The Friday 1-30-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 31, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Romney Says No. The biased and dishonest Republican Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: For about three weeks, Mitt Romney was running - making speeches, trying to raise money, putting his finger into the wind. And here's what the wind told him: don't do it. The governor says many of his previous donors are now committed to Jeb Bush, so he's not running in 2016.

But there is something else. According to a recent Fox News poll, there was some bad news for Governor Romney. When asked whether Romney would have done a better job as president than Barack Obama, 43% said yes and 50% said no. That was very bad news for Mitt Romney.

Now let's look ahead. The same poll asked which candidate you would like to see as Republican nominee without Romney. 15% of Republicans went for Jeb Bush, 13% each for Rand Paul and Mike Huckabee, with Ben Carson and Scott Walker rounding out the top five. So that means it is anybody's race, and for those men it might be worthwhile to look back and see why Romney lost the last time around.

Until two weeks before the vote, he was leading in the national polls. But in the last week of the campaign, dominated by Superstorm Sandy coverage, Romney seemed to disappear. Adding to that, in the last debate on foreign policy, the governor stumbled and did not confront the president with the Benghazi debacle. That was inexplicable, a huge blunder.

As I've said before, I don't believe Mitt Romney really wanted to win the presidency. It could have been subconscious, but no aggressive candidate would do what he did. Barack Obama had massive trouble with the economy and his foreign policy was beginning to unravel. Yet the governor did not exploit those key things.

This time, against a very powerful and well-funded Hillary Clinton, the Republican candidate is going to have to be charismatic, daring, and coherent. It's actually a good thing for the Republicans that Mitt Romney is not running. Now, somebody new will be on the big stage. But they'd better be ready for a bruising battle.
Comment from Steve: And now the reality, Romney did not really say no, he was told we do not want you, by the big money people in the Republican party. And O'Reilly said this: "The Republican candidate is going to have to be charismatic, daring, and coherent." Which is funny, because they do not have anybody like that, so they are in trouble no matter who wins, and that means Hillary is going to be the next President. Then two political analysts Tom Bevan and Chris Wilson were on to talk about the Republican field and the effect of Mitt Romney's withdrawal.

Bevan said this: "It is good news for Republicans that Romney isn't running, because it gives them a chance to get a fresh start. And a lot of Republicans thought that race in 2012 was winnable and Romney was a poor candidate."

Comment from Steve: And we now know that was a lie that was put out by the RNC, Romney had no chance and he lost by a landslide in the electoral vote. Obama had 332, Romney had 206, so it was a blowout, O'Reilly and Fox seem to have forgot that. Romney was not just a bad candidate who said many stupid things, the majority of America did not want him, and he had no chance to win, even if he had run a good campaign.

Only people like O'Reilly thought Romney could have won, nobody else did, and the guy at 538.com had Obama winning in a landslide for months before the election. O'Reilly just ignores all that because he does not want to admit the truth, that Romney was a terrible candidate and he also had no chance to beat Obama.

Wilson suggested that, at this early stage, Romney's departure benefits Jeb Bush, saying this: "Bush is the front-runner and it's important to remember that Mitt Romney wasn't going to be the Republican nominee. He would have taken votes away from Bush and Chris Christie and some of the other moderate candidates. But this will be a wide open race."

Then Geraldo was on to talk about a music video glorifying anti-cop violence that features two New York City public defenders. Geraldo, a former public defender himself, added that the lawyers also lied about their participation in the video.

Geraldo said this: "I think they should be fired, but not for participating in the video. What they did is not illegal, but this is about the lying and the deceit and their misrepresentation. It's always the cover-up, it's not the crime. These are city employees who lied to city officials. Ergo, they should lose the right to work."

Then O'Reilly did a totally dishonest segment called The Truth About Jobs in America, where he lied that all the net new jobs created since 2007 have gone to immigrants. What he did not tell you is that the study is misleading and done by a biased anti-immigrant group. Then he has a Republican on to discuss it with no Democratic guest for balance, so he can spin the study with nobody to counter their propaganda.

Steve Camarota, a staunch opponent of illegal immigration, was on to discuss it, he said this: "There are about 2-million more immigrants working now than there were in 2000, and there are about 1.5-million fewer native-born people working. So whatever job growth there has been has all gone to the foreign-born. We have seen a decline in the number of people who are actively looking for work, they are completely out of the labor force."

Comment from Steve: They are lying to you. The conservative media outlets are reporting on a misleading study from the anti-immigrant Center for Immigration Studies, which claimed that "all net employment growth has gone to immigrants" between November 2007 and November 2014. But data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that job growth among the native-born has far outpaced job growth among immigrants during the economic recovery.

According to the BLS. Since Lows During Recession, There Are 6.9 Million More Jobs Among The Native-Born And 4.1 Million Among The Foreign-Born. And btw, the Brookings Institution points out that Immigrants "Generally Do Not Compete For The Same Jobs" As Native-Born Americans.

Then Greg Gutfeld and Bernard McGuirk were on to talk about Seattle Seahawks running back Marshawn Lynch, who refuses to talk with reporters covering the Super Bowl.

Gutfeld said this: "I'm obsessed with this trend of every name ending in 'shawn,' You have Marshawn, Keyshawn, Lashawn, and there's even Eric Shawn. It's driving me crazy! But I think Marshawn Lynch is refreshing - you'll never hear him using sports cliches because he doesn't even speak."

McGuirk said this: "The sports media are obsequious to these athletes faces, and then they savage them in print or on the air. That's why athletes hate 'em. But this guy has a history, he's been fined for grabbing his crotch."

O'Reilly even praised Marshawn Lynch for overcoming a very tough childhood, saying this: "He's got a foundation, he's trying to help kids, and I kind of like this guy. He's making an indelible impression."

Comment from Steve: And as usual the three of them are idiots. Lynch is an employee of the NFL and the Seattle Seahawks, he signed a contract, and in the contract it says he must talk to the media. So he is violating his contract when he refuses to talk. Somehow O'Reilly, Gutfeld, and McGuirk all ignore that.

Then the moron Jesse Watters was on for his stupid non-news segment, he asked some people whether the Jets or the Dolphins will win the Super Bowl. Despite the fact that neither of those teams could find the Super Bowl on a map, the interviewees were highly opinionated:

"I'm rooting for the Dolphins, I live in Miami," one young woman said, while another added, "I like the little Dolphins, they're really cute." Watters also asked about Jets running back John Stossel, who tested positive for marijuana. "I don't see how it affects the way he plays football," said one libertarian-leaning man. The Coloradans even took it in stride when Watters told them the Super Bowl would include a female place kicker and an illegal immigrant, presumably not the same person.

Comment from Steve: How the hell is this news, and why is it on a so-called hard news show? It's just stupid and I will no longer report on the total waste of time Jesse Watters segments. All he does is make people look stupid for no good reason and it is not news, it's biased garbage for O'Reilly to laugh at.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day that was once again not a tip, just O'Reilly promoting a new show on Fox.

Corrupt GOP Still Pushing Keystone Pipeline After 4 Spills In A Month
By: Steve - January 31, 2015 - 10:00am

After their 2012 general election defeat, Republicans performed a self-autopsy and concluded that they had to convince the American people that they cared more about the regular people and not solely their special interest donors.

