in the Republican Party who have demonstrated their support for reproductive health issues.

"As a highly regarded member of the Oklahoma State House, Rep. Cox has tirelessly and effectively argued against more than 160 anti-women's health measures," the women's health organization noted.

But the other lawmakers in Oklahoma — a state that is already particularly hostile to women's reproductive rights — have certainly kept Cox busy. Earlier this session, one state lawmaker advanced a measure that would allow employers to deny their workers birth control coverage for any reason.

Another legislator has repeatedly pushed to outlaw all abortions and some forms of contraception with a personhood initiative that would endow embryos with the full rights of U.S. citizens. And just last week, in the wake of two deadly tornadoes that ravaged the state, the Oklahoma Senate voted to defund Planned Parenthood.

The Tuesday 5-28-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 29, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Pressure mounting on Attorney General Eric Holder. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Eric Holder is a very controversial guy. As Assistant Attorney General he was involved with the Marc Rich pardon, where the nation's biggest tax cheat ever was granted amnesty by President Clinton. Mr. Holder was also involved in the 'Fast and Furious' gun scandal and in the IRS scandal to some extent.

Finally, Holder signed off on calling Fox News correspondent James Rosen a 'co-conspirator' in a national security leak. So far Eric Holder has not paid any price for his dubious decisions.

To be fair, there's a valid national security situation involved in the Rosen matter - the fact that Rosen went public with North Korea's threat to test a nuclear weapon could have implicated someone giving information about that country.

But Rosen didn't name a source and did not leak any information. The Rosen and Associated Press situations both come back to Attorney General Holder, who is holding on by his fingertips.
Notice that O'Reilly says pressure is mounting on Eric Holder to resign, without telling you that pressure is only coming from biased Republicans who hate Holder, including O'Reilly.

Then the so-called Fox news Democrat Juan Williams was on to discuss it. And for once Williams disagreed with O'Reilly and made him look like the fool he is.

Williams defended Holder's actions, saying this: "What's lame here, is people who don't realize that this is about national security. In the AP case, Al Qaeda has no right to know that we have a double agent operating in Yemen. And similarly, there is a real national security issue in the North Korea case."

Then the right-wing stooge Brit Hume was on with a totally different view of the Eric Holder controversy.

Hume said this: "The President now has a guy who is causing problems, it's the President who would have to decide that someone from outside the administration has to look into this. There's a hesitancy on the part of Eric Holder to appoint a special prosecutor because once you do that, you say to the world that this is big and I'm not capable of handling the investigation. Holder will also have to reveal whether there were other journalists whose emails and phone records were snooped on or seized."

Then the two Republicans Cleta Mitchell and Catherine Engelbrecht were on to talk about the IRS admitting that it gave extra scrutiny to conservative organizations that were seeking tax-exempt status. One such right-leaning organization is "True the Vote," which wanted to monitor the national election process.

Engelbrecht said this: "The FBI contacted us on several occasions, wanting to know specifically about people who were attending our programs. My husband and I were personally audited for two years and our businesses were audited."

Mitchell added that "True the Vote" has filed suit against the federal government, saying this: "We are asking the court to grant our tax-exempt status, and we also believe IRS agents abused and violated a particular section of the tax code. 'True the Vote's' constitutional rights were violated by this targeting based on its ideological vantage point."

Then the Republicans Kimberly Guilfoyle and Lis Wiehl were on to analyze the lawsuit filed by "True the Vote" against the federal government.

Wiehl said this: "I give them a 50-50 chance, which is actually pretty high for suing the federal government. The government is 'sovereign' and it is immune unless they really screw up and go against established law. This group was investigated 17 times!"

Guilfoyle said this: "I think it's more like 75 - 25 against them, but this is a great case to bring forward and they should prevail. This is not about the money, it's the principle and this is a sound lawsuit. This would be a very damaging precedent to be established."

And I give them no chance of winning, zero. Only Republicans would give them any chance at all, because nobody else on the planet thinks they will win.

Then the biased right-wing hack Bernie Goldberg was on to analyze the national media's treatment of the various controversies affecting the White House. And of course no liberal was on with him or after him to provide the balance, so it was one sided right-wing spin.

Goldberg said this: "For a scandal to take off and become part of the general culture, it can't simply be a story for news junkies. It has to become a recurring joke on the late night comedy shows, it has to become a recurring theme with Jon Stewart, and it has to be a running story on the network evening newscasts. I don't see that happening because the relationship between this President and the press is still way too cozy."

Which is insane, because the late night comedy shows are joking about it, including Jon Stewart and Leno, who talk about it a lot.

Then the right-wing hack Charles Krauthammer was on to discuss it for the millionth time, and of course no liberal guest was on for balance, and never is. Krauthammer is always on alone, which O'Reilly does on purpose. Because he wants Krauthammer to be able to spin out right-wing propaganda with nobody to question any of it, because he agrees with Krauthammer 99% of the time.

Krauthammer said this: "The IRS scandal is truly an outrage, but we don't know how high up it goes. The only way to find out is to 'flip' lower people who expose higher people. The question is whether this is given to a special prosecutor or whether it's done in Congress. I think if you give it to a special prosecutor it will go away for six months because everybody will say they can't comment on an ongoing investigation, so if Republicans are smart they will recall Lois Lerner, who took the Fifth Amendment. They should offer her immunity and then she has to testify."

Krauthammer then speculated that lingering questions about the September 11th attack in Benghazi have more potential to damage the President, even though O'Reilly claims he does not allow speculation.

Krauthammer said this: "The biggest question of all is what the President was doing in those eight hours. He had a routine meeting at 5:00 but after that he never called the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the Secretary of Defense, or the CIA director. Who did he call? He called the Secretary of State, and soon after she released a statement about the anti-Muslim video. If it looks like the only phone call was to construct a cover story while Americans were fighting for their lives, there's the scandal!"

Which is 100% speculation, and the real scandal here is that O'Reilly and Krauthammer get away with all this biased right-wing garbage and call it news. Especially after O'Reilly says he does

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Piano Man's candor. Billy said this: "Check out the New York Times interview with singer Billy Joel, whose honesty matches his talent."

Earth to Bill O'Reilly, that is not a tip, it's simply a promotion of an interview of Billy Joel. You are an idiot, and this tip of the day is nonsense, stop it and report some real news. And btw, the whole show was nothing but right-wing propaganda, with only one so-called Democrat on the show, how is that fair and balanced.

Fox Host Tells Viewers To Punch Obama Voters In The Face
By: Steve - May 29, 2013 - 10:00am

And of course the so-called neutral journalist Bill O'Reilly never said a word about it. But if a Republican was in office, and a host at MSNBC called for people to punch conservative voters in the face, O'Reilly would be outraged and do half a show on it.

Last Thursday a host of the Fox News show The Five was so angry that the Justice Department had investigated one of the network's reporters that she told her viewers on Thursday to find anyone who voted for President Barack Obama and punch them in the face.

Fox News host Andrea Tantaros explained on the Thursday edition of her radio show. "And they said, 'Oh, Fox is just crazy! They're just paranoid!' Really? Are we?"

"This is what is happening to our press! This is Obama's America! It's like the Soviet Union," she continued. "He said he would change the country. He said it. And a lot of people voted for him."

"And if you see any of those people today, do me a favor, punch them in the face."

After a commercial break, a caller from South Carolina told Tantaros that he hated Obama, but worried that telling people to punch Obama voters in the face was sending the wrong message.

"To be clear, I didn't say punch Obama in the face," the Fox News host pointed out. "You're going to get me arrested with this type of government."

"If someone voted for him!" she insisted to the caller. "If anyone that you know who voted for President Obama, smack 'em down."

Haha, yeah right, just try it and see what happens, maybe you will get smacked down. In fact, I am asking her to come to Peoria and try and punch me in the face. And btw, it's President Obama, not Obama.

Bob Dole Slams The GOP For Right-Wing Extremism
By: Steve - May 27, 2013 - 11:00am

Former Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-KS) told Fox News Sunday that the Senate Republicans are abusing the filibuster and that he doubts if Richard Nixon or Ronald Reagan could make it in today's Republican Party.

Asked his thoughts on the modern GOP, Dole - a former Republican national chairman, the 1976 GOP vice presidential pick, and the 1996 Republican presidential nominee - suggested, to host Chris Wallace, that the party lacks any positive ideas and is no longer a place for even conservative Republicans like himself:
WALLACE: What do you think of your party, the Republicans today?

DOLE: I think they ought to put a sign on the national committee doors that says "closed for repairs" until New Year's Day next year - and spend that time going over ideas and positive agendas.

WALLACE: You describe the GOP of your generation as Eisenhower Republicans, moderate Republicans. Could people like you, even Ronald Reagan - could you make it in today's Republican Party.

DOLE: I doubt it. Reagan couldn't have made it. Certainly Nixon couldn't have made it, cause he had ideas. We might have made it, but I doubt it.
Dole, now 89, also took his own party to task for abuse of the Senate's filabuster rules. Wallace noted that "In your first two years as a Senator, there were 7 motions filed - cloture motions to end debate. In the last two years, there were 115 cloture motions," and asked the five-term Senator whether it is inappropriate that due to minority obstruction it now takes a 60-vote super-majority to pass any legislation or confirm any nominees.

"No doubt about it," Dole told him, "There are some cases where you could probably justify if, but not many."

Take note of where Dole and Wallace mention the cloture motions, in 2 years the Republicans filed 115 cloture motions. Dole said in his first 2 years as a Senator only 7 were filed.

This proves the Republicans are abusing the filabuster rule, and yet, not once has O'Reilly reported on it, or complained about what they are doing. But when Democrats used the cloture motions under Bush O'Reilly reported it all the time and cried that they were doing wrong.

O'Reilly even had Republican Senators on to complain about it and to promote a website the GOP started called www.upordownvote.com. Now that Republicans are doing it, and 10 times more than Democrats did, O'Reilly is silent and does not say a word about it.

O'Reilly Caught Lying About President Obama Again
By: Steve - May 26, 2013 - 11:00am

Now remember this folks, O'Reilly claims to be neutral when it comes to President Obama. Which is just laughable, because almost every night he joins in with a GOP talking points smear job lie about President Obama over something. He is about as neutral as Karl Rove or Sean Hannity, and it's total dishonesty to even make such a ridiculous claim.

O'Reilly was talking to Professor Marc Lamont Hill, and he said he was neutral, Professor Hill Laughed but did not say anything to him about it. He even cried that Professor Hill is not exactly an unbiased observer, when he is not an unbiased observer either, and worse than Professor Hill.

Billy said this:
O'REILLY: "You and Bob Beckel are giving the President the benefit of the doubt because you're both supporters of the President. But I'm neutral as far as President Obama is concerned and if evidence points to the fact that he did know and he's covering it up, then he's through."
Now here is an example of his latest biased smear job on Obama. Last Thursday O'Reilly lied and claimed that "President Obama is not holding anyone accountable" for the actions of the IRS after an Inspector General report found the agency gave extra scrutiny to tea party groups tax status applications.

O'Reilly failed to mention the fact that the Obama administration has fired Steven Miller, the acting commissioner of the IRS, placed Lois Lerner, the director of the tax-exempt organizations division at the IRS, on administrative leave, and that Attorney General Eric Holder ordered a criminal investigation into the case.

On the May 23rd O'Reilly Factor, Billy O'Reilly said this to Ben Stein: "I think to be fair on this we have to say a few things definitely. That President Obama is not holding anyone accountable. That's absolutely true." O'Reilly then claimed that the president should "be scolded for that," and that Lerner should have been suspended immediately.

But President Obama and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew forced Miller out as a "first step," with President Obama promising to "do everything in my power" to stop future targeting.

On May 23rd, the acting IRS commissioner placed Lois Lerner on administrative leave after she refused his request that she resign. And Attorney General Eric Holder announced on May 14th that the Justice Department would work with the FBI to see if any laws were broken in relation to the IRS case.

Not to mention this, O'Reilly never mentions that the head of the IRS was appointed by George W. Bush and that he testified nobody from the White House ever told him to target conservative groups. Which is also another example of not being neutral by ignoring news that clears Obama.

The Fox News scandal machine, eager for a new target after the collapse of its Benghazi investigations, has been whitewashing Mr. Obama's response from the start. Some in the right wing media are even using the opportunity to call for a special prosecutor, that they objected to, for any reason when Bush was in office.

The Thursday 5-23-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 24, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama trying to reassert his authority. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: In a major foreign policy speech today, the President put forth that his administration is winning the war on terror, although he does not use that phrase.

He explained how the drone attacks are effective and legal, and Talking Points agrees. He once again called for the closing of the prison at Guantanamo Bay and talked about increasing security for American diplomats abroad.

Finally, Mr. Obama promised to protect the rights of journalists. It is clear President Obama is doing damage control, which was also done in the Washington Post Thursday morning, which had an article about the IRS scandal that was clearly planted by the White House.

It said the President was not in the loop and that his top advisers kept IRS information from him for a variety of reasons. So the White House strategy is clear: The President did not know anything about the IRS targeting conservative groups, even though his top advisers did.

It is clear that a host of top administration officials must testify in front of Congress; the IRS story is just beginning to surface.
Then Ben Stein, an economist and former aide to President Nixon was on.

Stein said this: "Something's clearly wrong here, because you don't have a top IRS official pleading the Fifth Amendment if there's no likelihood that a crime was committed. Also, the idea that the President is not responsible for his top aides or the Department of Treasury is just ridiculous. They say all this conspiring was going on but somehow he was kept out of the loop. This is just the Nixon playbook minus all the foreign policy achievements."

Then the liberal Professor Marc Lamont Hill was on to discuss it.

Hill said this: "There is not only plausible deniability in the case of President Obama, but it is quite reasonable to assume that he really didn't know, which is not to excuse his behavior after he found out. The American people do not want a White House, either Democrat or Republican, that targets political groups based on their beliefs. I don't think that's what Obama was attempting to do, but the right has attempted to paint this as some Nixon-like moment."

O'Reilly pointed out that Hill is not exactly an unbiased observer, saying this: "You and Bob Beckel are giving the President the benefit of the doubt because you're both supporters of the President. But I'm in neutral as far as President Obama is concerned and if evidence points to the fact that he did know and he's covering it up, then he's through."

Now that's funny, O'Reilly said he is neutral as far as President Obama is concerned, yeah and I'm Donald Trump too. O'Reilly is as biased as Hannity or Limbaugh in his attacks on President Obama.

Then Laura Ingraham was on to talk about two home-grown Islamists, that butchered and killed a British soldier in London.

Ingraham said this: "This was so shocking, and people in London are worried for their safety. They're concerned that they have a whole separate group of people who are not assimilated and are prone to radicalization and jihadist sentiment. There is an adamant refusal on the part of new Brits to accept British tradition and values, which is setting up a clash of civilizations."

O'Reilly (who claims to never speculate) speculated that this week's murder could be a turning point, saying this: "The United Kingdom has been very lenient with Muslims, but most of them have not assimilated, they speak their own language, they have their own customs. I think there's going to be real violence there unless the British authorities really start to clamp down on these jihadists."

Then attorney Jack McMahon, who represented abortionist and convicted triple-murderer Kermit Gosnell was on.

McMahon said this: "I was complimentary to the jury because they did their service, but I don't believe that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania established that the three fetuses were born alive. You have to remember that they were injected with a drug in utero and the purpose was to cause fetal demise."

McMahon also said this: "A 13-year-old girl would come in with her mother, crying and with no place else to turn. She would beg him and he thought it was the right thing to do, to help that girl at that particular time in her life. In his mind, Dr. Gosnell did not kill live human babies."

The biased right-wing pro-life O'Reilly protested, saying this: "These babies will never ever exist on this planet because he killed them!"

Then Megyn Kelly was on to analyze the revelation that the FBI obtained a warrant and scrutinized the emails and phone records of Fox News correspondent James Rosen.

Kelly said this: "James is a great reporter, and here's what irritates me about this situation. I have no problem with the government investigating leaks of national security information, but in order to get at James' records and not notify him they said he was part of a 'criminal conspiracy.' A lower level judge approved the warrant but there was no reason not to give James notice."

O'Reilly then called for the firing of Attorney General Eric Holder, saying this: "Holder has to explain this and of course he is not going to be able to, so he should go!"

Then the right-wing stooge Adam Carolla was on, and he slammed the liberal Bette Midler, who applauded the IRS for singling out conservative groups for especially harsh treatment.

Carolla said this: "I've seen her specials where she goes out on stage dressed as a mermaid, so we're taking political advice from a giant fish! The hypocrisy bothers me because obviously if it was a Republican administration going after Planned Parenthood she would eat her own fish tail. We have our team, they have their team, but we want the game played without corrupt officials."

O'Reilly pointed out that Midler is not typical of the left, saying this: "Most liberal Americans are not condoning the IRS situation, most of them are condemning it. But she is standing alone, thanking the IRS for persecuting conservatives."

Carolla also took aim at local officials in Los Angeles, who want to serve breakfast to ever more schoolchildren.