Obviously they ignored their own diagnosis and have committed to serving the interests of their owners the Koch brothers. This week, despite a looming veto threat from President Obama, after House Republicans passed a bill subverting the President’s purview over a foreign nation’s pipeline and the Senate is following suit sometime this week.

Of all the reasons to not build the Keystone pipeline, one that is often overlooked, and ignored by the corporate media, is the real and present danger of a break in TransCanada's rupture-prone pipeline.

It is absurd to think the Canadian tar sand pipeline is even remotely environmentally friendly, particularly when Canada will not allow the pipeline to be constructed on its own soil. Now, based on the fourth in a string of pipeline explosions just this month, it is also not close to what any thinking human being would regard as safe.

However, Republicans could care less about the safety of the pipeline any more than they care about the environment, and in spite of the fourth pipeline explosion in a very brief amount of time, they are going forward to enrich the Koch brothers, a foreign corporation, and of course John Boehner's stock portfolio.

The latest pipeline explosion took place in West Virginia and fortunately there were no deaths or injuries. Residents reported seeing a massive fireball shooting hundreds of feet into the air, and an emergency dispatcher said the heat from the flames melted siding off of one house and damaged a power line.

And btw, this pipeline explosion, or the other three in a month, were never reported by O'Reilly. He has not said one word about any of them, while joining with the Republicans to promote the Keystone XL pipeline as safe. This is not only a violation of the rules of ethics in journalism, it's corrupt for a journalist to ignore while a national debate is in process of approving the massive Keystone pipeline.

The Texas-based owners of the pipeline, Enterprise Products, L.P. said it was investigating the cause of the rupture and explosion, but they like TransCanada, claim oil and gas pipelines are safe. It is exactly what three other pipeline owners claimed just this month as Republicans are attempting to force construction of a foreign corporations pipeline carrying incredibly dangerous and nearly impossible to clean up tar sand.

Not to mention this: the Keystone pipeline would not help one American, all it would do is make the Canadian oil company (and their shareholders) richer, So it's a joke to begin with to even talk about allowing this massive pipeline to go across thousands of miles of American soil and water. Their should not even be a debate, we should have said no to it, more like hell no.

Opponents of the pipeline should be educating the unknowing public about how much more dangerous to the environment, particularly the water supply, a 1,700-mile pipeline carrying over 860,000 barrels of nasty, carcinogenic, and extremely corrosive tar sand crude oil is compared to conventional oil, and conventional oil is not easy to clean up.

The biggest problem with tar sand oil is that it is not just harder, but nearly impossible to clean up due to its viscosity that prevents it from floating. Instead, it sinks and with a projected path over the Ogallala aquifer, Nebraska residents and farmers primary source of water would be decimated. Nebraska Republicans care as little about their populations source of water as they do their health, and have claimed a tar sand spill "will only affect local residents source of water."

To get an idea of the devastation and long-term effects of a tar sand rupture over a major water source, it is worth noting the nation's first and largest tar sand spill happened nearly five years ago and is still a posing monumental challenge to clean up. The company responsible for the spill, Enbridge claimed their primary concern has always been pipeline safety and environmental consciousness.

The 2010 spill has oil industry and environmental experts stumped about how to clean up, much less recover, all the tar sand oil. As the EPA said in 2012, after two years of struggling to clean up the spill, they have been unsuccessful in cleanup and recovery attempts because there is no known procedure to clean up tar sands bitumen.

An agency spokesman said they had to write the book on how best to clean up nasty tar sand (dil-bit) in Michigan. Tar sand bitumen, the type of oil Republicans want flowing through the Keystone pipeline spilled into the Kalamazoo River and promptly sunk to the bottom. Local residents and EPA officials are still struggling to save the water supply nearly five years later.

It has cost roughly $725 million to recover 1.2 million gallons of the tar sand so far, and environmentalists at the EPA say just attempting to recover the carcinogenic tar sand is decimating the environment.

Residents in and around the Michigan spill have complained and reported nausea, migraines, and burning in the eyes and throat due to the toxins needed to allow the tar to flow. Tar sand will not flow unless it is diluted with toxic chemicals and after it does spill, the tar separates from the toxic dilutant and sinks.

The chemical-laden dilutant evaporates into the nearby atmosphere affecting air quality. It is obviously a hazard that Republicans are comfortable imposing on Americans in their drive to serve the oil industry.

And btw folks, Bill O'Reilly never reports any of this. If you want the Factor for news about the pipeline you would be clueless and total uninformed on the issue. All you would know is that O'Reilly and the GOP support it being built.

The fact is there is no good reason to allow a foreign corporation to build an environmental hazard waiting to happen on American soil, and yet Republicans are Hell-bent and duty-bound to do the bidding of the Koch brothers; despite President Obama's pledge to veto legislation approving the permit.

A permitting approval process, by the way, that is constitutionally the purview of the President and State Department; not the Koch brothers, a foreign corporation, or Republicans indebted to the oil industry.

Still, O'Reilly and his Republican friends continue to lie about the safety of the pipeline, and wasting taxpayer's time and money, to pass legislation to construct a pipeline that is certain to rupture, explode, and decimate the environment.

And they are lying about Keystone while four pipelines ruptured or exploded amid ever-present promises it is a safe and environmentally-friendly means of enriching the Kochs, a foreign corporation, and corrupt John A. Boehner.

The Thursday 1-29-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 30, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Americans Not Happy with President Obama's Take on Terrorism. The biased and dishonest Republican Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: There was another rather painful exposition at the White House yesterday. Deputy White House Press Secretary Eric Schultz referred to the Taliban as an 'armed insurgency,' not a terrorist group. The White House really needs to stop this nonsense because it has become a national joke. The Taliban slaughtered 132 Pakistani school children and it's an 'armed insurgency?' That's just insulting.

So I am going to send a chart to the White House. The following are terrorists because they either kill or support killing civilians: Al Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram, the Taliban, the Iranian Mullahs, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood, and every other jihadist group.

A new Fox News poll shows Americans are getting fed up with the dumb dance the White House is doing. When asked if America is at war with radical Islam, 56% say yes, 37% say no. The truth is that most of the Muslim world would like to see the jihadis defeated. They are bad for business and bad for the soul. But America is not going to put the jihadis out of business because our commander in chief lacks the will.

The folks have had enough. Why should we bear the brunt of this savage war? If Muslim nations would declare war on the jihad, we and our allies would certainly help big time. But that does not seem to be a possibility in a cowardly world. And so the beheadings, the kidnappings, the bombings and the mutilations will continue unabated. Until the USA gets hit again. Then everything will change.
Comment from Steve: This is just more right-wing garbage, because only O'Reilly and his idiotic friends are not happy with Obama's take on terrorism. The rest of America does not care, nobody cares what you call it, we only care about fighting terrorism and keeping us safe, which Obama has done. And a Fox News poll as your evidence is laughable, it does not represent the majority of Americans.

So what did O'Reilly do then, he had the biased Obama hating Col. Ralph Peters on to slam Obama for the Bergdahl case, and of course there was no Democratic guest on for balance, making it a one sided right-wing propaganda debate. These fools will do anything to try and make Obama look bad, it's un-American and it's getting ridiculous. They can not slam him on gas prices, the stock market, unemployment, the economy, jobs, or Obamacare, so this is the best they can do, it's a joke and laughable.

Peters said this: "Everything I'm hearing, is that the White House has been exerting tremendous pressure on the Army and the Pentagon to whitewash the Bergdahl case. The White House doesn't think beyond the next public relations opportunity for the president and saving face, they just don't get it. For them, desertion is like skipping class, but for our military it's much bigger than this pathetic loser Bergdahl. If you cook the books and interfere with the Code of Military Justice, you have basically said that desertion is just fine."

Comment from Steve: Yeah and Peters is hearing that from his other Obama hating right-wing friends, so you can not believe anything they say when they are proven to be biased Obama hating idiots. It might be true, and we will most likely find out soon, but I sure would not believe what Peters and O'Reilly are saying about it, because they are partisan hacks who hate Obama.

Then the Democrat Jennice Fuentes and Republican Andrea Tantaros were on to talk about the Bergdahl case.

Another Obama hater Tantaros said this: "The Army is feeling pressure from the administration, to dump this investigation at a time when a lot of people won't notice. There is compelling evidence that they messed up this terror swap and they're waiting for a big incident to dump this."

But Fuentes advised against jumping to conclusions, saying this: "We don't know what is causing the delay and the only thing we can do is wait. I am interested in learning the facts, but I am not going to second guess the Pentagon."

Comment from Steve: Which is exactly what O'Reilly and Tantaros would be saying if we had a Republican President. Under Bush, O'Reilly and Tantaros always said we should wait until the facts come out before we slam anyone in the Bush administration. Now they say the exact opposite under Obama, simply because he is a Democrat and they hate him.

Then Donald Trump called in to the show, he was mad at O'Reilly for saying Trump and Sarah Palin running for President would be a "reality show."

Trump said this: "My beef is that all day long Fox News advertised Trump and Palin, and I was waiting for Trump and Palin. But there was nothing about me and nothing about her, so that was deceptive advertising. But I think you have your act together pretty well, Bill."

O'Dummy said this: "The segment was about all of the candidates on the GOP side and we said it would be very 'challenging' for you to put together an organization in every state. I don't think you're going to run for president, but I'm glad that you're speaking your mind."

Comment from Steve: Nobody cares, and how the hell is this news?

Then the biased Republican hack Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about an NBC News correspondent named Ayman Mohyeldin, who described "American Sniper" Chris Kyle as a "racist" who went on a "killing spree" in Iraq.

Goldberg said this: "Liberals learned a lesson after Vietnam, which was to not spit at the troops, literally or figuratively. But whether it's this 'correspondent' or Howard Dean or Michael Moore, these hard-left people didn't like the military then and they don't like the military now. And what they really don't like are American people who do like the military. They're going crazy because so many people are embracing this movie, which may become the biggest 'R' rated movie ever."

Comment from Steve: Nobody cares about this story but loons on the right, let it go, it's not news. Let people watch the movie and have their own opinions, it's none of your business, move on to real news.

Then the far-right stooge Laura Ingraham was on to talk about the 26 states that are suing the Obama administration over the president's recent executive order on immigration. Without telling you that every one of those 26 states are run by Republicans with Republican Attorney Generals, it's a partisan move, and the other 24 states are not suing the Obama administration. Funny how O'Reilly & Ingraham do not mention that.

Ingraham said this: "The argument the states are making, is that there are hundreds of billions of dollars in additional expense placed onto them because of this. In Indiana they say they'll have to pay welfare benefits, in Wisconsin they say illegal immigrants will have to get concealed carry permits, and in Texas they say they have to hire at least 100 new staffers to process all the paperwork for these new immigrants."

Ingraham then suggested that the federal courts may well uphold President Obama's executive action, saying this: "This will go to the Supreme Court, but I would remind my conservative friends that ObamaCare and Roe vs. Wade were never repealed."

Comment from Steve: What the President did is 100% legal and the courts will uphold it, the only people that do not like it are right-wing stooges, nobody else cares. It is the right thing to do, and the smart thing to do, they are already here and it is impossible for us to deport them all.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Give Credit When It Is Due. Billy said this: "Try to acknowledge and give tribute when someone, even if they do not share your politics or ideology, does something noble."

More Political Reality Bill O'Reilly Will Not Tell You About
By: Steve - January 30, 2015 - 10:00am

Five Years After Citizens United, Billionaires Are Buying Democracy

by Senator Bernie Sanders and Robert Weissman the President of Public Citizen

Five years after the Supreme Court's disastrous 5-4 decision in Citizens United, there's a lot to be angry about.

With election spending out of control, and super PACs empowering giant corporations and billionaires like no time since the Gilded Age, Big Money is not just influencing who's elected to office in this country, but what elected officials do.

Consider how the new Congress has opened: A House of Representatives leadership effort to skirt normal procedure and rush through a repeal of key Dodd-Frank provisions to rein in Wall Street speculative activities. A House of Representatives vote to authorize construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. A House vote to handcuff consumer, health, safety, environmental and other regulatory agencies so that they cannot issue new rules to address corporate abuse and protect the American public.

Another House vote to repeal the Dodd-Frank measure, after the initial rush effort failed to garner a needed two-thirds majority. Meanwhile, in the slower-moving Senate, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has decided Keystone legislation will be the first significant matter taken up.

What about jobs? What about falling wages? What about the minimum wage increases? Nothing from the Republican Congress.

Why is this the starting agenda for Congress? Most Americans are unfamiliar with derivatives clearing requirements, but they surely know they don't want to enable more of the aggressive Wall Street gambling that threw our nation into recession. Americans don't want dirty air, unsafe food and water, dangerous workplaces or to be ripped off by unscrupulous businesses; and by overwhelming margins, they want our regulatory agencies strengthened, not weakened.

And there's no serious case for the Keystone pipeline, given that it will do nothing for consumers, create only a few dozen permanent jobs, and significantly exacerbate the greenhouse gas emissions that are endangering the planet and humanity.

The Congressional agenda is the agenda of the billionaire class, plain and simple. The Koch brothers spent more money than we'll ever know on the last election. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce was the largest "dark money" organization in the 2014 elections, at least in terms of spending required to be reported to the Federal Election Commission.

The Chamber invested very heavily and successfully in the 2014 elections to elect corporate-minded candidates in the Republican primaries and in the general election. Now these and other giant donors are being rewarded with their return on investment.

When it comes to the outside spending facilitated by Citizens United, there's a lot we don't know about who's spending money on elections. Groups like the Koch-backed Americans for Prosperity primarily spent money in ways that aren't reported at all. And almost a third of reported spending was done by organizations that don't reveal their donors.

But even with what we know, it's staggering how few donors are wielding such a gigantic influence over our politics, and our country:

-- Across all federal elections since Citizens United was decided in 2010, there has been more than $1 billion in super PAC spending, reports the Brennan Center. Just 195 individuals and their spouses gave almost 60 percent of that money -- more than $600 million.

-- Forget about the top 1 percent. The top .01 percent of income earners are responsible for more than 40 percent of campaign contributions.