Carolla said this: "I did some checking into this, and you can get a sack of oatmeal that has more than 100 servings for $18, so you can feed your own kid for under a quarter. The bigger problem is the indoctrination into the system - we are pulling 6- and 7-year-olds into a system that basically says, 'Your parents won't take care of you, we'll take care of you.' In 20 years these kids are going to want us to cater their weddings."

What a jerk, somehow he is opposed to feeding poor kids breakfast at school. Hey Carolla, there is a spot in hell waiting for you. And O'Reilly has this idiot on the air every week, so he is just as bad as Carolla.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Ethnicity and fairness. Billy said this: "Strive to be fair to every ethnic group, but don't be afraid to criticize when there is an ongoing pattern of bad behavior."

Jon Stewart vs Bill O'Reilly Part 23
By: Steve - May 24, 2013 - 10:00am

During Wednesday night's Daily Show, Jon Stewart confronted his Fox News friend Bill O'Reilly over the intensity of their focus on the Obama administration's recent scandals, asking if there's some kind of sexual arousal or joy in the Fox offices over the Associated Press spying and IRS scrutiny of tea party groups.

After five years of constantly being at "DEFCON 1, red alert, the president is a Marxist who's destroying the country," Stewart began. "You finally have a few things that really look worth investigating. Is it joy? Is it sexual arousal? What is the feeling over there?"

O’Reilly ignored him, saying he's been "too easy" on President Obama and now he's getting criticized by his more conservative colleagues. "This is serious business with the IRS because it looks like the president just simply doesn't know what's going on within his administration," O'Reilly said.

Stewart suggested that it seems like the administration wants Obama to have a case for "plausible deniability," which is what all Presidents do, but O'Reilly countered with this: "The president sets the tone, like you set the tone for this program."

He added that, in his "educated speculation," Obama's enforcers likely decided to "scare the tea party" after the 2010 elections by asking them more detailed questions when they applied for tax exempt status as social welfare groups, a category widely abused by political groups that engage in attack ads funded by anonymous donors.

So much for that no speculation rule (and I only deal in the facts lie) O'Reilly claims to go by.

Stewart then asked O'Reilly again, "What's the feeling over there?" But again, O'Reilly dodged the question, demanding Stewart pronounce his employer's name. "Where I work. Say the words!"

"Uh, the Savak? What is the, the Shah's secret police organization?" Stewart joked. "So you're over there in hell. I'll say the organization: Sauron. The eye of Sauron."

He also said this: "There's this sense they have been singled out purely because of their political beliefs. To be profiled like that, It's just to be lumped in with people based solely on one fact, it's unfair, is all I'm saying. It'd be like, if somebody committed an act of terror and we took their whole religion and we lumped them all in for special singling-out."

O'Reilly countered that he supports profiling Muslims because they've committed "over 14,600" acts of terrorism. "I'm just doing the math here, if they keep mounting up, maybe you do a little bit of profiling."

"So 14,000 is the limit?" Stewart asked. "How many shootings are in this country?"

"I'm not quite sure," O'Reilly replied.

"I think it's like 30,000," Stewart said. "30,000 deaths between homicide and suicide. Do you think we should start profiling?"

"Of who?" O'Reilly asked. "Dead people?"

"No, the people with the guns," Stewart said. "It raises above your 14,000 threshold, is what I'm saying."

The Wednesday 5-22-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 23, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The IRS scandal getting even more intense. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Today the woman in charge of IRS department of tax-exempt organizations refused to testify in front of the House Oversight Committee. Lois Lerner is still on the job, but she should be suspended immediately. Yes, she has the right to remain silent, but she does not have a right to hold a job that has paid her about $750,000 over the past four years.

Hey, lady, that's taxpayer money and you owe us the truth, not the Fifth. Lerner knows she's in big trouble and many believe she will be charged with a crime. Another guy in trouble is former IRS director Douglas Shulman, who was Lerner's boss. He visited the White House 118 times, a red flag for sure.

Even devoted liberal Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings said there was 'gross incompetence and mismanagement' at the IRS. Is the President outraged that Lois Lerner took the Fifth? White House spokesman Jay Carney can speak to that, but he will not. According to a new poll, 49% of Americans consider President Obama 'honest and trustworthy,' while 48% do not.

If the IRS scandal continues and the White House continues to dodge, that 'untrustworthy' number will surely rise.
Then Bob Beckel was on to talk about Lois Lerner's decision to invoke the Fifth Amendment.

Beckel said this: "She started by saying she didn't break any laws, but then she took the Fifth, and that's a problem. Are we to believe that nobody suggested to her that conservative groups should be looked into? Do I believe Obama did that? Absolutely not, but there are people around him who may have done it. She should be suspended."

Beckel also insisted that President Obama deserves the benefit of the doubt, saying this: "I know Barack Obama, I've met him seven times, and this is a smart guy. Do you think he would tell the head of the IRS to look at these Tea Party groups? Of course not."

O'Reilly said this: "I don't think Obama would be foolish enough to order the IRS to target Tea Party conservatives, but his surrogates would be that stupid. And if he knew about it and didn't take any action, that is big trouble for him."

Then the fake Fox News Democrat Kirsten Powers and the Republican Kate Obenshain were on to talk about the Department of Justice targeting journalists.

Powers said this: "The President said he makes no apologies for what they did, and he hasn't said a word about James Rosen, so he's not too up in arms. He picks up the phone and calls people if they've been insulted by a radio host, but he hasn't spoken out on the government's thuggish tactics against journalists. Attorney General Holder and the President don't look very good right now."

Obenshain said this: "It's very clear that this was an executive level decision and Holder had to be involved. This shouldn't come as a surprise, but it is an atrocity and a scandal of serious proportions. The White House and the Department of Justice have made the determination that they're going after journalists."

Except there is no evidence at all that it was an executive level decision, but O'Reilly let her get away with saying it anyway. O'Reilly then predicted Attorney General Eric Holder will resign over this.

Then James Rosen and Carl Cameron were on to talk about the two Muslim extremists who attacked and killed a British soldier in broad daylight on Wednesday in London.

Rosen said this: "I just got off the phone with the British Embassy in Washington, and they are not calling this 'terrorism' just yet. But these two men attacked someone just a few blocks from a military barracks and then were shot themselves by armed British police. They are now in the hospital and this could be a terrorist attack."

Cameron said this: "Ibragim Todashev was being questioned Tuesday by the FBI about his friendship with the dead Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev. Todashev and Tsarnaev were both suspected in a triple murder in Boston and last night investigators thought Todashev was ready to sign a statement, but apparently he flew off the handle and pulled a knife. An FBI agent shot and killed him."

Then Lou Dobbs was on to defend Apple for avoiding billions in taxes. Apple CEO Tim Cook was grilled by a Senate committee this week and accused of avoiding taxes on profits earned overseas.

Dobbs said this: "This is a complicated issue, and complicating it further is that Tim Cook has promised that he's going to distribute $100 billion to his shareholders. Because interest rates are so low, he will borrow that money rather than bringing it back from overseas. But it's crazy what Senator Carl Levin is doing by attacking a successful business - Apple has 600,000 employees here and they pay their taxes, more than $6 billion last year."

Wrong Dobbs, Apple Used Low-Tax States, and Foreign Tax Havens to Dodge $2.4 Billion in Taxes Last Year. Apple used an intricate financial set up utilizing low-tax states in the U.S. and offshore tax havens has allowed it to skirt billions of dollars in American taxes over the last decade.

By setting up financial offices in states like Nevada (which has no income tax) and routing other profits through Ireland, Luxembourg, and nations in the Caribbean, Apple avoided an estimated $2.4 billion in American taxes in 2011 alone.

Apple's American tax rate was 9.8 percent in 2011. Its global tax rate was just 3.2 percent and has been in the single digits for the last decade. Its profits are skyrocketing. The amount it pays in taxes, however, has barely budged since 2007. And on top of all that, Apple is lobbying Congress to lower the corporate tax rate, as they set record profits and only pay a 9.8% tax rate now.

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because he is just a has-been unfunny right-wing hack comedian, and O'Reilly does not have a liberal comedian on for balance.

Then Jesse Watters was on for his waste of time weekly segment, he headed a few miles south to lower Manhattan, which is Obama country, and asked some folks about the current controversies. A few of their comments: "I don't think it's really like a huge scandal" ... "He seems like a good guy" ... "There's no way to be an honest President of a dishonest country" ... "Obama brought us back from the darkness."

And of course O'Reilly called them all clueless and uninformed far-left loons, while never asking any far-right Americans about what they know about Republicans who are in office. Who are even less informed than left leaning Americans.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: A culture war victory. Billy said this: "Tip your ten gallon hat to Texas lawmakers, who have done the right thing by passing a law that says school districts can not stop anyone from saying Merry Christmas or Happy Hanukkah."




Krauthammer Hypocrisy On Taking The Fifth
By: Steve - May 23, 2013 - 10:00am

Recently Charles Krauthammer attacked IRS official Lois Lerner for planning to invoke the Fifth Amendment during congressional hearings on IRS scrutiny of conservative groups, a change from his previous support for a Bush administration official doing the same.

A May 21st Los Angeles Times article reported that Lerner, "a top IRS official in the division that reviews nonprofit groups," will invoke her Fifth Amendment rights and not testify before the House Oversight Committee due to an ongoing criminal investigation and to avoid possible self-incrimination.

On The O'Reilly Factor, Krauthammer responded to O'Reilly's claim that Lerner's invoking the Fifth Amendment was evidence that the IRS controversy "was really building," saying that it was not unreasonable to infer that her decision was evidence "that there is a lot the Obama administration has got to hide and they are very worried."

But Krauthammer's claims conflict with statements he made during the George W. Bush administration. In a March 9, 2007 column, Krauthammer declared that invoking the Fifth Amendment was former Bush White House Chief of Staff Scooter Libby's right.

In other words, Krauthammer is a right-wing hypocrite with double standards, depending on whether you are a Republican or a Democrat.

Krauthammer even defended Libby, claiming that the controversy around the reveal of former CIA agent Valerie Plame's identity was a case of "memory lapses," casting doubt on the testimony of former NBC host Tim Russert, and dismissing the potential criminality of Libby's action.

Krauthammer's statement also differs from other Fox host claims. About two hours after Krauthammer's O'Reilly Factor appearance, On the Record host Greta Van Susteren - who holds a law degree from Georgetown University - said in an interview with House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA) that she would advise Lerner to invoke the Fifth Amendment because the Department of Justice opened a criminal investigation.

She said this:
VAN SUSTEREN: You know, if I were her lawyer, I'd advise her to take the fifth too, because the Justice Department has opened a criminal investigation and she does -- I mean, there is a risk that she says something tomorrow.
And btw, here is the real truth. She is taking the fifth because she's being sued in several civil cases. Her testimony is already covered in the investigation report that the House members already have. So anything that she says in that dog and pony show could be used against her in the civil cases. That is why her attorneys have advised her to take the fifth.

Invoking the Fifth Amendment is not evidence of anything. And invoking your fifth amendment rights is not allowed to be used against you by any court.

The Tuesday 5-21-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 22, 2013 - 11:00am

There was no TPM, instead O'Reilly did the top story called: Deadly tornado devestates central Oklahoma. John Roberts, who spent the day in Moore, Oklahoma, was on, he reported that the most devastating story involved an elementary school.

Roberts said this: "Nine children died, seven of them at an elementary school a few blocks from where I'm standing. Any loss of life in a tragedy like this is heartbreaking, but when it's children it's particularly heartbreaking. You send your child to school in the morning thinking it will be a safe place, but then that safe place is suddenly rent asunder by a tornado. Children were told to take shelter in the hallways and hug the walls, but the walls came tumbling down."

Roberts also said this: "We came across one person who said they're done with Oklahoma, but all the other people we talked to, people whose homes were blown away, are staying."

Then the biased right-wing hack O'Reilly attacked Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse for blaming it on "global warming." Did O'Reilly have a fair and balanced debate with guests from each side, haha, of course not, he had the right-wing stooge Joe Bastardi from the Fox weather center on to slam Whitehouse.

Bastardi said this: "There have been major tornadoes before, and the charts show major tornadoes have been decreasing over the years. They reached their peak in the 50's, 60's, and 70's. It's almost like ambulance chasing. Senator Whitehouse seems to be ignorant of the fact that his own state of Rhode Island was hit four times by tornadoes in the 1950's."

And Bastardi seems to be ignorant of the fact that it's not just how many tornadoes you get, it's how powerful they are, and they have been more powerful, which he totally ignored. Global Warming is real, and yet O'Reilly and Bastardi want you to think it's not. In fact, it's ridiculous and biased to even have Bastardi on to discuss it, especially when there was no Global Warming expert on for balance.

Then the biased right-wing stooge Charles Krauthammer was on to talk about President Obama, with no left-leaning guest for balance. Making it just another one sided right-wing propaganda segment by the right-wing hack O'Reilly.

Krauthammer said this: "Last week the President was asked whether anybody at the White House knew about the IRS activities, but the President gave a very lawyerly and peculiar answer. He deliberately dodged the question, and we now know that he knew at the time that his staff did know about it. What he said wasn't a lie, but it was a deliberate suppression of the truth from a man who leaks that he is only interested in everybody coming out and saying what they know. Why didn't he say what he knew when that question was asked?"

And Bush did the very same thing every day for 8 years, but neither one of you right-wing stooges ever said a word about it. In fact, you put a spin on it and defended it, you biased jerks.

Then the biased right-wing stooge Bernie Goldberg was on with his assessment of how the media is handling the various administration scandals. And of course no left-leaning guest was on for balance, just Goldberg spewing out right-wing propaganda.

Goldberg said this: "The big story is how the 'mainstream media' cover scandals in general. If it's a Republican scandal, it's covered as a scandal, but if it's a Democratic scandal, it's covered as, 'How are these cynical Republicans going to take advantage of this for political points?' In other words, the story isn't the IRS abuse, it's how the Republicans will seize on it!"

O'Reilly suggested that many reporters have skewed priorities, saying this: "You can do a legitimate sidebar on the Republicans taking advantage of the story, which they are, but the main story has to be whether this is credible."

Which is just laughable, coming from a biased hack like O'Reilly, who works at Fox News where they are all biased to the right. If you live in a glass house you should not throw stones, and O'Reilly lives in a glass mansion.

Then Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on to talk about Fox News correspondent James Rosen, who had his private emails read by federal investigators who were looking into leaks.

Wiehl said this: "The FBI had a warrant that gave them 30 days, but they read emails spanning four months. They claimed they were going after Rosen because they were worried about classified information being disclosed."

Guilfoyle accused the judge who authorized the warrant of legal overreach, saying this: "This is unauthorized, it's illegal, and it's an infringement on a reporter's legitimate interest in obtaining information. James Rosen was just doing his job!"

And if this happened under Bush to a reporter at MSNBC you all would excuse it and say it was ok because they were trying to find out who was leaking top secret information to someone in the media.

Then Oklahomans James and Micah Moody, whose home was destroyed by Monday's tornado were on to discuss it.

Micah said this: "The sirens started to go off, so we got into the storm shelter. I think I cried more than my three children because it was terrifying. When we came out there was screaming and yelling and hysteria at the school across the street. I ran over there to see if I could help and I had the privilege of carrying a little girl out of the school."

James Moody recounted how he made it home after leaving work, saying this: "The highway was shut down so I started meandering through local streets until I got about a quarter-mile from the house. I ran the rest of the way to the house and then, when I saw my children and my wife, I knew everything was okay and they were safe."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Eliminate ear pollution. Billy said this: "You can avoid sounding ignorant if you eschew clichés such as, 'at the end of the day,' 'there's no there there,' and 'it is what it is.'"

But if you really want to eliminate ear pollution just stop listening to O'Reilly and all his biased right-wing guests.

Another Racism Story O'Reilly Has Totally Ignored
By: Steve - May 22, 2013 - 10:00am

In Colorado, Blacks Make Up 4 Percent Of The Population But 100 Percent Of Death Row.

In March, Colorado came close to becoming the 19th state to abolish the death penalty, but the bill failed after Gov. John Hickenlooper voiced opposition and suggested a possible veto. A few months later, Colorado's death penalty is still firmly in place, and the state is poised to complete what would be only the second execution in 45 years (the last was in 1997).

Few dispute that Nathan Dunlap committed a horrific crime and murdered several people at a Chuck E. Cheese. But judges, university professors, and other prominent state leaders are urging Gov. Hickenlooper to commute Dunlap's sentence, both because crucial errors that defined his trial may have led him to get a harsher sentence than others, and because killing anyone under the perverted state system would be a miscarriage of justice:

-- All three people on death row are black men. In a state that is only 4.3% African American, Colorado's death row is 100% African American.

-- All three men on death are from the same one county, out of Colorado's 64.

All three men committed their crime when they were under the age of 21.

-- Two law professors who studied Colorado's application of the death penalty concluded it was unconstitutional, after finding that prosecutors pursue the death penalty in less than one percent of the cases where it is an option, and that the state failed to set clear statutory standards for distinguishing between the few who are executed and the many who commit murder.