-- In 2014, the Supreme Court ruled in McCutcheon v. FEC that the previously existing cap on aggregate contributions by individuals was unconstitutional, raising the amount an individual can give to candidates, parties and political committees from $123,000 to $5.9 million. Only 1,200 people had even approached the previously existing cap.

Five years after the Supreme Court handed down the abomination known as Citizens United, we know this: Our country will not be able to address the great challenges it faces - from putting people to work and raising wages to providing healthcare to all, from reducing wealth inequality to averting catastrophic climate change, and much more - without ending corporate and super-rich dominance of our elections.

As a whole, the billionaire class has views that are profoundly out of step with everyday Americans. And that goes a long way to explain the agenda of the new Congress.

It also explains in significant part why we aren't making progress on measures that have overwhelming popular support. The vast majority of Americans want to raise the minimum wage. They want policies to advance income and wealth equality. By a more than two-to-one margin, Americans oppose more NAFTA-style trade agreements.

By a similar margin, they want to break up the giant banks, and they want Wall Street criminals put behind bars. Americans want investment in our schools, on sustainable transportation and infrastructure. They want policies to prevent catastrophic climate change. They want to protect--and improve--Social Security and Medicare.

But there's reason for hope, as well. The decision ignited a democracy movement. More than 1 million people have called on the Securities and Exchange Commission to issue a rule requiring publicly traded companies to disclose their political spending. There are growing local and state efforts to win public financing of elections, and strong support for a federal bill as well.

And a grassroots firestorm is calling for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and related decisions, and to restore our democracy. The same day that the Supreme Court handed down its McCutcheon decision, demonstrators in more than 150 cities and towns took to the streets to demand an amendment.

Sixteen states and nearly 600 cities and towns have passed resolutions calling for an amendment. And, last September, in a historic moment on the path to winning an amendment, 54 U.S. Senators voted for an amendment.

Our country cannot tolerate domination by the Koch brothers, the Sheldon Adelsons, the U.S. Chambers of Commerce and their friends, and we will not. Five years after Citizens United, our democracy is weaker, but our democracy movement is stronger, than anyone could have predicted.

The road ahead is clear: Amending the constitution is hard by design, but it's something that We the People have done time and again to strengthen our democracy. We must do it again.

The Wednesday 1-28-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 29, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Is Terrorism Overwhelming the Obama Administration? The biased and dishonest Republican Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Former Defense Intelligence Agency Chief Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn has slammed the White House for not having a strategy to fight the jihad and for refusing to use the term 'Islamic militants.' General Flynn said, 'You cannot defeat an enemy you do not admit exists.' He joins a host of other former Obama officials in telling the world the administration has no plan to defeat Islamic terrorism. Talking Points has been chronicling that for months.

Here's the latest: Ten Democratic senators are telling President Obama that if there is no progress in the Iran nuke negotiations by March, they will join with Republicans in embarrassing him by passing sanctions. Iran is the centerpiece of this terror war. If that nation gets a nuclear weapon, the jihad gains incredible power.

And then there is the Bowe Bergdahl situation, again tied into the jihad. Sgt. Bergdahl was traded for five top Taliban terrorists who will most likely return to the battlefield to fight against America. Meantime, Bergdahl apparently left the battlefield, deserting his unit in Afghanistan.

The Factor broke a story earlier this week that says the White House is pressuring the Pentagon to go easy on Bergdahl. Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer says the Army has come to the conclusion that Bergdahl did indeed desert.

The Army denies that but Shaffer is standing by his story, which has also been reported by NBC News. The White House desperately does not want a trial where members of Bergdahl's unit would testify that he put their lives in danger. So President Obama would prefer that Bergdahl be charged with going AWOL.

Then he could be quietly punished with no big exposition. But the facts show that Bergdahl did desert his unit. The sane way to do this is to charge Bergdahl with desertion, and then, on humanitarian grounds, the president would pardon him. But the sergeant would lose back pay and be dishonorably discharged.

Col. Shaffer reports that politics is influencing the Bergdahl situation. If that is true, we the people need to know about it. Bottom line: Talking Points believes the Army knows exactly what Bergdahl did and is stonewalling the process. As always, I could be wrong.
Note from Steve: Those are all opinions from Republicans that do not like President Obama and are trying to make him look bad. It's called right-wing talking points, and O'Reilly is a big part of it. And in the next segment you will see more right-wing bias, because O'Reilly had two Republicans on to discuss it, and no Democratic guests for balance.

Then Congressmen Trent Franks of Arizona and Ryan Zinke of Montana, both Republicans, were on to discuss it.

Zinke said this: "We did negotiate with terrorists, and we released five Taliban terrorists. We are doing the same thing in Gitmo. This president has shown that he is willing to break the Constitution."

Franks said this: "The Bergdahl swap essentially replenished the leadership ranks of the Taliban. This administration does not seem to understand that this trade put heroes at greater risk and said to terrorists, if you take one of our people you can get whatever you want."

O'Reilly added that Bergdahl's alleged desertion may have cost lives, saying this: "Reports are that American soldiers were killed hunting for Bergdahl, and we can't get an exposition of the investigation? It's outrageous."

Note from Steve: Notice that none of the three right-wing stooges mentioned that George W. Bush also did the very same thing. Under Bush many so-called terrorists were released, but under Bush these hacks never said a word about it then. They only cry about it when a Democratic President does it.

Then O'Reilly had the biased right-wing stooge Karl Rove on to talk about how Hillary Clinton can be beaten in the general election? With no Democratic guest for balance. In fact, not one Democratic guest was on the entire show.

Rove said this: "The most obvious issue is foreign policy. She was secretary of state and you can't look around the world and not see problems. She was the architect of the 'Russian reset,' we have problems in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, and the resurgence of ISIS. You can't point to any success, and people think about foreign policy a lot when they feel threatened."

Rove also theorized that Clinton is vulnerable on the economy, saying this: "She doesn't understand how the economy works, she doesn't have a vision of how it ought to go, and she's going to be stuck defending the anemic recovery we've had under Barack Obama."

Note from Steve: Which is just laughable, because under Bill Clinton the economy did great, and now under Obama the economy is also doing great. In fact, history shows that the economy always does better with a Democratic President, somehow Rove can not seem to remember that. And we have trouble with foreign countries no matter who is in office, Republican or a Democrat, so Rove is just a dishonest idiot.

Then Joe Tacopina was on to talk about a music video glorifying anti-cop violence that features two New York City public defenders. O'Reilly asked attorney Joe Tacopina whether those government-funded lawyers can be disbarred or otherwise disciplined.

Tacopina said this: "Under professional rules of conduct, they could be in for a rude awakening and disbarment is a possibility. The police union could file a complaint with the disciplinary committee. They have an obligation as lawyers to uphold the law and to make sure they don't do things that are prejudicial to the administration of justice."

Then Martha MacCallum was on to talk about the former Governor Howard Dean who trashed the movie "American Sniper" last week and mocked the people seeing the film. Now he's apologizing.

Cheryl Casone and Dennis Miller was also on, but I did not report on their segments because it is non-news nonsense that nobody cares about. And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: No Offense! Billy said this: "Your life will be much easier and more placid if you don't go out of your way searching for ways to take offense in remarks where no offense is intended."