"It appears that race, geography and youth largely determines who gets the death penalty in Colorado," wrote a group of NAACP leaders in a letter urging Gov. Hickenlooper to grant clemency. They note that not a single black juror served on the panel that sentenced Dunlap to death.

In addition to the injustices that define the Colorado system, a group of former Colorado judges also point out that Dunlap's bipolar disorder and psychotic tendencies were not even mentioned at trial. In fact, according to their letter, Dunlap's lawyer told the jury that there was no explanation for his violence.

The judges add that "no clear evidence exists that the death penalty deters violent crime. What it does in our current system, as in this case, is to drain our judicial system of millions of dollars as mandatory appeals drag on for decades."

Studies have shown that the death penalty does not lower the homicide rate. In fact, the murder rate is lower in states without the death penalty. Hickenlooper says he continues to wrestle with the death penalty, and whether to commute Dunlap's sentence.

Fox News Proves How Biased They Are Once Again
By: Steve - May 21, 2013 - 10:00am

Fox News continued to push for a special prosecutor following reports that the White House chief counsel knew of an IRS investigation but did not inform the president, a claim that ignores the legal and political problems raised by involving a president in an ongoing investigation.

On Fox News Happening Now, contributor Nina Easton reported that White House chief counsel Kathryn Ruemmler knew about the investigation into claims that the IRS delayed approval of nonprofit status to conservative groups.

After host Jon Scott asked why Ruemmler would know about the investigation and not inform Obama, Easton claimed a special prosecutor should be assigned to find out if the White House was being dishonest about when the president had been informed.

But Easton's call for a special prosecutor ignores the actual reason the president was not informed, to avoid the appearance of influencing an independent investigation.

The conservative Wall Street Journal even quoted two former White House officials who pointed out that the White House counsel made the right decision to allow the investigation to conclude before informing the president.

Treasury Secretary Jack Lew was notified in a March 2013 meeting with the Treasury inspector general for the IRS that an audit was "forthcoming," according to the Treasury Department. But at that meeting, the inspector general didn't provide details of his findings, the Treasury said.

Jack Quinn, who served as White House counsel under former President Bill Clinton, said Ms. Ruemmler's office acted correctly in not sharing the information directly with the president.

If she had instead got "involved and called people over to the White House for a full briefing to know all the details, you know what we'd be talking about now? We'd be talking about whether she had tried to interfere with the IG's investigation," Mr. Quinn said.

John Podesta, a former White House chief of staff under Mr. Clinton, said this: "The worst thing is if you do anything that is perceived to be interfering with an independent investigation especially if it isn't fully complete. That gets you in such trouble your head spins."

So at Fox Obama is damned if you do and damned if you dont, and of course they spin it to make Obama look bad. Even though they did the right thing, and the same thing a Republican administration would have done.

Despite Scandals Obama Approval Rating Stays The Same
By: Steve - May 20, 2013 - 10:00am

A new poll shows that the smear campaign by O'Reilly, the Republican party, and all of Fox News over the recent scandals have not hurt President Barack Obama's approval rating at all.

The poll, from CNN and ORC International, found that 53 percent of Americans approve of the job President Obama is doing, while 45 percent disapprove. This number remains virtually unchanged from polls taken before the scandals hit.

The poll was taken on May 17 and 18, and has a +or- 3% margin of error.

According to a Gallup poll taken in early May, the president's approval rating was 50 percent. SO if you compare it to the Gallup poll the Obama approval rating actually went up 3 points.

The CNN poll also found that 71 percent of Americans believe the actions of the IRS employees who targeted tea party groups were unacceptable. However, 60% said they trusted the president's statements on the issue.

Additionally, it was revealed that the Justice Department had subpoenaed phone records from the Associated Press. The White House also faced continued scrutiny on the attacks in Benghazi.

And none of it has hurt the President at all. Which must drive O'Reilly, the GOP, and Fox crazy. Because they have spend thousands of hours covering the scandals for nothing, haha.

What it also shows is that most people who watch Fox are Republicans, so they have no influence on the national polls. Basically it means the right-wing stooges at Fox are preaching to the choir, and that just because they report on it does not mean the rest of America will care, or believe what they say.

O'Reilly even has the #1 rated cable news show, that he claims is so powerful, and yet all his right-wing propaganda about Benghazi, the IRS story, and the AP story, has done nothing to hurt President Obama with the rest of America.

GOP Sources Edited Benghazi E-Mails To Suggest Cover-Up
By: Steve - May 19, 2013 - 11:00am

Here is a story the great so-called journaalist Bill O'Reilly has totally ignored, and you will never see reported by him or anyone at Fox News.

Since September, O'Reilly and the Republicans have claimed the Obama administration covered up the truth about the attack on the American consulate in Benghazi, by altering the talking points Susan Rice used on the Sunday morning talk shows. To bolster the story, Republicans misquoted or significantly embellished the emails officials used to draft Rice's remarks, the CBS Evening News reported Thursday.

CBS News Major Garrett confirmed that it was a GOP source who leaked the altered emails.

The miscast quotes affect at least two emails that include a State Department spokesperson and a White House deputy adviser -- the two parties GOP lawmakers insist were trying to engage a cover-up on behalf of the Obama administration to protect the president's chances of re-election.

A leaked email adds new language to State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland's email, including a specific reference to al-Qaeda:
The penultimate point is a paragraph talking about all the previous warnings provided by the Agency (CIA) about al-Qaeda's presence and activities of al-Qaeda.
The actual email read:
The penultimate point could be abused by members to beat the State Department for not paying attention to Agency warnings.
A leaked email written by deputy national security adviser Ben Rhodes suggests that he asked for the final draft to remove references to warnings about specific attacks, a demand made by the State Department:
We must make sure that the talking points reflect all agency equities, including those of the State Department, and we don't want to undermine the FBI investigation.
But the actual email did not mention the State Department:
We need to resolve this in a way that respects all of the relevant equities, particularly the investigation.
Since the congressional hearings last week, the White House on Wednesday released a hundred pages of emails from after the consulate attack. The full versions undermine already-thin accusations that this is a White House scandal.

Bill O'Reilly Came In Dead Last In Don Imus Guest Poll
By: Steve - May 19, 2013 - 10:00am

Don Imus from the Fox Business Channel ran a poll on his website asking who he should have as a guest, and guess what, Bill O'Reilly came in dead last, here are the choices.

1) Bo Dietl - 32.7%
2) Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong - 29.8%
3) Neil Cavuto - 29.1%
4) Bob Beckel - 7%
5) Bill O'Reilly - 1.2%

Yes you saw that right, O'Reilly only got 1.2% of the vote, which was a total of 61 votes. And notice that the liberal Bob Beckel got far more votes than O'Reilly, which is pretty bad when a liberal beats you out in a vote on a conservative news network website poll.

That means even the people who watch Don Imus on Fox hate O'Reilly so much they would rather see an interview with the liberal Bob Beckel than O'Reilly.

The Friday 5-17-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 18, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Grilling the IRS. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Today the House Ways and Means Committee questioned fired IRS commissioner Steve Miller and one of his deputies. The IRS has admitted it unfairly targeted conservative groups for years, although Miller said he didn't know much about it.

But the inspector general discovered the IRS targeting conservative groups months ago, so surely Mr. Miller and the White House knew the IRS was being investigated. Talking Points doesn't know who directed IRS agents to target conservative groups and individuals, but surely Miller knows much more than he's saying.

Only when IRS people from the inside start to blow the whistle will this scandal be defined; until that happens it's all speculation. What's not speculation is the chaos we are seeing in Washington right now, which is damaging the nation. The President is rightfully taking massive heat.
Then businessman Frank VanderSloot was on, who was audited by the IRS soon after he contributed $1 million to help Mitt Romney.

Vandersloot said this: "My life changed on April 20, 2012, when eight of us were singled out on the Obama campaign website. The website said we had 'less than reputable' records and had been 'on the wrong side of the law,' which certainly wasn't true. Blog sites and 'journalists' started repeating those messages, I started losing customers, our phone lines lit up, and all hell broke loose."

VanderSloot also said this: "In June of 2012 I got my first letter that we were going to be audited. Then I was audited by the Department of Labor and had two other audits by the IRS. But there were no penalties, no fines, and they owe me a large refund!"

Now let me say this, of course it is wrong for the IRS to target people based on what political party they are in. But both sides do it, and when Bush was in office liberals were targed for audits, they just did not get caught back then. O'Reilly and Fox act like only liberals did it, when they know conservatives did it too when Bush was in power.

Then Lou Dobbs was on to talk about Sarah Hall Ingram and the IRS having the power to oversee Obamacare.

Dobbs said this: "We should be very concerned, because she was actually the person in charge of the tax-exempt division at the IRS during much of the time when these egregious acts were committed. She's now in charge of implementing the Affordable Care Act. If the President were going to fire some people, you would have thought she would be the first person on the list. This is an absolute validation of every fear we ever had about what this administration is about."

Then O'Reilly said that polls show that about half of Americans are closely following the Benghazi and IRS scandals, so he had a Factor producer Dan Bank hit the streets to ask folks about the controversies, he discovered that many people had never even heard of Benghazi.

And O'Reilly lied, because the polls show that only 44% of Americans are closely following the Benghazi and IRS scandals, which is not half, it's less than half.

O'Reilly said this: "There's no question that we the people are becoming distracted. When you spend most of your leisure time tweeting, gaming, or on the cell phone, you don't have much time to absorb information. It's no surprise to me that half the country has no clue about how the Obama administration is running things. And many of those people don't care."

Earth to Bill O'Reilly, most Americans who work for a living do not have time to watch the news. They are working, doing things with their family, and in their little bit of off time they go out and do things. A lot of people are not spending all their time tweeting and talking on cell phones. It's called working and living, and you are clueless.

Then Geraldo was on to talk about the Los Angeles school board, who voted to stop suspending students who display "defiant behavior" in the classroom.

Geraldo said this: "Students will not be ejected from the building, but they can be put into kind of a 'rubber room.' The theory is that if you send these kids out on the street during the school day they'll go back to the gang and you'll have an exacerbated situation. So as long as the student is not a threat to himself or other students or the teacher, there has to be some kind of mid-level punishment that stops short of getting them out of the building."

O'Reilly ridiculed the school board and its defenders, saying this: "So it's better to have them polluting the building and infecting the other students than suspending them for a few days? This was done in L.A. because most of the suspended kids are minorities, so the school board is saying we surrender, we're going to let these kids do what they want."

Then the two right-wing stooges Greg Gutfeld and Bernard McGuirk were on to evaluate a ridiculous new study that claims physically powerful men tend to be more politically conservative.

Gutfeld said this: "Almost all professional athletes are conservative, because team sports rely on results, where A + B = C. If you're a liberal, A + B = Racist. Guys who lift weights are generally more conservative because they actually see results and every action hero is a conservative."

Which is just laughable, most professional athletes are conservative because they are wealthy who want tax cuts and the Republican party supports tax cuts for the wealthy.

McGuirk said this: "Exhibit A in all this is the whiny, pencil-necked wimps on MSNBC. To paraphrase the great Charles Krauthammer, real men to do not suck on the teat of big government. We've had Charlton Heston, John Wayne, and Ronald Reagan, while they have Woody Allen, Jon Stewart, and Bill Maher."

Now read this, O'Reilly, Gutfeld, and McGuirk are right-wing hacks that are lying to you. What they did not tell you is the study was widely misinterpreted, mostly by conservative-leaning outlets.

The Daily Mail's article claimed that "men who are physically strong are more likely to have right wing political views," and that "weaker men more likely to support welfare state and wealth redistribution." Neither of those claims is fully supported by the study.

Then they returned for a 2nd segment to name the stupidest people of the week. Who of course were all liberals, because O'Reilly, Gutfeld, and McGuirk are all Republicans.

Gutfeld picked White House mouthpiece Jay Carney, saying this: "He is our generation's Eddie Haskell, he'll say anything to Mrs. Cleaver. This guy used to be a reporter, now he's an apologist, and the transformation makes a sex change operation look like a wart removal."

McGuirk selected the men and women who are signing up to colonize Mars, saying this: "78,000 people have signed up, and when I read that I thought this is great, this is a good way to thin the herd. It's a one-way trip."

O'Reilly picked the art lover who paid $1.9 million for a portrait called "Bea Arthur Naked, saying this: "$1.9 million could buy 127 Trackchairs for our amputee veterans, but this idiot wants to pay that amount of money to look at this painting every day."

Gutfeld added this comment: "This means my watercolor of Lou Dobbs in a Speedo is going to get $5 million!"

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: The family that plays together. Billy said this: "Parents and grandparents, now is the time to start organizing activities that will force your children and grandchildren to participate in a family activity."




Less Than Half Of Americans Following Benghazi News
By: Steve - May 18, 2013 - 10:00am

O'Reilly said Benghazi is an important story to most Americans, and his proof, he said he got 3.3 million viewers for his show the night of the Congressional hearings, so that means the people care about the story.

But he ignored the fact that he gets about 2.9 million viewers a night, so that means only 400,000 extra people watched his show that night to see what he was reporting on the hearings. And it turns out most of those people lean to the right, not to mention the Pew poll shows that interest is split along party lines, Republicans care, Democrats do not.

Pew Poll Information -- The Benghazi hearings are drawing intense interest in Washington. In the rest of the country, not so much.

A new poll by the Pew Research Center says only 44% of Americans are paying attention to congressional hearings on administration actions surrounding the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya.

That number is "virtually unchanged from late January when Hillary Clinton testified," Pew reported. "Last October, 61% said they were following the early stages of the investigation at least fairly closely."

The Pew survey also said that Americans "are deeply split" over how the Obama administration and congressional Republicans are handling the investigations, largely along party lines:

"40% say the Obama administration has generally been dishonest when it comes to providing information about the Benghazi attack, but 37% say they have been generally honest. And when it comes to the GOP-led investigation, 36% say Republicans have gone too far in the hearings, while 34% say they have handled them appropriately.

"Not surprisingly, these reactions divide cleanly along partisan lines. Among Republicans, 70% say the Obama administration has been dishonest and 65% say the hearings have been handled appropriately. Among Democrats, 60% say the hearings have gone too far, and 62% say the administration has been honest."

O'Reilly Ignores Report About Deficit Shrinking
By: Steve - May 18, 2013 - 9:00am

(Reuters) - The U.S. budget deficit this year will be $203 billion lower than previously estimated, the Congressional Budget Office said on Tuesday, citing rising tax revenues and higher contributions from government-run mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The CBO, updating forecasts made in February, said it now forecasts a $642 billion deficit for fiscal 2013 compared with a previous estimate of $845 billion.

Since the recession ended four years ago, the federal budget deficit has topped $1 trillion every year. But now the government's annual deficit is shrinking far faster than anyone in Washington expected.

The agency forecast that the deficit, which topped 10 percent of gross domestic product in 2009, could shrink to as little as 2.1 percent of gross domestic product by 2015 - a level that most analysts say would be easily sustainable over the long run.

"Revenues have been strong as the economy has outperformed a bit," said Joel Prakken, a founder of Macroeconomic Advisers, a forecasting firm based in St. Louis.

And O'Reilly has ignored it all, because he is a partisan right-wing hack who has said many times that Obama is doing a terrible job on the economy, and that Obama is also adding to the deficit at a record pace. Even when the facts show the exact opposite, the economy is improving and the deficit is going down fast.

Jon Stewart Responds To Criticism From O'Reilly
By: Steve - May 17, 2013 - 11:00am

And as usual, he makes O'Reilly look like the dishonest right-wing hack he is. On Monday's Daily Show, Jon Stewart said he "caught a little flack" last week from his "TV husband and weekend squash partner Bill O'Reilly."

O'Reilly called out Stewart for citing a University of Maryland study that found during George W. Bush's presidency, U.S. diplomatic targets were attacked more than 50 times, resulted in 13 American deaths. While only three cases were brought before Congressional hearings.

O'Reilly said that when one "studies the study, many of the cited attacks" occurred in Iraq during the war. "That is true," Stewart said, "if by many you mean eight."

Stewart added this: "Eight out of 54 - how is that many? By that math, you Bill O'Reilly, have many viewers who are not bedridden and catheterized."

Your move, O'Reilly.

Earth to Bill O'Reilly, eight out of 54 is not many, it's a few, which is more than 2 and less than 10, idiot. And what's really funny is this, O'Reilly was trying to make Stewart look bad with his criticism, when in fact all he did was make himself look bad by trying to claim eight out of 54 is many.

Kirsten Powers Proves She Is A Pretend Fox News Democrat
By: Steve - May 17, 2013 - 10:00am

Powers said this on the May 13th edition of Fox News Special Report with Bret Baier:
POWERS: "Nobody Thought Obama Called Benghazi A Terrorist Attack."
Which is a ridiculous and dishonest statement, and something you would expect to hear from O'Reilly, Hannity, or Limbaugh, not a so-called Democrat.

Once and for all, here are the facts:

September 11, 2012 -- 9:42 p.m. -- Armed men begin their assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

September 12, 2012 -- 5:15 a.m. -- Attackers launch assault on a second U.S. facility in Benghazi. Two former U.S. Navy SEALs acting as security contractors are killed. They are identified as Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

Some time on September 12, 2012, President Obama made a statement on the attacks from the Rose Garden at the White House where he specifically called it a terror act.

Here is a direct quote from his statement taken from the actual transcript at www.whitehouse.gov, that Powers could have easily found in 2 seconds with a simple google search.

Obama statement on the Benghazi attacks from 9-12-12:
OBAMA: No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

But we also know that the lives these Americans led stand in stark contrast to those of their attackers. These four Americans stood up for freedom and human dignity. They should give every American great pride in the country that they served, and the hope that our flag represents to people around the globe who also yearn to live in freedom and with dignity.

We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory, and let us continue their work of seeking a stronger America and a better world for all of our children.

Thank you. May God bless the memory of those we lost and may God bless the United States of America.
Earth to Kirsten Powers, President Obama called the attack an act of terror, the very next day after it happened, in a national speech that was on every news network in America, you fricking moron.

You have proven to be a fool and a partisan Fox News hack, and as of today I will no longer list you as a Democrat in my guest list count. You are a biased and fake Democrat, and a total loser. You should just change your party to Republican and get it over with, you are a moron.

Hey O'Reilly: Look What One Of Your Fans Did
By: Steve - May 16, 2013 - 3:30pm

My Father passed away 2 days ago and this a-hole Gary Palank sent me a donation of 1 cent, so I wrote to tell him I hope he dies a violent death and then burns in hell, and if anyone else wants to write him with their thoughts, here is his e-mail address: [email protected]

Gary Palank
675 S President Street
#2404
Baltimore, MD 21202

Here is a copy of what the jerk wrote to me:
Subject: Notification of payment received
Date: Thursday, May 16, 2013 12:55 PM
From: "Gary Palank via PayPal"
To: "Steve Senti" [email protected]

May 16, 2013 14:55:02 CDT | Transaction ID: 5A359529G7976064U

Hello Steve Senti,

You received a payment of $0.01 USD from Gary Palank ([email protected])

Thanks for using PayPal. You can now ship any items. To see all the transaction details, log in to your PayPal account.

Description:
Unit price: $0.01 USD
Qty: 1
Amount: $0.01 USD

Subtotal: $0.01 USD

Total: 0.01 USD
------------------------------------

Not 5 minutes ago I was thinking of my Dad and I started crying again, so just think about what a low-life scum this Gary Palank is, he would do that to someone 2 days after their Father died. Maybe one day his Father will die and then he will understand what a piece of garbage he was for doing that. In fact, I am going to pray every night that his Father gets hit by a bus and dies, so he can know what I am going through.

Update On My Father Florian D. Senti
By: Steve - May 14, 2013 - 4:30am

The nursing home called me at 4:15am Tuesday morning to tell me my Father passed away, and as you can expect I am devastated. I can barely see through the tears to type this message. He was not just my Father, he was my best friend and everything I had. He was a great Father and I will miss him so much.

Please say a prayer for him and me, and if you can go to my donation page and make a donation to help me pay the bills I would really appreciate it. I am so depressed right now I plan take a few days off of updating my blog to mourn for him and deal with his passing.

Thank you,

Steve

Robert Gates Slams Conservatives Over Benghazi
By: Steve - May 14, 2013 - 10:00am

And of course O'Reilly does not have him on the Factor to discuss it, all he has on are right-wing spin doctors like Ingraham, Krauthammer, Rove, etc.

Robert Gates is calling out conservatives for the "cartoonish impression of the military" they promote when baselessly criticizing the Obama administration for not sending additional support during the September attack on diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya.

The right-wing media has often criticized the administration for what Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan termed their decision to "do nothing" in the face of the attack, with some suggesting that by failing to send additional troops or fighter jets to respond, President Obama had deliberately "sacrificed Americans as a political calculation."

But Gates, who served as Secretary of Defense during the Bush and Obama administrations, debunked these claims and explained that he would have made the same decisions, during his May 12th interview on Face the Nation.

Gates explained that he "would never have approved sending an aircraft" due to fears it would get shot down, and that he would not have approved sending Special Forces due to a lack of information about what was happening on the ground.

Here is a partial transcript:
GATES: I think the one place where I might be able to say something useful has to do with some of the talk of the military response. And I listened to the testimony of both Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey, and frankly had I been in the job at the time, I think that my decisions would have been just as theirs were.

We don't have a ready force standing by in the Middle East, despite all the turmoil that's going on with planes on strip alert, troops ready to deploy at a moment's notice. And so getting someone there in a timely way would have been very difficult if not impossible.

And frankly I've heard, well, why didn't you just fly a fighter jet over there to scare 'em with the noise or something. Given the number of surface to air missiles that have disappeared from Qaddafi's arsenals I would not have approved sending an aircraft, a single aircraft, over Benghazi under those circumstances.

And with respect to sending in Special Forces or a small group of people to try and provide help, based on everything I've read people really didn't know what was going on in Benghazi contemporaneously, and to send some small number of Special Forces or other troops in without knowing what the environment is, without knowing what the threat is, without having any intelligence in terms of what is actually going on on the ground, I think would have been very dangerous and personally I would not have approved that because we just don't -- it's sort of a cartoonish impression of military capabilities and military forces.

The one thing our forces are noted for is planning and preparation before we send people in harm's way, and there just wasn't time.
The Pentagon has said that fighters could not have been sent to Benghazi because they lacked the refueling tankers that would have been needed to get them there and that Special Operations Command Africa instructed a team of Special Forces not to leave Benghazi because they would be needed to provide security in Tripoli. That second team would not have reached Benghazi before the attacks were concluded.

Obama Slams The Right For Benghazi Circus Sideshow
By: Steve - May 14, 2013 - 9:00am

And that includes you O'Reilly, you are part of the right, and you are part of the sideshow President Obama is talking about. Here is the story. During a joint press conference with the British Prime Minister David Cameron Monday morning, President Obama went off on his political opponents and the press for the controversy over his administration's Benghazi talking points, calling the entire ordeal a "political circus and sideshow with no there there."

Asked by the Associated Press about the so-called controversy, which included last week's House Oversight Committee hearings with several State Department whistleblowers as well as revelations that the administration repeatedly revised its talking points in the wake of the attacks to omit key facts, Obama proceeded to scold his opponents, saying this:
OBAMA: The whole issue of talking point, frankly, throughout this process, has been a sideshow. We have been very clear about throughout that immediately after this event happened we were not clear who exactly had carried it out, how it had occurred, what the motivations were.

It happened at the same time as we had seen attacks on U.S. embassies in Cairo as a consequence of this film and nobody understood exactly what was taking place during the course of those first few days. And the e-mails that you allude to were provided by us to congressional committees.

They reviewed them several months ago, concluded that in fact there was nothing awful in terms of the process that we had used. And suddenly, three days ago, this gets spun up as if there is something new to the story. There is no there there.
Obama expressed astonishment that some of his political colleagues would consider the possibility that his administration actively tried to downplay the Benghazi attacks:
OBAMA: So if this was some effort on our part to try to downplay what had happened or tamp it down, that would be a pretty odd thing that three days later we end up putting out all the information that, in fact, has now served as the basis for everybody recognizing that this was a terrorist attack and that it may have included elements that were planned by extremists inside of Libya.

Who executes some sort of cover-up or effort to tamp things down for three days? The whole thing defies logic.
Obama then accused his opponents of hyping the controversy for political gain:
OBAMA: And the fact that this keeps on getting churned out, frankly, has a lot to do with political motivations. We've had folks who have challenged Hillary Clinton's integrity, Susan Rice's integrity, Mike Mullen and Tom Pickering's integrity.

It is a given that mine gets challenged by these same folks. They used it for fundraising, and, frankly, you know, if anybody out there wants to actually focus on how we make sure something like this does not happen again, I am happy to get their advice and information and counsel.
The president concluded by chiding his opponents for turning the controversy into a political circus:
OBAMA: We dishonor State Department employees when we, you know, we turn things like this into a political circus. What happened was tragic, it was carried out by extremists inside of Libya.

We are out there trying to hunt down the folks who carried this out and we're trying to make sure we fix the system so that it doesn't happen again.
And Bill O'Reilly is a big part in all of it, even though he claims to not be a Republican, he does the very same thing all the Republicans are doing. O'Reilly is also not having any guests on from the left or the people who did the report on to discuss it. All he has on are right-wing spin doctors, which is not fair and balanced, and is a violation of the rules of journalism.

O'Reilly is basically trying to help the Republican party use this sideshow to smear Hillary Clinton so she will be hurt by it when she runs for President in 2016, it's a circus and a sideshow, by O'Reilly, Fox News, and the Republican party.

Congressman Slams Fox Host For Benghazi Obsession
By: Steve - May 13, 2013 - 11:00am

Democratic Congressman Adam Smith (D-WA) tore into Fox News Chris Wallace and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI) for obsessing over the talking points U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice used when talking to the media in the days following the attack in Benghazi, Libya rather than focusing on identifying the perpetrators of the killings.

"I think the desire of the Republicans to create a scandal here has really undermined any ability to have a credible look at what actually happened," Smith said during an appearance on Fox News Sunday alongside Rogers.

While acknowledging that the administration's initial assessment of Bengazi did not reflect what officials later learned about the incident, Smith criticized Fox for suggesting that that Rice's remarks on five Sunday news shows presented a definitive picture of the events of Sep. 11, 2012.

"The administration didn't reach conclusions the way you just presented by the Sunday afterwards that the administration said here is what happened, here is our conclusion," Smith said. "But the president never said, no terrorism, no Al Qaeda. There was a dispute about how soon to lead to specific conclusions that now is being made into Watergate and Iran-Contra."

In fact, during multiple appearances on the Sunday shows Rice said that the attacks were in part a response to the anti-Islam video that had spurred protests across the region, but did not offer a definitive answer as to what exactly took place in Benghazi and predicated the administration's assessment as "based on the information that we have at the time."

The CIA and State Department did initially believe that the attack was spontaneously inspired by the protests in Cairo, Egypt.

Still, in the days after the attack, both President Obama and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described the events in Benghazi as an act of terror and pledged justice against the perpetrators.

Wallace responded to Smith pointing out that intelligence officials changed Rice's talking points at least 12 times, taking out references to prior attacks and specific terrorist groups.

"We're talking about talking points," Smith reminded the host. "There was no question this was a terrorist attack. They didn't deny it. I would much rather get into investigation of the groups that threatened the U.S., figure out how they are, and how to stop them instead of debating how one memo was put together in the immediate days after the attack."

O'Reilly Still Ignoring News About The DOW Hitting 15,000
By: Steve - May 12, 2013 - 11:00am

Remember this folks, Bill O'Reilly is the guy who screams about liberal media bias every night, while he is as biased as anyone in the media. The stock market hit 15,000 and set a new record high last Tuesday, and O'Reilly has still not said one word about it.

This is as biased as a so-called journalist can get. Because almost every media outlet in the world reported on it after the DOW broke 15,000 on Tuesday.

Here is part of just one story on it:

The Dow Jones industrial average jumped above 15,000 on Tuesday morning, extending a surge in the stock market that has carried the famous index up almost 2,000 points this year.

The gain in U.S. stocks followed a vibrant overnight rally in Japanese shares and positive economic news in Germany that sent that country's leading stock index to a new record high despite Europe's ongoing debt crisis.

The enthusiasm carried over to the U.S., where the Dow jumped above 15,000, an intra-day mark that it first hit last week.

And you also need to remember this, when the DOW broke 14,000 under Bush O'Reilly reported it that day, and the next day, and the next day, and even gave Bush credit for it. O'Reilly reported it and said it proves what a good job Bush is doing as President.

At the time O'Reilly also used the DOW as a measure of how good the economy was doing, he would say that not only does the stock market hitting a new record high of 14,000 show what a good job President Bush is doing, it shows that the economy is also doing well.

But now, O'Reilly not only totally ignored the fact that the DOW broke 15,000, he does not give President Obama any credit for it, or use it as a measure of how good the economy is doing.

This is right-wing bias folks, from O'Reilly. The man who claims to be a non-partisan Independent journalist. And the man who screams about media bias every night, as he is being as biased as anyone can be.

A real journalist would have reported on the DOW hitting a new record high of 15,000. Then if he was fair (as he claims to be) he would give Obama credit for it, just as he did when it broke 14,000 under Bush. He would also say it shows Obama is doing a good job, and that it shows the economy is doing good.

Instead, O'Reilly does the opposite, he ignores the DOW hitting 15,000, he does not say it shows Obama is doing a good job, he does not give Obama any credit for it, and he does not say it shows the economy is doing good.

This is about as biased as a person can get, and he does it while crying about media bias for Obama from the rest of the media, while he is being biased against Obama. It's hypocrisy, and dishonesty.

The Truth About The O'Reilly/Fox Benghazi Reporting
By: Steve - May 12, 2013 - 10:00am

In reporting on the May 8th House Oversight Committee hearing, O'Reilly, Fox News, and all their conservative friends are pushing new myths about the Obama administration's response to the attacks in Benghazi. And here is the truth about what really happened.

MYTH: The White House And State Department Edited References to Terrorism Out of their Talking Points For Political Purposes.

FACT: The CIA Signed Off on The Changes For Tactical, Not Political Reasons.

Gen. David Petraeus, former head of the CIA, testified in November that the intelligence community signed off on the final draft of the talking points, and that references to terrorist groups in Libya were removed in order to avoid tipping off those groups.

In fact, on September 12th, President Obama referred to the attacks as an act of terror when he spoke from the White House Rose Garden. One day later, Obama again referred to acts of terror at a campaign event.

These comments destroy the myth that edits to a document that were made on September 14, after Obama had already labeled the attack an act of terror, demonstrate that the administration was trying to downplay the role that terrorism played.

MYTH: Benghazi Whistleblower Gregory Hicks is Being Prohibited From Talking to Investigators And Members of Congress.

FACT: Hicks Was Interviewed Twice As Part Of The State Department's Independent Internal Investigation. After Gregory Hicks sat down for an initial interview with the State Department's Accountability Review Board, he asked for a follow-up interview to expand on issues that he felt needed amplification. And he was granted one.

Hicks Was Only Told he Was Not Allowed to Speak With a Member of Congress Without a State Department Attorney Present.

Following the attacks, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) traveled to Libya, seeking to interview witnesses and a survivor, including Hicks. Hicks testified that the State Department had instructed him not to speak to Chaffetz without a State attorney present -- a condition Hicks says was unusual, but which the State Department says is standard procedure.

Hicks even ended up speaking to Chaffetz without a State Department attorney present because, according to his own testimony, the lawyer lacked the proper security clearance.

MYTH: Cheryl Mills Tried to Intimidate Hicks After His Meeting With Chaffetz.

FACT: Hicks Admitted Mills Offered No Criticism Or Reprimand, Only That She Had Asked For A Report. While being questioned by Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY), Hicks elaborated on a phone call from Cheryl Mills, at the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's chief-of-staff.

Hicks made clear that he had received no direct criticism from Mills. It was the "tone of the conversation," he testified, that led him to believe Mills was unhappy with him. But a Senior Advisor at the State Department (Philippe Reines) confirmed that he witnessed the conversation and that it was supportive of Hicks.

MYTH: Hicks Is Being Punished For Speaking Out.

FACT: Hicks Testified That He Voluntarily Chose Not to Return to Libya And That The Overriding Reason Was Because of His Family.

During his testimony, Hicks said that "I felt that if I went back, I would never be comfortable working there, and in addition, my family really didn't want me to go back. We had endured a year of separation when I was in Afghanistan in 2006 and 2007. That was the overriding factor. So I voluntarily curtailed."

State Department employees, who spoke to ThinkProgress on the condition of anonymity, said that the staff was upset with Hicks performance since he was first assigned to Tripoli on July 31st. Contrary to Hicks claim that he was demoted out of retribution, the sources said that Assistant Secretary meetings with the staff prior to Oct. 2nd were about Hicks performance as a manager.

MYTH: The White House Refused to Send a Second Team to Benghazi Because of Political Motivations.

FACT: The Decision Was Made By The Head of The Military's Africa Command, Who Was Concerned About Embassy Security in Tripoli.

Diplomats on the ground the night of the attacks were concerned about threats to the Tripoli embassy complex, and a Pentagon spokesperson confirmed that the assessment of Special Operations Command Africa leadership at the time was that "it was more important for those guys to be in Tripoli" for embassy security.

Additional Reinforcements Would Not Have Been Able to Get to Benghazi Before The Second Attack Was Over.

Transcripts of an interview Hicks gave to congressional investigators show that he said that the flight these special forces were scheduled to take, but never did, was scheduled to take off after 6:00 a.m., local time -- approximately 45 minutes after the attack at the CIA annex that killed two people.

Neither O'Reilly or anyone at Fox News is telling you this important information. Because they do not care about the facts or the truth, they just want to spin out right-wing propaganda to smear Hillary Clinton and President Obama.