Note from Steve: O'Reilly is talking about the moron Sarah Palin, who took offense to O'Reilly saying if her and Trump got in the 2016 Presidential race it would turn it into a reality show. Even though what he said is true, Palin got mad, and O'Reilly basically told her to lighten up.

Nicolle Wallace Said Palin Iowa Speech Showed How Dumb She Is
By: Steve - January 29, 2015 - 10:00am

Nicolle Wallace, who served as communications director for Sen. John McCain's 2008 campaign, shared her thoughts about Sarah Palin. She told David Letterman what it was like to work for Palin while she was going rogue.

Wallace described Palin as an "outside the box" choice for McCain's running mate, but said she was just never able to measure up to his "knowledge and experience."

"She was able to excite us, but she wasn't able to prove that she had the experience for the job," Wallace continued. She cited Palin's Iowa Freedom Summit speech this past weekend as another instance when, "on full display were all the gaps in her knowledge."

Which is a polite way of saying she is dumb.

"That's what became obvious, not just to the public, but to us," she said of McCain's campaign staff in 2008. "And that was sort of chilling."

"As someone who'd worked in politics for over a decade, I'd never encountered somebody like her," Wallace added.

Lets get real, Palin is a dumb Alaska hillbilly who was picked by John McCain to be his running mate because he is a moderate and the far-right nuts loved her, she was good looking, and she is a woman. She is not qualified to be anything in politics, and we all know it. She is dumb as a box of rocks, and I would not vote for her to be my Dog Catcher, let alone Vice President or even scarier the fricking President.

The Tuesday 1-27-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 28, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The Presidential Race is On. The biased and dishonest Republican Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: In Iowa last weekend, nine Republicans showed up to present themselves to potential voters. Mitt Romney, Jeb Bush and Rand Paul were not there, but the gathering got a bunch of attention. Some of the GOP hopefuls are not well known yet, but Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker recently caught a break when Rush Limbaugh praised him for having 'the blueprint for winning.'

Walker is a proponent of smaller government, has restricted the power of labor unions in Wisconsin, and has generally defeated the far-left at every turn in a state where the Democratic Party is strong. He will have to go up against populist folks like Chris Christie and Ben Carson, who effectively speak directly to the voters, but Walker and fellow Governors Perry and Kasich have very positive economic stories to tell.

Senator Rand Paul remains somewhat of a mystery to me. We've asked him on the program a number of times, but he always declines. It could have to do with his foreign policy outlook.

Senator Ted Cruz and former Senator Rick Santorum are conservative guys who must break through fast in order to raise money, while Senator Marco Rubio seems to have a bit more momentum. The senator's Cuban heritage gives him a unique perspective into the American minority situation, but that might put him up against his former mentor Jeb Bush, who will run as a moderate Republican with a record of achievement in Florida.

Mitt Romney is the best-known Republican. He will run again as an economic stimulator, but his road will not be easy. Other folks like Sarah Palin and Donald Trump certainly liven up the proceedings, but they need effective organizations in 50 states and that will be a major challenge. The race is already interesting and that's a good thing.
Note from Steve: This is a perfect example of the bias and dishonesty from O'Reilly. Because Bill O'Reilly reported on this gathering in Iowa as if it were 9 moderate Republicans who have a good chance to be the next President. When in reality it was a circus of far-right (out of the mainstream) conservatives who have no chance to be the next President.

The whole thing was a joke, and the media used the video of it to make fun of them. Palin was terrible and made a fool of herself, even most conservatives said she looked stupid and rambled on with nonsense. O'Reilly never mentioned any of that, instead he acted as if they were smart people who came off as Presidential.

When the reality is they came off as extreme right fools, the whole thing was like a skit on Saturday Night Live, not an actual gathering of serious Presidential contenders. Bush and Romney did not go to it because they did not want to be lumped in with those far-right loons, and O'Reilly never mentioned any of that either.

Then Monica Crowley and Democrat Kirsten Powers were on to discuss it.

Powers said this: "The biggest threat to Hillary Clinton is Jeb Bush. He has a record of accomplishments, he is well-liked, and he is going to buck the party at times, which will make him a good candidate in the general election."

Crowley advised the GOP to avoid nominating an establishment and more moderate candidate such as Mitt Romney, saying this: "He can raise money and he can pour his own money into a race, so money wouldn't be a problem. But the problem is that there is no compelling reason for Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush to be president. Running for president these days is like American Idol - you don't just have to be a serious thinker with a great record, you also have to be charismatic."

Then O'Reilly had the right-wing biased Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer back on the show, he made headlines on Monday's show when he said that the Army will soon charge Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl with desertion. After the Army pushed back hard, insisting that no decision has been made in the case, Shaffer returned to defend his reporting.

Shaffer said this: "I stand by all of the facts, and if you look at the written statement from the Pentagon, they don't deny what I said was in their report. I stand by the fact that Bergdahl's lawyer has been given a 'charge sheet' that tells them what to expect."

O'Reilly reminded Shaffer that he is now in a full-fledged war of words with the Pentagon, saying this: "The Army is calling you a liar, and if it turns out that what you're telling us is accurate they are going to look bad. We're in this for the truth."

Note from Steve: So let me get this straight, O'Reilly does a biased one sided segment with Shaffer where he said the Army will soon charge Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl with desertion, so the Army and everyone at the Pentagon deny it. So what does O'Reilly do, he has the same guy back on to repeat his claims with no Democratic guest for balance, it was ridiculous. So much for respect the Army, I guess that is only a slogan for O'Reilly.

Where was the Army guest, or anyone who was disputing it, both segments were biased one sided garbage by O'Reilly and his biased guest. And every bit of it violated the code of ethics of journalism, that say, do not report anything you can not verify with a second source. And btw folks, it also violates O'Reilly's own rules. He said he never speculates and only reports the facts, so he broke his own rules to make Obama look bad.

Then the two Republicans Kimberly Guilfoyle & Lis Wiehl were on for the legal segment. They talked about a school district in Minnesota that spent more than a million dollars sending teachers to conferences of dubious value.

Wiehl said this: "These are discretionary funds, and they spent $60,000 on two conferences dealing with 'white privilege.'"

Guilfoyle added that district officials did nothing against the law, saying this: "Even though what they did was legal, you could throw them out of their jobs, which would be nice."

Then they turned to New Jersey, where a high school freshman was videotaped body-slamming his 62-year-old teacher to the floor.

Guilfoyle said this: "This 16-year-old has been suspended, and he'll go to another school for the rest of the year. If he's tried as an adult, he's looking at three-to-five years for aggravated assault."

Then Charles Krauthammer was on to handicap the Republican field at this very early stage.

Krauthammer said this: "Scott Walker is getting up there to the top tier, while I don't think Mitt Romney will even run, and Jeb Bush has the unfortunate fact of his last name. It's as if he needs to defend the record of George W. Bush, which adds a burden that he wouldn't have if his name was Jeb Smith. But he had a very good record as the governor of Florida."

O'Reilly pointed out that the GOP field is crowded with talented governors, saying this: "Rick Perry had a great economic record in Texas, John Kasich led an amazing turnaround in Ohio, and Scott Walker has done well in Wisconsin. But New Jersey under Chris Christie is running a big budget deficit, so it's not as clear-cut there."

Then the moron Jesse Watters was on, he hit the streets of New York after the much-anticipated apocalyptic snowstorm fizzled.

"The weather guys get paid either way," one New Yorker told Watters, "they just have to get look good on camera." Some other observations from New Yorkers: "The mayor ruined my wedding day because he shut down everything" ... "Now I have a stocked fridge for the rest of the week" ... "Al Roker has some explaining to do."

Obama Approval Hits 19 Month High In Gallup Poll: O'Reilly Silent
By: Steve - January 28, 2015 - 10:00am

When the Obama job approval numbers were below 50% O'Reilly reported it and mentioned it almost every night. But now that his job approval numbers are back up to 50% approve - 45% disapprove, O'Reilly is silent.

And btw folks, every President has up and down variations in their job approval, depending on a million factors that are beyond his control. And O'Reilly knows it, but he still used the down times for partisan political reasons just like every other Republican in America did.

According to the Gallup Daily Tracking poll, President Obama’s job approval rating has risen to a nineteen month high. By margin of 50%-45%, those surveyed approve of the job that President Obama is doing.

Last week's ABC News/Washington Post poll revealed that the president's job approval rating had increased by nine points in a month. The ABC News poll found that the positive changes in the president's job approval rating were directly related to the economy. The ABC poll found the highest level of approval of the economy since 2007.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is openly complaining that Obama is ignoring the results of the midterm election, but the polling is evidence that the White House is correct to ignore the election. Obama has gotten more popular since he began taking executive action and going on the offensive after the election. President Obama's State Of The Union address has also helped his standing with the public.

The president is countering many of the unpopular positions of congressional Republicans by standing up for the middle class, workers, Hispanics, and more benefits for families. Obama has taken control of the national agenda and put Republicans on the defensive. The polling demonstrates that the more aggressive agenda setting coming from the White House is popular with many Americans.

In other words, the more Obama does to go against what the Republicans want the more his job approval ratings go up. And that shows the opposite of what O'Reilly has been saying, O'Reilly is saying that since the people gave the Senate back to the Republicans it means Obama should work with the Republicans. But the facts show the opposite, that the more Obama goes against the Republicans the more his job approval ratings go up.

Obama is enjoying a late in his presidency resurgence. America is moving on from the dark years of war and recession, and President Obama is finally getting appreciation for his years of work on behalf of the country. But of course O'Reilly will never report on or admit any of this, because he is a biased right-wing hack who is not fair and balanced and never has been.

O'Reilly Gets The Facts Wrong Once Again
By: Steve - January 27, 2015 - 11:30am

Monday night O'Reilly had the right-wing biased Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer on to talk about the U.S. Army investigation of former hostage Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, who was swapped for five Taliban commanders more than six months ago.

O'Reilly asked Lt. Col. Tony Shaffer for an update on the troubling case, and he said this: "Bowe Bergdahl will be charged with desertion. The next step is a court martial."

Shaffer even claimed that the Obama administration has been stonewalling the results of the investigation.

Shaffer said this: "There is a huge battle going on and I am told that the individual trying to suppress this is Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes. There is a titanic struggle behind the scenes, the White House wants this to go away."

And it looks like that is all lies from Shaffer, because real journalists at Reuters are reporting this.

Army Says No Decision Made In Bergdahl Investigation

The U.S. Army on Tuesday denied that a decision had been made to bring desertion charges against Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, who was released last year in a controversial prisoner swap after disappearing from his base in Afghanistan in 2009.

Major General Ronald Lewis, the Army's head of public affairs, said that report from Fox News, is "patently false."

"To be clear there have been no actions or decisions on the Sergeant Bergdahl investigation," Lewis said in a statement.

"The investigation is still with the commanding general of U.S. Army Forces Command (General Mark Milley) who will determine appropriate action - which ranges from no further action to convening a court-martial," he added.

The Pentagon's press secretary, Rear Admiral John Kirby, told a news conference that no decision had been made in the case and said Milley was under no pressure to make a decision on any timeline.

Top defense officials are sensitive about exercising any undue influence on officers responsible for cases in the military legal system.

Bergdahl, who spent five years in captivity after leaving his post, was released in May in an exchange with the Taliban for five inmates from the U.S. prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The deal was blasted by some Republicans, and some of his fellow soldiers called him a deserter.

General Milley received the findings of Army investigators late last month, is reviewing them and has not publicly indicated whether charges will be filed, said Jim Hinnant, a spokesman for U.S. Forces Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina.

Milley is expected to make a decision soon on whether the findings merit a court-martial or some form of administrative punishment. The general also could decide no action against Bergdahl is warranted.

"There is no timeline to make that decision and General Milley is not being put under pressure to make a decision either way," Kirby told reporters.

If officials conclude that Bergdahl broke U.S. military law, they could force him to forfeit hundreds of thousands of dollars in back pay accumulated during his captivity and give up future benefits.

Bergdahl is stationed at Fort Sam Houston in San Antonio, where he is working as a clerk.

As usual O'Reilly had one biased Republican on who speculated about the facts, with no Democratic guest on for balance. And instead of saying they think this is what will happen, they state it as if it were a fact. In O'Reillyworld this is called journalism, but in the real world it's called garbage. And remember O'Reilly said you can not trust the internet, while this shows you can not trust him either, because a real journalist would have checked what Shaffer was saying before letting him report the lies.

The Monday 1-26-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 27, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Is President Obama Being Humiliated? The biased and dishonest Republican Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: On March 3rd, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will address Congress about Iran and terrorism in general. Speaker of the House John Boehner invited Mr. Netanyahu but did not tell the president until the last minute. Fox News Sunday host Chris Wallace believes the move is designed to embarrass the president, and many other Americans feel the same way.

But Talking Points dissents. I want to hear what Netanyahu has to say, and I hope President Obama rebuts his remarks publicly if they are false or misleading. Mr. Netanyahu and his nation are directly threatened by terrorism and Iran, thus they have to be deeply involved in what's going on. It's important for all Americans to know what Benjamin Netanyahu is thinking.

Now the bigger picture. Americans are in danger from Islamic terrorists and from Iran. President Obama believes he is making progress in a nuke deal with Iran, but the current negotiations have been going on for 14 months and have been extended twice. Some in Congress want to impose sanctions right now, but Talking Points has said that would be a mistake.

Yes, severe sanctions would have to be imposed if the deal fails and President Obama has said he would do that, but Congress should give Iran no excuse to walk away. If there is no deal by the end of June, then Congress can unleash hell and President Obama will have no choice but to go along with it. So let's put the saber rattling aside for five months, no antagonism.

That being said, many Americans have no confidence that President Obama will ever confront Islamic terrorism. In fact, some might surmise that the White House is actually afraid of the Muslim world. The White House gets away with this kind of nonsense because the American public doesn't care to know what's going on.

One of the reasons America was hit so hard in 2001 is that we were unprepared. Our intelligence services underestimated al Qaeda, and our immigration authorities were asleep. Well, in 2015 immigration authorities are still asleep, anyone can get into this country. And while our intelligence certainly has improved, public interest in terrorism overseas and the dangerous Iranian situation is almost nonexistent.