The Friday 5-10-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 11, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The Benghazi story heats up. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: If there is one guy you would not want to be today, it is White House spokesman Jay Carney. The press grilled him over charges that the White House altered the initial CIA reporting of the Benghazi attack to downplay the organized terrorism angle and play up the spontaneous anti-American demonstration angle.

Mr. Carney said the White House did nothing wrong, Ambassador Susan Rice did nothing wrong, and the whole controversy is being generated by Republicans for political reasons. But ABC News is reporting that there were 12 different versions of talking points on Benghazi and the final version eliminated references to Al Qaeda and affiliated terror organizations.

What Jay Carney attempted to do was convince the world that there was initial confusion about who attacked the American ambassador and killed him, and that the White House was acting responsibly in avoiding placing direct blame. But Ambassador Rice did place blame for the attack on the anti-Islamic video.

Summing up, there is no admission of wrongdoing by the Obama administration, there are charges that the Benghazi controversy is politically motivated, and there will be no release of emails that might clarify the situation.
Earth to Bill O'Reilly, the Benghazi attack happened in the middle of a Presidential re-election campaign, so they did not want to say it was a terrorist attack. Get a clue, any administration would have done the same thing, even a Republican one, so get over it.

Then Jonathan Karl was on, who broke the story that the Benghazi talking points went through a dozen iterations.

Karl said this: "Jay Carney was under fire today, and these were the toughest questions I've seen him face. But he is a loyalist who defends the administration consistently."

Karl also said this: "What we heard from the White House in November was that neither the White House nor the State Department made anything beyond stylistic changes to the talking points, but we've now clearly seen that there were dramatic changes to the talking points."

O'Reilly said this: "It was the White House and the State Department, working together, that made these edits and misled the world. We need to find out who in the White House drove this, whether it was the President or somebody else trying to protect him in a re-election campaign."

Then Geraldo was on with his take on the Benghazi affair and the administration's initial claim that an anti-Muslim video was to blame.

Geraldo said this: "They did that for tactical advantage to win the election. I don't think there is a crime at the heart of this, but it is deeply disturbing. Jay Carney seemed extremely uncomfortable because the administration spun this as something it was not."

O'Reilly predicted Hillary Clinton will be the biggest loser in the scandal, saying this: "Even though he doesn't know it, Jay Carney basically threw Hillary Clinton under the bus today. He was saying it was the State Department, and Hillary Clinton will have this around her neck for the rest of her political life."

And I predict O'Reilly will be wrong as usual, because nobody has proven she did anything wrong, and they never will. Not to mention, O'Reilly is still ignoring the fact that the Republicans voted to cut embassy security funding, as he blames it on the Democrats.

Then the biased right-wing hack Lou Dobbs was on, who laid out his objections to the new immigration bill.

Dobbs said this: "Tell me how many immigrants will be given legal status. How can you possibly pass a bill giving status when you don't know how many people you're giving it to? And how much will this cost? I want a cap on the number of illegal immigrants who are given status and a rational analysis of the cost and the impact. This should be in the national interest!"

Then Tim O'Brien from ABC News was on to talk about Jodi Arias, which I do not report on because it's a tabloid media story, not real news.

Then the two right-wing stooges Greg Gutfeld and Bernard McGuirk were on for their regular weekly segment.

They talked about a "humorous" video in which New Jersey Governor Chris Christie appears with various celebrities.

Gutfeld said this: "Everybody now thinks they can do a skit in their own workplace, and that it will actually be funny. Chris Christie is naturally funny when he's talking to people in town halls and he doesn't need to do this stuff. But having said that, I wouldn't mind having a Republican nominee with a sense of humor."

McGuirk said this: "This is like an unfunny NBC sitcom, which is actually redundant. This was weaker than Chris Christie's knees and if I want to watch unfunny fat people I'll watch The Biggest Loser or a Michael Moore documentary."

Then Gutfeld and McGuirk were back for a 2nd segment to name their biggest pinheads of the week. Notice that O'Reilly does not have any Democratic guests to name any right-wing pinheads of the week, ever, not once.

McGuirk went with former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who said Republican Senator Ted Cruz should not "be defined as a Hispanic" because he is a conservative.

Gutfeld explained why his pinhead of the week is writer Kate Lombardi, saying this: "She claims Mother's Day is sexist because it reinforces gender stereotypes. Complimenting motherhood basically ticks off feminists, and if you're a writer all you have to do is add 'this is sexist' to any topic and you have a story."

O'Reilly picked the folks who actually believed that President Obama nominated Judge Judy to the Supreme Court. Based on a man on the street comedy skit from the Jimmy Kimmel show.

O'Reilly said this: "If you don't know what you're talking about, be smart enough to know you're dumb and don't say anything!"

I pick O'Reilly as pinhead of the week, for not being able to come up with a better pinhead of the week than multiple people from a comedy show.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: A special Mother's Day gift. Billy said this: "If your mother is troubled and genuinely not a good parent, you might consider a Mother's Day gift of forgiveness."

Wow, that is the dumbest so-called tip of the day O'Reilly has ever spewed out. Stop this waste of time tip of the day garbage and report some actual news with the time, or use the time in other segments.

O'Reilly Lied About His Ratings Again
By: Steve - May 11, 2013 - 10:00am

During the Thursday night Factor show, in a segment with Bernie Goldberg, O'Reilly made the ridiculous claim that because he got 5 million viewers for his Wednesday show about the Benghazi hearings it means the people care about the story.

Now there are some problems with all that:

1) O'Reilly did not get 5 million viewers for his Wednesday show, he got 3.3 million, which is not 5 million, in fact, it's not even close to 4 million let alone 5 million. Dear Bill O'Reilly, 3.3 million viewers is not 5 million.

2) Just because 3.3 million people watch your show does not prove what you reported on is an important story to the other 307 million Americans that did not watch your lame cable news show.

3) Especially when you average 2.8 million viewers a night, which means that only 500,000 more people watched your show to see your reporting on the Benghazi hearing.

Let me give you a reality check Billy, just because you report on a story does not mean the majority of the American people think that makes it an important story. Especially when 99% of the American people do not even watch your show.

And think about this, even if you add the million viewers O'Reilly got for the 10pm re-run (which is never done in the ratings game) you still only get to 4.3 million, and it's still not 5 million. Polls also show that the majority of Americans do not care about Benghazi.

The Thursday 5-9-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 10, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Does Benghazi really matter? The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Many on the left are echoing Hillary Clinton's assertion that it doesn't really matter who screwed up in Benghazi, Libya. There is no question that the hearings yesterday were embarrassing for the Obama administration and for Hillary Clinton, but immediately the left wing spin found its way into the media.

Jon Stewart claimed there were '54 attacks on diplomatic targets that killed 13 Americans' during the Bush administration. But many of the cited attacks occurred in Iraq during the war and none of the attacks were at the level of Benghazi.

It should also be noted that Jon Stewart apparently got this information from the far-left websites MediaMatters and DailyKos.

The most riveting testimony Wednesday was delivered by Gregory Hicks, second in command in Libya under slain Ambassador Christopher Stevens. He described in vivid detail how he tried to get help for the Americans under siege in Benghazi but was not able to secure cooperation in Washington.

There is no question that the State Department screwed up and Mr. Hicks told the truth. Speaker John Boehner now says Congress will continue its investigation and Hillary Clinton needs to come back and testify. She is up to her eyeballs in this, which has political implications for the Democratic Party.

Americans need to know the truth about what happened in Benghazi, why our government misled the world, and why they did not respond with more urgency on the day of the attack.
Earth to Bill O'Reilly, this is a non-story to everyone but you and the right-wing hacks who want to use it for political reasons. Stop helping the Republicans put out propaganda and report some real news.

Then Pat Smith was on, whose son Sean was killed in the Benghazi attack. Smith said this: "I want somebody to tell me why there was no security there when it was asked for. They begged for security but instead it was taken away. My son called me the day he died to tell me that there was someone out there taking pictures of the compound and he was really concerned about it. My son cannot be saved, he's already gone, but what about those who follow?"

Ask the Republicans who voted to cut the embassy security funding, and ask O'Reilly why he will not report that.

Smith also said this: "Hillary Clinton, President Obama, and Ambassador Susan Rice all told me the reason this happened was because of the video. I asked every one of them to please tell me why no one is owning up to this. They all said they would check and get back to me, but I have heard nothing except one call from a clerk."

Then the biased right-wing hack Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about the media coverage of the Benghazi hearing. With nobody from the left to provide any balance.

Goldberg said this: "MSNBC ran zero live coverage of the hearings, and it is not a news organization of any kind. It is a public relations firm and some of its clients don't want this story to go anywhere. Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and Congressional Democrats don't want the story to go anywhere, so MSNBC and other organizations oblige and that's shameful."

Just as Fox News is an arm of the Republican party, MSNBC is an arm of the Democratic party, so they cancel each other out, jerk. But you two never cry about the bias at Fox because you are biased and you work for them.

Goldberg also said this: "On his radio show Mike Huckabee said that Barack Obama will not survive Benghazi, but this is wishful thinking masquerading as political analysis. Barack Obama is going nowhere because, by and large, the American people don't care about Benghazi."

Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about the Jody Arias interview, which I do not report on because it's tabloid news, not real news.

Then Bonnie Forrest and Wendy Walsh were on, who analyzed the effects of captivity on hostages such as the three young women who were just discovered in Cleveland.

Walsh said this: "There's a survival mechanism, and the brain is always trying to figure out how I can survive. Sometimes cooperating with the captor is a way to reduce pain in the short term and survive in the long term."

Forrest said this: "You're walking along on a sunny day, you're 15 years old, you don't have a strong sense of self-identity yet. If someone grabs you, you start to look for things in your captor, the smallest clue about what he wants. You start to totally identify with him and do things that will make him happy or keep you safe."

Then the right-wing stooge Laura Ingraham was on with her thoughts on the immigration reform bill now making its way through the Senate. As if anyone cares but O'Reilly and his right-wing viewers.

Ingraham said this: "A lot of us have been saying that the government doesn't have a lot of credibility in enforcing the border, and that we need to reduce the flow of illegal immigrants. But this new legislation has at least seven major provisions that give Janet Napolitano complete and unreviewable discretion to waive key factors for admissibility for aliens. One provision would allow her to admit a variety of relatives of people who can come in legally."

Then the biased right-wing stooge Charles Krauthammer was on with his thoughts on the Benghazi hearings and where the story goes from here. With no Democratic guest for balance, just the two right-wing spin doctors O'Reilly and Krauthammer.

Krauthammer said this: "This story is not going to explode, but it's drip, drip, drip. The administration tried to suppress the truth about what happened in Benghazi. The President was saying his only objective was to collect the facts and share them with the American people, but every piece of evidence we heard yesterday contradicted that. This is not a jailing offense, it's not a burglary, but it's an administration trying to cover up human error in the middle of an election campaign."

O'Reilly criticized the State Department for attempting to sidestep the truth, saying this: "I'm trying to be fair on this story, but the thing that really annoyed me was when Gregory Hicks said he was demoted for telling the truth. Hillary Clinton had to sign off on that."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Modern marvels for wounded warriors. Billy said this: "Pay a visit to IndependenceFund.org to find out how high-tech gear can help disabled veterans gain far more mobility and freedom."

And once again that is not a tip Billy, it's a promotion for IndependenceFund.org.

O'Reilly & Fox Ignored the 9 Embassy Attacks Under Bush
By: Steve - May 10, 2013 - 10:00am

Did you know there were 9 foreign embassy attacks during George W. Bush's two four year terms?

And Democrats did not hold any hearings to gain political points. So if one embassy attack in four years is a sign of "weakness" on Obama's part, one would think the eleven embassy terror attacks on American embassies while Bush was president should make O'Reilly and his Republican hypocrite friends sick to their stomachs.

Five of them occurred during his first term alone, and you would think the Democrats would have tried to prevent his reelection, but they did not do it.

Here are the 9 terrorist attacks on US Embassies and other outposts for American diplomats and others working in service to their country:

-- On June 14, 2002, the terrorist group Al Qanoon, which was suspected to be an al Qaeda branch, sent a suicide bomber into the U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 12 people and injuring 51 others. Nearly a year later, four of them were convicted of plotting the bombing, which blew in windows and left body parts all over the sidewalks near the embassy.

-- On February 28, 2003, Gunmen on motorcycles attacked the U.S. consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing two police officers and wounding five other officers and a civilian in front of the consulate.

-- Late in the evening of May 12, 2003, gunmen entered Al Hamra Oasis Village in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, a compound known to be inhabited by Americans and other Westerners.

-- On July 30, 2004, three suicide bombers targeting the Israeli and U.S. embassies in Taskkent, Uzbekistan managed to kill two and injure nine others.

-- On December 6, 2004, terrorists stormed the heavily guarded U.S. consulate in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, occupying it and taking 18 hostages for a time. When the incident was over, they had killed nine people, including four security guards and five staff.

All of that was before the end of Bush's first term, yet there are no accounts of any Democrats using the incidents to attack the president, or to suggest the United States was weak, or to insult the dead in any way.

And btw, even after all those attacks the Republicans still voted to cut funding for embassy security, which O'Reilly and Fox News never report or talk sbout.

Here are the 4 attacks that happened in the Bush 2nd term:

-- On March 2, 2006, just two days before President Bush was scheduled to visit Pakistan, a suicide bomber targeted the U.S. consulate in Karachi, killing four, including a US diplomat believed to be the target, and as many as 50 others.

-- On September 12, 2006, four armed gunmen stormed the U.S. embassy in Damascus, Syria. In the 20 minute attack, they threw grenades and fired automatic weapons at guards. In the end, one person was killed and 13 wounded.

-- On January 12, 2007, a rocket-propelled grenade was fired at the US Embassy in Athens Greece. Thankfully, it was early morning, and the building was empty and no one was injured.

-- On July 9, 2008, men armed with a shotgun and pistols stormed the U.S. consulate in Istanbul, Turkey. At the end of the five-minute battle, three Turkish policemen were killed.

Those are the 9 confirmed attacks, and at no time did anyone on the Democratic side treat any of them as anything other than tragedies that took the lives of Americans or people from foreign countries who were protecting Americans. Such attacks are not political footballs to be used to give yourself an advantage.

What's happened in the wake of the Benghazi incident is nothing short of disgusting, O'Reilly, Fox News, and the Republicans should be ashamed of themselves. Diplomats and diplomatic security are there to serve their country and to protect us, not to give Republicans a better chance of winning elections.

The Wednesday 5-8-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 9, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: What did we learn from today's hearing on Benghazi? The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: There is no question that the USA did not protect Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans who were murdered by terrorists in Benghazi last September. So today the House Oversight Committee tried to find out exactly who screwed up and why, although a few committee members used their time to protect the Obama administration.

There are three major areas of concern for those who want to know the truth: Why did the White House not deploy a rapid security team when all hell broke loose in Benghazi? Why did Ambassador Susan Rice mislead the world when she said a provocative anti-Muslim video could have ignited a spontaneous attack on the Americans?

Was President Obama and/or Hillary Clinton at fault in the Benghazi debacle? The witnesses today were compelling, but they are not at the level where they could level direct charges against the President or even Secretary Clinton. Mr. Obama was barely mentioned and his role remains largely undefined.

We the people are left with these facts: The U.S. government did not protect its people in Libya the way it should have, it was not forthcoming about who launched the attack, and it has not brought the killers to justice. The Benghazi incident speaks to a failure of leadership in the State Department and the White House. There is no way Ambassador Susan Rice should have been allowed to mislead the world.

The truth is that Republicans want to know the whole story because it embarrasses the Democrats, while the Democrats don't want to know the whole story because it helps the Republicans. But the folks should know what happened, especially the families of the murdered Americans.
Now think about this, every word O'Reilly said was right out of the Republican talking points book, and every video clip O'Reilly used was a Republican asking questions, then he had a Republican Congressman on to discuss it. Not one clip was of a Democratic Congressman, and not one Democratic guest was on to discuss it.

That is what you call bias folks, one sided right-wing bias, and a clear violation of the Journalism rules of ethics. O'Reilly is a partisan joke and a fraud of a journalist. In fact, only one so-called Democrat was on the entire show, and she is a Fox News Democrat, not a real Democrat, who even agreed with O'Reilly, which no real Democrat would ever do.

So here is the real truth, we learned nothing new from the Wednesday hearings, it was a partisan witch hunt to smear Hillary Clinton. The Republicans do not care about the truth, they just want to hurt Hillary politically so they can use it against her when she runs for President in 2016, and that is a fact. But O'Reilly will not tell you that, because he is a Republican who is helping them to smear her.

Then the Republican Congressman Jim Jordan was on, who said this: "It was established today without any doubt, that Ambassador Rice misled the American people and she went out and told a different story than the facts showed. Even the Democrats agree that we need more hearings so we can get to the truth and find out who told her to go lie to the American people. The other fact made clear is that this goes to the very top of the State Department."

And that's a lie, what Jordan said about Ambassador Rice was his opinion, not a fact.