ISIS does not fear the USA, and certainly Iran is pushing us to the wall. Sadly, the president does not seem to be very engaged. Speaker Boehner's invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is not out of line. Let Netanyahu speak his mind, let him spell out the danger he sees to the world. That will be instructive, and maybe some Americans will finally pay attention. Probably not.
Note from Steve: This is more proof Bill O'Reilly is a biased right-wing stooge. We do not need to know what Netanyahu is thinking, and Boehner did something that has never been done before, he invited a foreign leader to speak to Congress, and if a Democrat did that behind the back of a Republican President O'Reilly and the right would call for him to be tried for treason.

But when a Republican does it they say it's ok and we need to hear from him, which is total garbage. And btw, Obama has been as tough on terrorism as Bush, if not tougher, he just does not insult them publicly as Bush did, so O'Reilly claims that is a weakness. When in fact it is smart, why make them more mad, that would lead to more terrorism if we do not need to.

Then Juan Williams and Mary Katharine Ham weighed in on the Netanyahu invitation.

Williams said this: "I think this is politically offensive, because it makes it appear that the American people have a politically-driven foreign policy. It used to be that these kinds of disputes stopped at the ocean's edge, but not in this case. Also, I think it's making Obama into the victim here."

And of course the Republican Ham agreed with O'Reilly and insisted that the invitation is entirely appropriate, saying this: "John Boehner told the White House about this and I am not sure what the president expects. He has systematically undermined his relationship with Congress, he has systematically undermined his relationship with Israel, and yet he expects everything to go swimmingly in a situation like this."

Note from Steve: Earth to O'Reilly and Ham, this has never been done before in the history of America, and according to Press Secretary Josh Earnest, such an invitation would be a breach of diplomatic protocol between world leaders. Typically, the foreign world leader must initiate contact with the White House if he wants to visit the United States. It was wrong, and only Republican stooges are defending it.

Then O'Reilly had Melissa Francis on for a new segment called "Did You Know That?" O'Dummy spoke with Fox Business anchor Melissa Francis about her unusual childhood, which included a starring role on the hit show "Little House on the Prairie."

Francis said this: "I had the Hollywood version of a 'tiger mom,' who pushed me relentlessly in everything I did. But I loved acting as a kid and Michael Landon was phenomenal, he was like Santa Claus and God rolled into one. I went to a regular school and I had straight As all the way along. And then, after Harvard, I started as an intern at a local TV station in Los Angeles. A station in New Hampshire gave me a shot, but I bombed and got fired. So I picked myself up and kept going, and now I have my dream job."

Note from Steve: How the hell this is news is beyond me, and I will never report on this waste of time segment again.

Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about the New York State, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who has been charged in a corruption case.

Kelly said this: "They claim he was taking bribes and kickbacks to the tune of $4 million. In one example, he had a relationship with a doctor who referred asbestos cases to a law firm that Sheldon Silver happened to be a partner at. He never had to show up for work, but the law firm allegedly gave Silver millions of dollars. In return, Silver gave the doctor a state grant for research."

O'Reilly said that Sheldon Silver, whether or not he is guilty as charged, has done great harm to the citizens of New York, saying this: "He single-handedly stopped 'Jessica's Law' from being passed in New York, he stopped education reform because he's in the pocket of the teachers union, and he basically makes all the decisions in one of the most corrupt states in the union."

Then the lame Jesse Watters was on, he headed west to Colorado and the X-Games, where competitors engage in dangerous skiing and snowboarding competitions. He asked some spectators a few simple questions about U.S. history and geography. While most of them actually knew George Washington was our first president, only a few could identify our enemies in World War II, the general location of the Atlantic Ocean, or the name of our national anthem.

Back in the studio, Watters summarized his extreme adventure, saying this: "I know for a fact that one guy was stoned, but that's about it. I just go for how people look - I see people and I ask them a few questions."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Beware the Blogs. Billy said this: "A blogger paid by the Boston Globe made outrageous and untrue claims about The Factor. The Globe has issued a correction, but there's way too many falsehoods on the Internet."

Note from Steve: And I would say beware of the cable tv news hosts, especially the ones who work for Fox. Because they are partisan hacks who lie to the people on every show, and do it on television. O'Reilly lies every night and never issues any corrections, because according to him he has never been wrong about anything, which is just laughable.

Bill Maher Calls American Sniper Pro Iraq-War Propaganda
By: Steve - January 27, 2015 - 10:00am

Bill Maher ripped the lid off of the right's martyrdom of Chris Kyle by calling Kyle a psychopathic patriot and suggesting that the film was pro-war propaganda:
MAHER: Somehow their Twitter war broke out and now we have to take sides whether the American sniper is a real hero or not. Now, I said last week we had Kathryn Bigelow on who made Hurt Locker, and I said it kind of goes over a lot of the same territory. Hurt Locker made seventeen million because it was a little ambiguous and thoughtful, and this one is just American hero.

He's a psychopath patriot and we love him.

You know, I read some of the quotes from the real Chris Kyle. He said, "I hate the damn savages (talking about the Iraqis) and I've been fighting and I always will. I love killing bad guys. Even with the pain, I loved what I was doing. Maybe war isn't very fun, but I certainly was enjoying it."

Um, I don't, Eisenhower once said, "I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can."

I just don't see this guy in the same league as Eisenhower, I'm sorry. And if you're a Christian, I know this is a Christian country. "I hate the damn savages. I don't give a f**k what happens to them. It doesn't seem like a Christian thing to say.
American Sniper is a right-wing propaganda film that implies that Iraq was responsible for 9/11. Chris Kyle is the perfect martyr for the right. Since he is dead, they have no worries about the real Kyle opening his mouth and destroying the pro-war mythology that they have created around him.

Some on the left have happily jumped in giving the right what they wanted by questioning Kyle's heroism, but Kyle is just a symbol of a deeper deception.

The problems with American Sniper are much deeper than whether or not Kyle was a hero. The problem is that the film serves as a facts optional right-wing justification for the Iraq war. I agree that the film is a dishonest whitewash of the Iraq War.

More people should be talking about the fact that Kyle was murdered by an Iraq war veteran who was suffering from PTSD.

The real story of the Iraq war isn't a Clint Eastwood directed testosterone filled flag waving piece of propaganda. The true story is that veterans of the war that American Sniper glorifies are taking their own lives every day.

How Chris Kyle died undermines the "killing bad guys" propaganda that he embraced in life.

Bill Maher said there is something psychopathic about a person who professes a love for killing, but there was something even more psychopathic about the Bush administration. It was the Bush White House who took advantage of the fears of the nation that they had a sworn oath to the lead by lying the populace into an unrelated war.

Basically, American Sniper is another attempt by O'Reilly and his friends on the right to rewrite history and justify their failed war.

And one more thing, O'Reilly and the right cry on and on about Obama and liberals doing things that divide the nation, then they use the American Sniper movie and the dead Chris Kyle to divide the nation, when they do not need to do it. So they are hypocrites when they complain about the left doing things to divide the country, because they do the very same thing, and do it all the time.

Why dont we just let each person watch the movie and form their own opinion about it, and stop using the movie to divide the country for political gains.

Hey O'Reilly: If America Is Center-Right How Do You Explain This
By: Steve - January 26, 2015 - 11:00am

Bill O'Reilly tells us almost every day that America is a center-right country and the majority of Americans agree with him on most issues and want Republicans to run everything. But if that is true how the hell did Obama get to be the President for 8 years, and how the hell is Hillary Clinton crushing all the possible Republicans that could run against her for President.