Even O'Reilly said he was reluctant to describe Susan Rice as a liar, saying this: "I don't think Ambassador Rice knew what she was talking about, she was a pawn in this. But there was somebody who pushed her out there and that's what you guys have to find out."

Earth to idiots, she reported what information she had at the time, and yes she did put a spin on it. But if a Republican was running for re-election he would have done the very same thing and you know it. It's called political spin during a re-election campaign.

Then O'Reilly had a segment about the jury finding 30-year-old Jodi Arias guilty of first-degree murder, which I do not report on because it's a tabloid news story and not real news.

Then Bill Hemmer was on with the latest news from the case in Cleveland, where three girls were held hostage for a decade.

Hemmer said this: "The FBI and police say they want to move slowly with their interviews, 52-year-old Ariel Castro has been charged with four counts of kidnapping and three counts of rape, but there have been no charges yet against his two brothers. I have been told that Ariel Castro is wearing a large smirk in jail!"

Then Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on to talk about the danger of kidnapping.

Wiehl said this: "411 people were kidnapped by strangers in 2012, so it's a fairly low number compared to the 650,000 people who go missing every year. Most of those missing are runaway kids."

Guilfoyle said this: "When you get reports of a missing child or teenager, the initial assumption can be that there is a problem in the family. They assume it's a runaway, but then after a certain period of time they can designate the case as a 'missing person.' That's frustrating for family members."

O'Reilly said that kidnapping, while rare, has an inordinate impact on American families, saying this: "Do you know how much this has cut into our freedom that you can't have children go play in the neighborhood anymore? These evil people have destroyed a lot of our freedom."

Which is ridiculous, because most places are not too bad and you can let your kids play outside. O'Reilly is an idiot, and if you live in a bad neighborhood, keep an eye on your kids, it's called being a parent.

Then the Republican Kate Obenshain and the part-time Fox News Democrat Kirsten Powers was on to discuss the Benghazi hearing.

Powers said this: "I think the behavior of the Democrats today was astonishing. They had no interest in what the witnesses were saying, which was riveting. Gregory Hicks was not there as a Republican, he was the number two person in Libya!"

Obenshain said this: "The first thing that happened after the attack was that the President and the Secretary of State engaged in an extended political cover-up. Everyone knew that this was not a spontaneous protest, it was a terrorist attack. This is stunning stuff and the dam is about to break."

Which is just funny, because Republicans have been saying that for 6 months, but nothing happens and no new News ever comes out. Obenshain is a dark haired Ann Coulter, and nothing but a dishonest right-wing spin doctor.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Punishing evildoers. Billy said this: "People who commit heinous acts of evil, especially against children, need to be removed from society for a long, long time."

Earth to Bill O'Reilly, that is not a tip, it's a statement and an opinion.

The Benghazi Hearings Are Nothing But A Partisan Witch Hunt
By: Steve - May 9, 2013 - 10:00am

Republicans, O'Reilly, and all of Fox News are promoting Wednesday's partisan House Oversight Committee hearing as a potential final nail in the coffin of the Obama administration's continuing cover-up of what really happened the night a diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya was attacked last September.

Even though the hearing is nothing but a rehash of previously debunked finger-pointing and yet another round of political posturing surrounding the tragic death of four Americans.

The GOP's star witness at the hearing is the former Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Libya, Gregory Hicks, who the right-wing has labeled the main Benghazi whistle-blower.

Hicks is also expected to explain to the panel that a team of special operations forces was told not to fly from Tripoli to Benghazi prior to the second wave of the attack.

Republicans are latching onto Hicks testimony about the lack of military response during the attack as evidence of the administration's negligence in protecting diplomats overseas and a resulting cover-up to avoid scrutiny.

Even though the military has repeatedly said, that there were simply no air assets close enough to Benghazi that would have arrived in time to make a difference. Hicks himself even admitted during his pre-hearing testimony that the nearest fighter jets were at Aviano Air Base in southern Italy, hours away from Libya with no tanker assets in the area available for refueling purposes.

And while Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) scolded the Pentagon for not having assets available at the Souda Bay naval base in Greece, the fact remains that even the hour and a half from the island to Benghazi would have been too late to save Ambassador J. Christopher Stephens and communications specialist Sean Smith.

Both died during the first wave of the attack, less than an hour after the Pentagon was first notified.

Despite what O'Reilly and Fox News have said, U.S. forces based in Europe as part of U.S. Africa Command would not have arrived until after the second wave of attacks, which took place at the CIA annex in Benghazi hours after the first wave of attacks had finished.

But that has not stopped O'Reilly and his conservative friends from railing against the lack of cavalry riding into Benghazi at the last minute, which in turn ignores the valiant efforts from the CIA's response team that saved some lives the night of the attack.

Much of what's to be discussed was already covered in the State Department's Accountability Review Board report, which was overseen by former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Adm. Michael Mullen and former Ambassador Thomas Pickering.

Even after all that, it has not stopped Republicans from trying to tear down the Board's findings. Instead, the House GOP released its own report with a focus on former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, claiming that their findings contradicted her testimony that she was unaware of requests for additional security in Libya.

Attacking Clinton seems to be the reason for the hearings, despite lacking the authority to order Defense Department assets into the field.

"They're no longer going after the White House, because the president's not running for reelection, they're going after the former secretary of state, because she will be running for president in 2016," Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), explained. Much like the rest of the hearing, going after Clinton in relation to Benghazi is in itself nothing new.

Notice that O'Reilly has not had one guest on from the State Department's Accountability Review Board, who did the actual investigation and the report on the Benghazi attacks. O'Reilly only had partisan right-wing hacks from Congress and Fox News on to discuss it.

Because he does not want the truth, he wants to use the attacks for partisan political reasons to try and make Hillary Clinton look bad, because she will most likely run for President in 2016.

Notice that the Republicans at the hearing barely mentioned President Obama, or talked about what to do to prevent anything like that from happening again. All they did was try and get people to admit Hillary Clinton was personally to blame for the lack of security to handle the attacks, and that she was to blame for not getting someone there to help them in time.

Which is ridiculous, and they know it. But O'Reilly, the GOP in Congress, and all of Fox News are doing it anyway. They simply want to help the Republicans smear Hillary with the attack, so they can use it against her in the 2016 elections. And they all ignore the fact that the Republicans voted to cut the funding for embassy security, that was already funded too low, but O'Reilly and Fox never mention that news.

And btw folks, here is some news O'Reilly and Fox have never mentioned one time. From 2001 until 2009 there were 11 attacks on a U.S. embassy where 60 people were killed, and O'Reilly or one Republican ever said one word about any of it, no hearings, no outrage, no anything, nothing.

Fox Gives Double Airtime To GOP During Benghazi Hearing
By: Steve - May 9, 2013 - 9:00am

Fox News Megyn Kelly actually said she was worried that the network's live coverage of the House Oversight Committee hearings on Benghazi was providing "lopsided" airtime to questions from Democrats -- even though Fox had actually devoted over twice as much airtime to Republican questions.

Three State Department officials testified Wednesday before the House Oversight Committee about the September 11, 2012 attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya. Fox provided live coverage of the hearing, beginning when the three witnesses testifying, Gregory Hicks, Mark Thompson, and Eric Nordstrom, were sworn in.

For over an hour, Fox stayed live on the hearings without a single interruption. During this time, the network showed 32 minutes of Republican committee chairman Rep. Darrell Issa's (CA) questions and witness responses. But when Issa yielded the floor to the ranking Democratic committee member, Rep. Elijah Cummings (MD), for his turn to question witnesses, Fox cut to commercial, breaking live footage for the first time.

Rather than immediately returning live to Cummings questions after the commercial break, Happening Now host Jon Scott instead spoke to Fox contributor John Bolton about the hearing. In total, Fox aired only two minutes of Cummings questions and witness responses before returning to commercial break.

Fox favored Republican questioning right from the start of the hearing, yet Megyn Kelly implied that the network's coverage had been lopsided in favor of Democrats.

About two hours into Fox's hearing coverage, during questioning from Republican Rep. John Mica (FL), Megyn Kelly broke in and expressed concern that, "We're getting a little lopsided in terms of the Democrats versus the Republicans, so we're going to try to rectify that for you after the break, and play more of Mr. Mica right after this quick commercial break."

Fox continued airing what was left of Mica's questions upon returning from break. But then as Democratic Rep. Stephen Lynch (MA) took the floor, Fox halted live coverage so that Kelly could speak to another Fox correspondent. As she skipped the Democrat's question period, Kelly stated, "And so we're going to try to even it out. We're going to try to get on the same number of Democrats and Republicans as we watch this coverage."

At the time of Kelly's biased and ridiculous claim, eleven politicians -- six Republicans and five Democrats -- had asked questions of the Benghazi witnesses. And despite Kelly's dishonesty, during that time Fox devoted 46 minutes of live coverage to Republicans questions and answers, and only 19 minutes of Democrats questions and answers.

O'Reilly even added to it, because he used nothing but clips from Republicans asking questions at the hearing during the Factor Wednesday night, not one clip of a Democratic Congressman or woman was used. And not only that, O'Reilly only had a Republican Congressman on to discuss it, not one Democrat was on for balance.

And if that is not biased one sided right-wing unfairness, I'm Elvis.

The Monday 5-7-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 8, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: What the bizarre kidnapping case in Ohio says about America. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Yesterday police in Cleveland received a 9-1-1 call that led them to a small home, where they discovered 27-year-old Amanda Berry, as well as two other women who were kidnapped about ten years ago. The man mentioned in the 9-1-1 call, Ariel Castro, owned the home; his two brothers are also involved in the abduction, according to police.

The story is amazing because the girls were held captive in the middle of a dense neighborhood. These kinds of kidnappings are rare, but the impact of children and young people disappearing is enormous on the public psyche. Chances are that when you were a child your parents let you go out to play unsupervised, but today American children are constantly under supervision.

Parents are simply frightened, they believe children are at risk in public. The big mystery in Ohio is this: How could three women be held against their will in a suburb for all that time? The heinous crime will reinforce the perception that, although America is a free country, we are also a dangerous nation. There are some very bad people walking the streets and this is another cautionary tale.
Then Bill Hemmer was on to discuss it. Hemmer said this: "These girls were all abducted, no more than four miles from the home where they were found. In the first abduction the police told the family she was a runaway, but the mother never believed it, she never thought her daughter would run away. The police at first also thought Amanda Berry was a runaway, but that was quickly dismissed because someone called her mom using her cell phone."

Hemmer also said this: "Multiple police sources are saying the three women were pregnant multiple times, and the first abducted woman says she was struck over the head and she may have damage to her face."

Then O'Reilly had Monica Lindstrom on to talk about the Jodi Arias trial, O'Reilly even said the nation is waiting for a verdict in the trial. Which is ridiculous, because it's a garbage tabloid media trial, and I do not know one person who is waiting to hear the verdict, cares about her, or talks about the trial.

Then Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes were on to talk about the biased Republican Benghazi hearings.

Crowley said this: "Based on what we know so far. I believe Hillary Clinton is a central figure in this scandal. She or her department turned down repeated requests for added security leading up to the attack, and on the night of the attack one of these whistle-blowers says she actively eliminated the State Department's counter-terrorism unit from the chain of information. Also, the State Department and White House altered the facts to eliminate all references to Al Qaeda and Islamic terror."

Notice that Crowley ignored the fact that Hillary said she did not see any request for added security, or the fact that the Republicans voted down more money to pay for added embassy security.

Colmes said this: "Thomas Pickering, the ambassador who co-chaired the accountability review board, told me there was absolutely nothing untoward here. This seems like a partisan witch hunt and it seems like there were underlings involved, but not Clinton and Obama themselves."

Then O'Reilly talked about guns, he said he thinks that all crimes committed with a firearm should be handled by federal authorities, with tough minimum sentences for any conviction.

John Stossel was on to discuss it, and he disagreed, saying this: "It's not going to make any difference, and you can't make policy based on crazy people. There are too many federal laws already, we can't even count them, and you are arrogant to think that you can design a better system from here! Judicial discretion is better than mandatory minimums."

O'Reilly then insisted the feds are better equipped to prosecute gun crimes, saying this: "The founders clearly wanted Americans to have the right to defend themselves, but we have to stop people from getting arsenals and shooting innocent people. If you federalize gun crimes it's easier to control."

Then Dennis Miller was on, which I do not report on because he is not a journalist, he is simply a has-been right-wing biased comedian who is only on to make jokes about liberals, because O'Reilly likes it. And there is no liberal comedian on for balance, to make jokes about conservatives.

Then Jesse Watters was on, he paid a visit to Columbia University and confronted former terrorist Kathy Boudin, who has been hired to teach at the school.

Boudin said this: "I have nothing but regret for the suffering that I caused, and I've attempted to lead a life that would express that remorse and regret."

Earth to O'Reilly and Watters, she admitted she made a stupid mistake when she was young, does that mean she should never be allowed to work or have a job. So did the crime and paid the time, and now she is sorry, so leave her alone idiots. This is a non-story and no-body cares about it, report some real news jerks.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Happy Birthday, Mrs. O. Billy said this: "The secret to living a long and happy life, as exemplified by Bill's mother Winifred Angela O'Reilly, is to be unselfish and help others, even if it inconveniences you."

Republican Warns Of Revolution Over Obama Immigration Bill
By: Steve - May 8, 2013 - 10:00am

WARREN, NH -- At Sen. Kelly Ayotte's (R-NH) Warren Town Hall Tuesday, a Republican state legislator questioned the senator about whether she shared his concern that America was headed for an armed revolution due to President Obama's immigration reform proposals and his pro-immigrant appointees.

In a followup interview outside the forum, the lawmaker, New Hampshire State Rep. Edmond Gionet (R), explained that he believes something is bound to happen and "people are revolting because they're looking to have a government in place that's more user-friendly to people like them."

As New Hampshire residents pressed Ayotte to respond to questions about her vote against enhanced background checks for gun purchasers, her hand-picked moderator instead called on Gionet, who Ayotte had earlier recognized as one of the honored guests present.

Gionet praised Ayotte's vote against background checks and then asked her about whether she shared his fear that fellow conservatives might need to overthrow the government.

Ayotte then rushed from the event without answering media questions, but Gionet stuck around and elaborated on his concerns.

He said this:
GIONET: This morning, I was down at the Lions Club, at McDonald's and this photo of President Obama with Sec. of Transportation-Designate Anthony Foxx was given to me.

And they're saying all the key positions, That's the latest one. But even key positions within the White House are going to people that are going to promote his agenda. And this agenda doesn't appear to be helping us to the extent that it should be.

It might be that we've got the wrong slant on things, but here again we're in our own world up here. We understand what we like, the lifestyles that we've had, the way the country should be run. And it's just not happening.
And O'Reilly does not say a word about any of it, because it was said by a Republican and he does not want you to know about all this crazy stuff Republicans are saying, because he is one and he is covering for them.

Just like O'Reilly ignored Ted Nugent saying people in the military are committing suicide because President Obama is violating the Constitution. Which may be the dumbest thing Nugent has ever said. Now if a Liberal said that O'Reilly would be all over it like stink on your know what.

The Monday 5-6-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 7, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Could be a bad week for President Obama and Hillary Clinton. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Three key witnesses are expected to testify Wednesday about the murder of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya on September 11th. The Obama administration at first told the world that the attack was a spontaneous anti-American action; instead, it was a well-planned terrorist attack, likely by Al Qaeda agents.

So the testimony could be devastating to President Obama and to Hillary Clinton, who ran the State Department at the time. The key question is whether there was a coverup. Part of President Obama's platform last fall was the assertion that terror agencies were badly damaged, but if organized terrorists did indeed kill Ambassador Stevens, that claim would have been dubious.

Anti-Obama forces are looking forward to the hearings because they want to put State Department officials on the record. But what about the American people? The Obama administration, and that includes Hillary Clinton, made a calculation that the American people don't care about the Benghazi story. We will see how things play out this week.
Then Col. Ralph Peters and Col. David Hunt were on to discuss it. Notice that not one liberal was on to give an opposing view, as O'Reilly said anti-Obama forces, which is what O'Reilly, Peters, and Hunt are. This was not a fair and balanced debate, it was a one sided joke of a smear job.

The biased Obama hating Col. Peters said this: "There is absolutely a cover-up. I believe President Obama lied to the American people, Hillary Clinton lied to Congress, Susan Rice lied to the UN, Jay Carney lied to the media, and the mainstream establishment media have protected this administration right down the line. It sounds like we're going to get 'smoking gun' testimony and the question is how much a President can get away with if the media is sympathetic."

Col. Hunt talked about the Middle East, where Israel attacked Syrian weapons installations over the weekend, saying this: "We've been tracing missiles transferred from Syria and where they've been going, which is partly to Hezbollah. Israel had the right to defend itself and they made two very accurate strikes. Any time Israel attacks there are consequences to us, but this was a necessary attack."

Then the biased hack Karl Rove was on to talk about the Benghazi hearings and the potential political fallout. With nobody on to give the opposing view, which is another violation of the journalism rules of ethics.

Rove said this: "People are still trying to figure this story out and it has not yet begun to bite, but it might this week given the testimony we are about to hear. There's an excellent piece in the Weekly Standard that draws this right into the White House. On the night of the attack people told the President the Benghazi facility was under attack and he basically said, 'okay, I'll talk to you tomorrow.'"

O'Reilly argued that the Benghazi story will only resonate if it indicts high-level officials, saying this: "This has to involve Hillary Clinton or President Obama. If it involves unnamed people at the State Department, then it just goes away. The American people deserve to know the truth here."

Then the right-wing hack Brit Hume was on, who looked ahead to Wednesday's hearings and the possible impact on Hillary Clinton's wish to be president.

Hume said this: "She was in Washington and on duty when the attack happened, but she wasn't closely questioned about that when she went before a committee on Capitol Hill. If the advance information about Wednesday's testimony pans out, it will be beyond doubt that there was a cover-up here. There's no way that people like former Secretary Clinton are going to be able to escape responsibility for this."

O'Reilly demanded far greater transparency, saying this: "It is stunning that we don't have a timeline of what she knew, when she knew it, and who told her what. Historically Mrs. Clinton has gotten away with a lot, nothing seems to stick to her."

Then Mary K. Ham and Juan Williams were on to talk about President Obama's OSU commencement address, which O'Reilly thinks crossed the line.

During his commencement address at Ohio State University, President Obama asked the new graduates to reject anyone warning about government tyranny.

Williams said this: "I don't think he frightened anyone, all he did was tell these young people that we want you to do more than just being an occasional voter and a taxpayer. We want you to get out there and start a business, run for office, get involved."

Ham said this: "One of his worst habits is to dismiss and demonize his opponents. Something like cynicism toward the government can actually just be healthy skepticism born of actual experience with the federal government. During his time in office young people have grown in skepticism toward the federal government and toward the President."

Then O'Reilly had another right-wing hack Bernie Goldberg on to cry about Dan Rather. He accused President Obama's political opponents of excessive viciousness.

Goldberg said this: "I don't remember Dan Rather worrying about Richard Nixon or George W. Bush when liberals wanted to 'cut his heart out.' We live in a polarized culture and Democrats and Republicans have very different visions, so Dan Rather is half-right - he's right that some Republicans won't cooperate with Barack Obama, but he left out the fact that Barack Obama is not going to cooperate with those Republicans."

Then another right-wing stooge Adam Carolla was on to talk about a high school in Arizona that declared May 1st "Redneck Day," some students and parents did not like it.

Carolla said this: "'Redneck Day' is white-on-white crime, it's whitey making fun of whitey and it's 15-year-olds pretending to be Roy Clark from Hee Haw. What happened to our sense of humor, why is everyone's nose out of joint?"

Carolla also talked about the box office success of the movie "Iron Man 3."

Carolla said this: "I don't know what's going on. When did it become okay for 45-year-old males to speak openly about their love for comic books? Remember when 45-year-old guys would smoke cigars and drink brandy and talk about their mistresses? Or storm the beaches at Normandy? I don't know what's going on with this generation."

Yeah, you do not know what is going on because you are a clueless old right-wing fool, plain and simple, and that is why O'Reilly has your dumb ass on his show.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Book and a bonus. Billy said this: "Bill's new book "Keep It Pithy" includes observations and writings from The Factor's 17 years on the air. When you buy a copy on BillOReilly.com you'll get a free Fisher House tote bag and one dollar will be donated to that very worthy charity."

Dow Hits 15,000 & O'Reilly Failed To Report It
By: Steve - May 7, 2013 - 10:00am

During the Bush years O'Reilly measured the economy based on what the stock market was doing, and every time a liberal was on his show to say Bush is a terrible President O'Reilly would say this: "If Bush is a bad President how come the stock market is so high?"

O'Reilly would report every gain under Bush, and not only that, he would always give Bush credit for it. But now that Obama is the President, O'Reilly ignores all the stock market gains, and only reports on days with big losses. And not once has he given Obama any credit for the gains.

On Friday the DOW broke 15,000, and O'Reilly said nothing. Then new high was based on the newly released unemployment rate of 7.5%. With 165,000 new jobs created in April and revisions made to prior months' figures by the Department of Labor, the jobs market is looking better than it has in a long while.

Beating the expectations of analysts and economists, the influx of new jobs shows that federal budget cuts and overall economic malaise haven't negatively impacted job-creation, as many had expected.

The newest jobs data reinforces the growing sense that the recovery is at least continuing in the right direction.

Now think about this, O'Reilly claims the economy is a disaster, and President Obama is doing a terrible job, as the facts show the opposite.

The DOW hit 15,000, the unemployment rate dropped, and the jobs are coming back. And O'Reilly reports the opposite, proving he is a dishonest right-wing hack who is lying to you.

It's right-wing propaganda, from O'Reilly. The so-called real journalist that he says will tell you the truth. In fact, he claims to be the only honest journalist on TV that you should watch for the truth. But he is a liar, and he is not being honest with you, just look at the economic facts, and then look at what O'Reilly is reporting, his reporting it a lie.

Russell Simmons Calls Out O'Reilly Over Drugs & Crime
By: Steve - May 6, 2013 - 11:00am

Here is a copy of an article Russell Simmons published on May 3rd:

Dear Bill O'Reilly, You Want To Pick On Someone? Call Me.

Dear Bill, It's me! Your friend. Your old punching bag. Russell. Gotta tell you, your comments a few weeks back about a public letter to the President I organized, encouraging him to end the "War on Drugs" were way off base. They were so off base that your guest that night who you thought was just going to agree with your "talking points," flipped on you and told you that you were wrong as well.

And when I saw you this past weekend in Washington, you continued to spew your fear-laden rhetoric, while Geraldo couldn't figure out whose side to take. Geraldo, you've been hanging out with your friends at Fox for too long...you got to get back to reality. Out of our people, you should know this reality, having come from a community that was completely destroyed by the "War on Drugs."

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but Bill, you got to get your facts straight. It is not acceptable to use skewed and selective information to scare your audience to think that everyone in prison are "terrible people." I know a lot of people who have gone to jail, and you know a lot of people who probably should have gone to jail, but because of the color of their skin or the zip code they lived in, were spared that punishment. And most of these people are diseased addicts who took some drugs, sold some drugs and went to buy some more drugs to stay high.

Bill, the days of being the "tough on crime" bully are over, so no need to play that character anymore. The failed war has bankrupted many of our states and cost the taxpayers over one trillion dollars with very few results to show for it. Republican and Democratic governors across this nation are realizing that the current system does not work, and that is why many are making drastic changes to their drug policies.

Furthermore, it has become evident that the disproportionate affect it has had on communities of color is equivalent to the Jim Crow era, a further cause of destruction of urban areas in these states. And the sad part is that blacks and whites use and sell drugs at the same rate, yet black people go to prison at a rate of 7 times more than their white counterpart for the same offense. But, if you have no compassion for the racial injustices of an unfair criminal justice system, then I am sure we can agree that as businessmen, the way we are doing business makes no sense.

Even after spending more than $50 billion a year on the Drug War, drugs are more available and drug cartels are more wealthy than ever before. You and I, and the rest of America, are paying for a program that has little to no return on our investment.

Our federal prison system needs a complete re-design, however over 90 percent of the nation's inmates are housed in state or county facilities. Although our diverse coalition of civil rights leaders, religious leaders, actors, athletes, entertainers, activists, educators and elected officials is requesting for the President to make changes in federal policy, we know that his leadership will reverberate down through the states and pave the way for changes to be made there too.

He knows that we cannot arrest our way out of this problem. Currently, 80 percent of all drug arrests in this country are for possession and there is no clear indication that this has had any affect on rates of drug use.

Yes, violent crime and drug use might be down in your neighborhood, but it certainly is not for many impoverished neighborhoods across this country. Surely they might have cleaned up the places where white people live, but black America still lives under harsh conditions. It is no longer acceptable to be "tough on crime," we must be "smart on crime."

Most people, from neighborhoods that I grew up in, from the streets that I know, went to prison for the first time for possession - non-violent offenders. After these diseased people became educated in criminal behavior behind bars (most of whom had to in order to survive), they came back to our communities and brought prison culture with them. This destroyed the fabric of the black community and most of my friends went back to prison as violent offenders.

And now almost all of them are dead. I have watched their children take their place on the street corner, as the vicious cycle continues. We must create federal policy in each state that transforms our broken system rooted in punishment and suppression to one that encourages and invests in prevention, rehabilitation and treatment.

I would be happy to come on your show and talk to you in person. Stop attacking the people who signed the letter with me. You want to beat up on somebody? Beat up on me and Dr. Boyce Watkins, we wrote the letter. You want to fight someone over it, call me.

I love you, I love watching your entertainment on television, but stop perpetuating a war that even your own buddies, Grover Norquist, Pat Robertson and Newt Gingrich, all agree has failed. And if you don't want to listen to them or me, listen to your sweet, progressive daughter who will tell you that the answer to ending the drug problem in our country is not solved by putting more diseased people in prison.

-- Russell Simmons

44% Of Republicans Think Armed Revolution May Be Needed
By: Steve - May 5, 2013 - 11:00am

Take note of this, as a new poll shows that 44% of Republicans think an armed revoultion may be needed, O'Reilly is saying the far-left is out of control. Because of a bunch of idiots in Seattle who fought with police in a recent protest.

And as James Carville told O'Reilly, they are breaking the law and they do not represent any far-left people he knows, and they do not represent the Democratic party. But Republicans are actually saying they might have to start an armed revolution, and O'Reilly ignores the entire story, to spin out lies that the far-left is out of control.

Almost half (44 percent) of all self-described Republican voters say they believe "an armed revolution might be necessary to protect our liberties." Just as bad, more Republicans believe an armed revolution might be necessary than believe one isn't necessary.

GOP leaders say that their opposition to minimal gun regulations has nothing to do with helping arm those who want to commit acts of violence, and everything to do with wanting to make sure people can defend themselves. Based on the poll, of course, it is certainly likely that many are buying such weapons in an effort to defend themselves, both for day-to-day life and in the event of a sudden armed revolution.

But here's the scary part: How many are buying weapons to arm themselves in order to foment an armed revolution? Most likely a lot. I don't have an answer, but this poll suggests a lot of Republicans are getting ready for that armed revolution. There has even been reporting about ammo shortages, because they are buying so much ammo the factories can not keep up with the demand.

The other question is about Democracy: Can it survive in an age when almost half of the Republican party seems to support the concept of violently thwarting it.

The Friday 5-3-13 O'Reilly/Ingraham Factor Review
By: Steve - May 4, 2013 - 11:00am

The far-right loon Laura Ingraham filled in for O'Reilly and her TPM was called: Immigration Reform and the Boston Bombing. The crazy Ingraham said this:
INGRAHAM: If you've heard members of the Senate 'Gang of Eight' push immigration reform, you've heard them repeat this tired line: 'We must do something because the system is broken.' But to say the system is broken is to remove responsibility from politicians who refuse to enforce the current laws and from individuals who willfully break those laws.

In Mexico yesterday the President said we shouldn't get 'bogged down' on border issues. Does that sound like somebody who is serious about enforcement? Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani told me last week that enforcement provisions in the proposed bill will not work, especially since Homeland Security chief Janet Napolitano can waive most of the requirements.

Meanwhile, Immigration and Customs Enforcement announced today that it will track student visa holders to make sure they're actually enrolled in school. They were shamed into doing this because of the revelation that two of the Boston bomber's pals violated student visa requirements. The system is not broken, but the politicians sure are.
Then Michael Grant and Joe Dwinell, from the Boston Herald were on with the latest on the Boston bombings.

Dwinell said this: "This plan was deadly and cowardly. We gave this family more than $100,000 in benefits and then they turned around and said this country stinks!"

Grant turned to Tamerlan Tsarnaev's widow Katherine Russell, who claims she had no advance knowledge of the attack, saying this: "Do you know how small apartments are in Cambridge? There's no way she could have been stepping around six boxes of pressure cookers. Accounts are that she contacted her husband after his photo hit TV, she didn't contact the cops!"

Ingraham complained that the Tsarnaevs received far more from this country than they deserved, saying this: "There's a sense of people gaming the system. Americans are struggling out there, so why are we giving benefits to people who never bought into our values or our system?"

Earth to idiots, you can not look into a crystal ball and see who is getting welfare, and then see if they are going to turn into terrorists, it's impossible. So shut up about it and do your job, which is to report the news.

Then Ingraham report on the right-wing biased Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who recently said that he always knew that any black President would "have to be approved by the elites and the media."

Jacques DeGraff was on, who said this: "The fact of the matter, is that every African American who has stepped forward for a major office has undergone excruciating scrutiny. Look at what Barack Obama went through - they talked about his birthplace, his pastor, his religion. No one else had their college transcript requested."

And he is right, in fact, media studies of the election showed that Obama got more negative coverage than Romney did, but O'Reilly and Ingraham ignore that fact. Because they are right-wing idiots who would not report the truth if their life depended on it.

Then Democratic pollster Margie Omero was on to talk about Hillary Clinton being the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016. Even though she has not said she is running yet.

Omero said this: "We now have a climate, where Democrats have the advantage in the presidential race. I think it will be tougher for other candidates to get into the field if she decides to run, but it's a long way away and a lot of things can happen."

Omero also downplayed the significance of Hillary Clinton's actions, on the night of the Benghazi attack, saying this: "It hasn't been a problem for her yet and voters don't make up their minds based on what conversations people had or what cables people have read."

Ingraham added that Clinton will be greatly helped by her husband, saying this: "Bill Clinton hit the trail big time for Barack Obama, and don't you think he demanded that Barack Obama campaign for his wife in 2016? He did it in part because he wanted President Obama to win, but in part because he wanted his wife to win in 2016."

Then Ingraham talked about some dishonest right-wing documentary put out by a biased right-wing stooge. The documentary concludes that the southern border is porous and chaotic.

Ingraham spoke with the film's producer Dennis Michael Lynch and immigration rights advocate Enrique Morones.

Morones said this: "I'm not surprised to see a clip of this film on Fox News. It's trying to paint a picture that is actually not happening along the entire border and we know that more people are going south than north today. The border has never been more secure."

Lynch said this: "This man's narrative is the problem with the country. When you go to the border you see the truth, but no one wants the truth to come out. I'm here to defend the American people, the ones who are in the unemployment lines. We're not being protected by the President of the United States."

Ingraham worried that potential terrorists can easily cross into the United States, saying this: "It only takes a couple of people to kill a lot of Americans, so to say that the overwhelming part of the border is being enforced is ridiculous."

Even though they usually just fly or drive right into America, and do not come across the border. And in fact, 99.9% of the people crossing the border are just doing it to find work, making what Ingraham said insane and ridiculous.

And finally, in the last segment Ingraham had the right-wing radio talk show host Mike Gallagher on to discuss the tabloid garbage story about Actress Reese Witherspoon, who was recently arrested for disorderly conduct after her husband was pulled over for driving under the influence. A dashboard camera recorded Witherspoon warning the cop, "Do you know my name? ... You're about to find out who I am."

Gallagher said this: "I have always loved Reese Witherspoon, and I really appreciated her apology. When do you hear a celebrity say, 'I messed up, I was a fool, I'm embarrassed?' She said that right out of the gate and she admitted being drunk, which is really rare. That's a good message for everybody to learn, it wasn't one of these qualified apologies, and I think Americans are ready to forgive her."

Don Imus & Bob Beckel Called Bill O'Reilly A Jerk
By: Steve - May 4, 2013 - 10:00am

Despite being good friends with colleague Bill O'Reilly, Fox personalities Don Imus and Bob Beckel said they think he's a total jerk with whom it would be insufferable to spend an entire weekend.

During a segment of today's Imus in the Morning, the two had a little fun at O'Reilly's expense, mocking his bombastic persona and his forthcoming book Killing Jesus.

"I don't like O'Reilly that much. He's a jerk," Imus told Beckel. "But I can say that because we've been friends for 30 years. Sometimes he can be okay, but his show is great. That's a great television program."

"You can argue all you want about O'Reilly's personality," Beckel said of O'Reilly, "but he does know how to do a TV show."

The Five co-host then continued with this: "Could you imagine spending a weekend with that guy?"

No, Imus responded. "Lord God, no."

"It would be deadly," Beckel agreed.

The two then made fun of O'Reilly for his newest book, Killing Jesus, which claims to have new information about the killing of Jesus Christ. "Hey Bill, for 2,000 years you've had historians, archaeologists trying to figure out something new about Jesus," Beckel mocked, "and you're gonna come up with something!?"

"He's so full of himself," Imus replied.

"Full of himself, really?" Beckel joked with a sarcastic tone. "I must've missed that."

The Thursday 5-2-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 3, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: More evidence that the far left is out of control in America. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Yesterday was May Day, where communists and socialists celebrate their belief that stealing private property is a good thing, and thousands of loons took to the streets in Seattle. At least 17 people were arrested and eight Seattle police officers were injured.

But it's not just Seattle that's a problem - most everywhere in the USA the far left is running wild. There's the legalization of marijuana in Washington and Colorado, the punitive taxation some states are levying on the wealthy, and the view that America is the villain throughout the world.

Twenty years ago that craziness would have been openly rejected by most Americans, but today traditional forces are disorganized and many non-political Americans have no idea what's going on. That leaves an open field to the loons who assaulted Seattle yesterday and they are taking full advantage of it.
And Bill O'Reilly is a biased right-wing jerk. Because these nuts in Seattle have nothing to do with the Democratic party, and yet O'Reilly linked them to it anyway. Even though when someone on the left says the right are all a bunch of homophobe racists O'Reilly says you can not slam an entire group for the actions of a few, then he does that very same thing by saying the Seattle nuts are part of the left.

James Carville was on, and the first thing he did was disassociate his party from the Seattle mobs, saying this: "They're criminals, so let's call people what they are. The Catholic Church is far left when it comes to economic theory and this pope is very critical of capitalism, but you don't see them rushing the barricades. Those people in Seattle don't represent any liberals or progressives or Democrats that I know. They're anarchists who are breaking the law."

O'Reilly said he was worried that extremists are drowning out other voices on the liberal spectrum, saying this: "Moderate liberal Americans are not for this crazy stuff, but the far-left people, the MSNBC people, are starting to dominate the conversation."

So he did it again, now the people at MSNBC are the same as the anarchists, which is just ridiculous. Proving once again that Bill O'Reilly is a jerk and a biased right-wing hack who would not know the truth if he saw it. Not to mention, the people at MSNBC are not the Democratic party, they were not elected to anything, they are just people giving their opinions.

Then Mikey Weinstein was on to talk about an organization called the Military Religious Freedom Foundation, that claims many military officers are improperly proselytizing and punishing non-believers.

Weinstein said this: "There's a difference between what you feel personally, and the behavior you exhibit. We represent 33,000 members of the military, 96% of them Roman Catholics and Protestants who are victims of religious oppression. This is something we view as totally out of control. We broke the story of the 'Jesus rifles' where every rifle in the U.S. military had New Testament inscriptions on the scope. The military finally did something after we fought on behalf of our clients."

Then Ian Duncan was on to talk about the Baltimore City Detention Center where inmate Tavon White has allegedly been running a drug ring, and has reportedly impregnated four prison guards. Maryland corrections boss Gary Maynard remains on the job.

Duncan said this: "When this story broke, Gary Maynard said he would take full responsibility, but he has since turned around and said he's going to be the person to fix these problems. The warden of the prison was replaced but it's not clear whether he's still in the corrections department."

O'Reilly denounced Maynard and his boss Governor Martin O'Malley, saying this: "O'Malley has been spinning and saying this is all a good thing because the feds came in. Even though narcotics are being sold and this guy impregnated four guards while he was in prison!"

Then Laura Ingraham was on to discuss the claim that Christian zealots are out of control in the military.

Ingraham said this: "Of all the issues facing the U.S. military, which include cutbacks and PTSD and suicides, the biggest problem facing the military is Christian extremists? You can conclude that there is an anti-Christian bias on the part of Mikey Weinstein, who wants to wipe all religion out of the military. We should be asking whether the rights of Christians are being violated in the uber-politically correct world we live in, including in the military."

O'Reilly said he would do a poll of the military about it, haha, yeah that will prove it, not. The polls Fox and O'Reilly do are rigged, biased, and worthless.

Ingraham also mocked the far-left protesters in Seattle, saying this: "These people are just out of control. They look like little children, they put their ski masks on and ride around on skateboards, and then go home to mommy and daddy."

Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth, who refuses to release school records of accused Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev.

Kelly said this: "There are privacy rules that protect students, even after they graduate. They are protected from the release of certain information such as their grades, transcripts, evaluations from professors. It's relatively easy for law enforcement to get the information, but the question in this case is whether we the people should get it."

Kelly also raised some troubling questions about the three other UMass students who have been arrested, saying this: "The three students met on campus and within an hour were in Dzhokhar's dorm room taking his computer and his backpack. As soon as they saw his picture on TV, their instinct was not to call the cops, but to go into his room and start getting stuff. Are you telling me they had no idea he was up to no good prior to that?"

Then Bonny Forrest and Wendy Walsh were on to talk about Federal Judge Edward Korman, who has ruled that any female of any age should be able to buy the morning-after birth control pill without a prescription or parental consent.

Forrest said this: "I want to bring down the number of abortions and unintended pregnancies, and I actually see this as a way of doing that. Every scientist who has looked at this and seven major national organizations are all in favor of making this accessible to all women."

Walsh argued that pre-teens are simply not equipped to make the decision, saying this: "Think about the psychological effects on these young girls. A child being left to make an adult decision when they're not emotionally mature enough can lead to depression and anxiety."

O'Reilly complained that parental rights are being trampled, saying this: "Just because children act irresponsibly doesn't mean their parents have no right to know about that. You're taking away my parental authority by giving the child an avenue to take action without the parents knowing."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: More freedom for wounded warriors. Billy said this: "You can get information about the high-tech Trackchair, which enables disabled vets to go almost anywhere, at ActionTrackchair.com."

Republican Government Spending Critics Add Wasteful Spending
By: Steve - May 3, 2013 - 10:00am

And O'Reilly never said a word about it, because he is also a Republican and he does not want to make his friends look bad.

Congress is forcing the Army to spend nearly half a billion dollars building tanks that Army officials say they don't want, with money they say could be better spent elsewhere, according to a new report from the AP.

Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH) and Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) are the two members of congress at the helm of the effort to spend $436 million on upgrading the Abrams tank, "a weapon the experts explicitly say is not needed." The reason? Both represent Ohio, home to the nation's only tank manufacturing plant, which would profit from the money.

The move is contradictory for the two politicians; both are also vocal advocates for fiscal austerity, and have made careers insisting that the government cut what they see as wasteful spending.

It would seem that pushing for tank production against the will of the Army -- as Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno put it, "If we had our choice, we would use that money in a different way" and is in direct contradiction to that aim.

Rep. Jordan defended his request for the funding, saying this: "The one area where we are supposed to spend taxpayer money is in defense of the country."

Which is a common dishonest line among Republicans. The House GOP's proposed budget also seeks to restore funding the military says it doesn't need.

Republicans have tried to maintain defense spending while pushing for cuts to mental health programs, cancer treatment, food safety inspectors, and preschool programs.

They have also repeatedly ignored or dismissed the claim from military generals that President Obama's budget, which would have made targeted cuts to military programs, was an acceptable path to spending reduction.

A cut to one specific program would by no means be a drastic setback for the military; between 2001 and 2011, military spending nearly doubled. American voters, much like the military's generals, also support scaling back the military's spending.

The Wednesday 5-1-13 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - May 2, 2013 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Three more arrests in the Boston terror bombing case. The biased and crazy Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: We told you that the Boston terror suspects had to have help, they couldn't do what they did without training and money. The FBI is investigating that angle right now in Russia, and today agents arrested three men in Massachusetts who allegedly helped Dzhokhar Tsarnaev after the bombing.

Two are exchange students from Kazakhstan, one is an American citizen. These guys knew their pal had been arrested for the bombing and decided to help him anyway! There is obviously a huge problem at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth. What kind of students are they accepting? Four bad seeds on campus? How many more?

Massachusetts is a magnet for students from all over the world; that used to be a strength but now there is suspicion, especially on the Muslim students. Along with the criminal investigation, there should be a state investigation into what exactly is happening in the welfare and university precincts.
Then Boston Globe columnist Kevin Cullen was on to discuss the latest arrests.

Cullen said this: "We have to keep things in perspective. There is not a huge number of foreign-born students at the University of Massachusetts at Dartmouth and it's going to take some time to figure out whether these kids were nefarious, or were they more Borat than Boris Badenov? The feds say these kids knew their buddy was implicated and they tried to get rid of evidence. That's wrong, their first phone call should have been to the cops."

O'Reilly also suggested that Tamerlan Tsarnaev's widow Katharine Russell should be scrutinized, saying this: "It strains credulity to think that this woman wouldn't know that her husband was involved in this."

Then Harris Zafar was on to talk about a new poll that shows a large majority of Muslims wish to live under the strict edicts of Sharia Law and that a large number believe violence is justified.

Zafar said this: "This is a matter of concern for us, but it's also important to note the vast difference between American Muslims and non-American Muslims. The problem is not systemic within Islam, this is happening in countries with incredibly high rates of illiteracy and extremely low economic prospects."

O'Reilly agreed that Muslims in the USA tend to be peaceful and productive citizens, saying this: "I don't consider American Muslims a problem at any level, but our problem is that Muslims from overseas think they can come over here and blow people's arms and legs off in the name of Allah."

Then Bob Beckel was on to talk about author and reporter Masha Gessen, a gay activist, who recently said, "The institution of marriage should not exist."

Beckel said this: "Comments like that are not helpful, when the Supreme Court and state legislatures are going through issues about gay marriage. Marriage is a great institution and for her to be stating this is not very timely."

O'Reilly claimed that some extremists have as their goal the end of marriage itself, saying this: "This woman believes that when gay marriage becomes law, people will just not bother getting married at all and there will be any combination of living arrangements. A lot of far left people believe gay marriage will be the end of traditional marriage."

Beckel also repeated his call for a moratorium on Muslim immigration, saying this: "I got attacked from my friends on the left, but these guys arrested today were Muslim students, and Muslims have been behind every terrorist attack I know of."

Then Kirsten Powers and Kate Obenshain were on to talk about the city of Philadelphia, who will now pay for sex change operations for city employees. Illinois is funding a museum for Mexican art, and California has 11,000 workers in the Department of Corrections earning six-figure salaries.

Powers said this: "I don't think it's fiscally responsible to spend money when you're in debt, but it's not just a problem where there are liberals. We certainly had this problem under a Republican Congress when Bush was President."

Obenshain said this: "California is ready to fall off the map because it's so heavily in debt, yet they will give state aid to illegal immigrants to go to college. These are far left agenda ideas that are being perpetuated by leftist elected officials and public sector unions."

O'Reilly agreed that big spenders tend to be on one side of the political fence, saying this: "The far left, which controls the legislatures in California and Illinois and the city council in Philadelphia, will spend as much as they can until they're either arrested or voted out. The left doesn't seem to care about fiscal responsibility."

Fact: Almost every State in America is in debt, because of what Bush did to the country when he was in office. But O'Reilly only reports on the States that are in debt which are run by Democrats, he never says a word about any Republican run States debt. There are 30 Republican Governors, and their States are in debt too, but O'Reilly never says a word about it.

Not to mention, most of the Federal debt was caused by Bush, and yet O'Reilly blames it all on Obama and the Democrats anyway.

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

Then James Rosen and Carl Cameron were on to talk about an anonymous military man who told Fox News that the government is not telling the truth about last fall's embassy attack in Libya.

Rosen said this: "If you're asking me whether this is a major scandal, the answer is yes. I define scandal as a situation where you have a major event and the official version of that event is riddled with inaccuracies and half-truths and falsehoods. Four whistleblowers on this case have been threatened with reprisals, according to attorneys representing them."

Cameron turned to the chaos surrounding the short-lived furlough of some air traffic controllers.

Cameron said this: "The villains are bureaucrats and administration political employees. The automatic cuts were designed to be painful, so the implementers were told they had to go with across-the-board cuts, they couldn't lessen the pain in any way. The administration warned people that there would be delays and they made sure that would happen."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: For your reading pleasure. Billy said this: "If you're looking for great reading material, consider David Baldacci's "The Hit," Col. David Hunt's "Terror Red," "Roger Ailes Off Camera" by Zev Chafets, "The Guns at Last Light" by Rick Atkinson, or "Keep it Pithy" by some guy named O'Reilly."

Former Justice O'Connor Now Regrets Bush v Gore Vote
By: Steve - May 2, 2013 - 10:00am

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, the conservative retired justice who provided the fifth vote to install George W. Bush as president, is now having second thoughts about that decision:
"It took the case and decided it at a time when it was still a big election issue," O'Connor said during a talk Friday with the Tribune editorial board. "Maybe the court should have said, 'We're not going to take it, goodbye.'"

The case, she said, "stirred up the public" and "gave the court a less-than-perfect reputation."

"Obviously the court did reach a decision and thought it had to reach a decision," she said. "It turned out the election authorities in Florida hadn't done a real good job there and kind of messed it up. And probably the Supreme Court added to the problem at the end of the day."
If nothing else, Bush v. Gore demonstrates how justices who are determined to reach a certain result are capable of bending both the law and their own prior jurisprudence in order to achieve it. In Bush, the five conservative justices held, in the words of Harvard's Larry Tribe, that "equal protection of the laws required giving no protection of the laws to the thousands of still uncounted ballots."

The Court's decision to hand the presidency to Bush stunned most legal observers, some of whom were O'Connor's fellow justices. Retired Justice John Paul Stevens once recounted a story where he ran into fellow Justice Stephen Breyer at a party while a relatively early phase of the case was pending before the Court. According to Stevens, "we agreed that the application was frivolous."

In fact, Bush's own lawyers were skeptical of the legal theory that ultimately made up the basis of the Court's decision in Bush. As Ben Ginsberg, a top lawyer on Bush's presidential campaign, explained in 2006, "just like really with the Voting Rights Act, Republicans have some fundamental philosophical difficulties with the whole notion of Equal Protection."

And yet, O'Connor and four of her fellow Republicans joined together to embrace a particularly aggressive reading of Equal Protection -- at least so long as it could put George W. Bush in the White House.

O'Reilly Caught Lying For The Dishonest Pro-Life Nut Lila Rose
By: Steve - May 1, 2013 - 10:00am

On Monday night O'Reilly had the dishonest pro-life right-wing hack on the Factor, who claimed the video she had edited reveals "illegal and inhuman practices" at an abortion clinic in New York City, and accused a doctor at the clinic of committing murder.

When in fact, the video shows nothing of the sort, and actually undermines Live Action's baseless allegations that the clinic is performing illegal procedures and endangering the lives of patients.

Live Action and its founder, Lila Rose, have a long, disreputable history of perpetrating hoaxes and concocting false allegations against abortion rights supporters, Planned Parenthood in particular.

The Live Action video depicts a woman at Dr. Emily Woman's Health Center in the Bronx inquiring after an abortion in the 23rd week of her pregnancy -- a procedure that is legal in New York State.

The woman speaks to both a clinician and a counselor at the facility, and the video is edited down to make it appear as though the clinician describes a procedure in which a baby that survives an abortion is killed using a toxic solution.

Based solely on this exchange, Live Action claimed that the doctor who performs abortions at the clinic "has violated" the state's law against murder in the first degree and called on the state's attorney general to launch a homicide investigation.

But Live Action edited out from the 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.

The woman goes on to ask what would happen if the aborted fetus were "twitching" or "breathing," and the clinician responds: "It will automatically stop. It won't be able to breathe anymore. Not in the, not with the solution."

The clinician's treatment of the hypothetical notwithstanding, Live Action's video depicts a separate exchange with a counselor at the same clinic who tells the woman outright that the doctor "cannot do a termination once it's outside of the body, OK? He has to resuscitate it; he has to send it to the hospital. That's the law."

In portions of the conversation included in the transcript but not the video, the counselor also tells the woman that the situation she is describing does not occur, but that if it did, "once that pregnancy comes out alive the doctor will do everything he can to save it."

While Live Action claims that clinic workers seek to "separate the woman from the humanity of her child" in order to "ensure the mother has an expensive abortion," the full transcript reveals that the counselor urged the woman to be sure that she is comfortable having the abortion and told her to talk it over with a friend before making a final decision.

Despite the dishonest claims in Live Action's press release, what the video depicts is two employees at the same clinic reacting to a situation they both say does not actually happen, and one of them accurately describing what would have to happen according to the law.

What the video does not depict is any evidence whatsoever that the doctor at the clinic stands in violation of the New York murder statute or the federal Born Alive Infants Protection Act, as Live Action and Lila Rose claim.

And Bill O'Reilly helped her put out this dishonest propaganda because he is a pro-life Republican who does not want you to know the truth about Live Action or Lila Rose, and he wants to make anyone who is pro-choice look bad.

More Debt Reduction News O'Reilly Not Telling You About
By: Steve - May 1, 2013 - 9:00am

O'Reilly claims that President Obama is adding more debt to the country than any President in history, while ignoring news like this that actually report the truth.

The U.S. Treasury Department projected it will reduce government debt by $35 billion dollars this quarter, as tax receipts exceed forecasts and spending diminishes.

The pay-down in debt was estimated at $35 billion in the April-June period, the department said in a statement Monday in Washington.

"This is a substantial reduction," said Thomas Simons, a government debt economist at Jefferies LLC in New York.

In a statement released with the borrowing needs announcement, Alexander Gelber, the Treasury's acting assistant secretary for economic policy, said a recovery led by the private sector "continues to solidify." He cited a stronger housing market and an improved labor market.

"Businesses are well-positioned to increase their level of investment as domestic demand strengthens and global economic conditions improve," Gelber said in the statement.