O'Reilly never talks about this, because it destroys his propaganda that America is a center-right country, and the truth is that America is a center-left country. The reason the left does not win more elections is because of the money Republicans have, and gerrymandering. They basically rig congressional district maps so Republicans win, because Democrats always get more overall votes in the country, while losing elections because of gerrymandering.

A Washington Post/ABC News poll released on Thursday shows Hillary Clinton crushing the entire GOP field. The poll, drawn from a representative sample of 843 registered voters, finds Clinton leading five prominent Republicans by double digits.

The survey found Clinton with the largest lead over Mike Huckabee. She leads the former Arkansas Governor, turned pop music critic, by an immense 56-39 margin. She posts a similarly large lead (55-40) over 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney. Rand Paul, Chris Christie and Jeb Bush are just slightly more competitive than Romney and Huckabee. Rand Paul and Jeb Bush each trail Clinton 54-41, while Chris Christie is down 53-40.

Women voters give Clinton a 20-point margin or greater, against each of the Republican candidates. Male voters also prefer Clinton, but by a considerably smaller gap. Clinton also performs exceptionally well with minorities, young people, and low-income voters.

Many GOP hopefuls will be spending their Saturday afternoon courting House Republican extremist Steve King at his Iowa Freedom Summit. While this may improve their visibility with socially conservative Iowans who dominate GOP caucus events, it is not likely to help them achieve the mainstream appeal needed to defeat a formidable candidate like Hillary Clinton in a general election.

If Clinton were to maintain her double-digit lead, she would be in position to win in the largest presidential landslide since Republican Ronald Reagan's 1984 drubbing of Democratic nominee Walter Mondale. A double-digit popular vote advantage would project out to approximately 400 electoral votes, potentially putting a number of reliably red states into play. For example, Arizona, Georgia, and Missouri would become clear pickup opportunities in such a blowout.

In other words, Republicans are out of touch with mainstream America, and all their candidates are to the extreme, so they lose in the polls to Hillary Clinton. They do not run moderate candidates, because the far-right base would revolt. And that is why they will lose another presidential election in 2016, and we will have our first woman President.

As the 2016 election draws nearer, Republicans, with help from talk radio and FOX News, will do everything they can to smear Clinton if she is the Democratic nominee. Her popularity would probably drop some in the midst of a polarized political campaign.

However, she currently is in an unusually strong position to become the Democratic nominee, and to convincingly defeat whichever Republican candidate is chosen to run against her.

How The Government Helps The 1 Percent More Than The 99 Percent
By: Steve - January 25, 2015 - 11:00am

Here are some facts about the Government and the 1 percent, you will never hear about any of this from O'Reilly, because he is a Republican and part of the 1 percent.

Written by E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post
Posted Jan. 21, 2015 @ 4:39 pm

You may think that government takes a lot of money from the wealthy and gives it to poor people. You might also assume that the rich pay a lot to support government while the poor pay a pittance.

There is nothing wrong with you if you believe this. Our public discourse is dominated by these ideas, and you’d probably feel foolish challenging them. After Mitt Romney's comments on the 47 percent blew up on him, conservatives have largely given up talking publicly about their "makers versus takers" distinction. But much of the right's rhetoric and many of its policies are still based on such notions.

It is thus a public service that the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy (ITEP) has issued a report showing that at the state and local level, government is, indeed, engaged in redistribution -- but it's redistribution from the poor and the middle class to the wealthy.

It's entirely true that better-off people pay more in federal income taxes than the less well-to-do. But this leaves out not only Social Security taxes, but also what's going on elsewhere.

The institute found that in 2015, the poorest fifth of Americans will pay, on average, 10.9 percent of their incomes in state and local taxes and the middle fifth will pay 9.4 percent. But the top 1 percent will pay states and localities only 5.4 percent of their incomes in taxes.

When you think about it, such figures should not come as a surprise. Most state and local governments rely on regressive taxes -- particularly sales and excise levies. Poor and middle-class people pay more simply because they have to spend the bulk of their incomes just to cover their costs.

This gets to something else we don't discuss much: Public policies in most other well-to-do countries push much harder against inequality than ours do. According to the Luxembourg Income Study (LIS), the United States ranks 10th in income inequality before taxes and government transfers. By this measure, Ireland and Britain, and even Sweden and Norway, are more unequal than we are.

But after government transfers are taken into account, the good old USA soars to first in inequality. Norway drops to sixth place and Sweden to 13th.

It's not a matter about which we should be proud to shout, "We're No. 1!"

Actually, things may be a bit worse for us even on pre-transfer incomes, said LIS Director Janet Gornick, because people in the other rich countries tend to draw their pensions earlier.

The overall story is that we are not very aggressive in spreading the wealth around. "Our inequality is already high because of the low minimum wage, the weakness of unions and very high levels of private-sector compensation at the top," Gornick, a professor at the Graduate Center of City University of New York, said in a telephone interview from Luxembourg. "But on top of that, we are redistributing less than other countries and also have lower taxes on the highest incomes, particularly income from capital."

And at the state and local level, our governments are exacerbating inequality. The ITEP study concludes that "every single state and local tax system is regressive and even the states that do better than others have much room for improvement." The five states with the most regressive systems are Washington, Florida, Texas, South Dakota and Illinois.

On its face, the property tax would seem progressive, because big houses are taxed more. But the study finds that on average, "poor homeowners and renters pay more of their incomes in property taxes than do any other income group -- and the wealthiest taxpayers pay the least."

There is also an unanticipated consequence of growing economic disparities: Because states and localities tax the wealthy less, "rising income inequality can make it more difficult for state tax systems to pay for needed services over time. The more income that goes to the wealthy, the slower a state's revenue grows."

Political debates are typically driven by cliches, but at the very least, we can expect our cliches to be true. We need to stop claiming that we have a massively redistributive government. We need to stop pretending that poor people are "takers" when they in fact kick in a lot to the common pot. And we need to replace arguments about big and small government with a debate over what governments at all levels are doing to make our society more just -- or less.

The Friday 1-23-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 24, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: How the Internet is deceiving you. The biased and dishonest Republican Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The movie American Sniper is favorable to the U.S. military. Clint Eastwood's film makes a sharp distinction between the evil of the terrorists in Iraq and the nobility of U.S. sniper Chris Kyle. Because of that, the far left is going nuts, launching hateful attacks on the film and Mr. Kyle. And most of the libel is found on the Internet.

Amanda Taub writes for a website called Vox.com and may even be a terrorist sympathizer. After Taliban savages murdered 132 school children in Pakistan, Ms. Taub tried to explain why the Taliban did it, providing a rationale for slaughtering 132 innocent children! Her article about American Sniper was posted on a number of Internet providers, including Yahoo.

Those providers do not tell the reader who Ms. Taub is or the quality of the organization she works for, they just post her disgusting stuff without any context. Here's what Taub said about the movie: 'While it's never great to see a movie falsify a true story, American Sniper's disdainful attitude towards the truth is especially disingenuous.'

Taub's view is preposterous; she portrays the enemy in Iraq as victims of American aggression. The chief danger here is not from a propagandist like Amanda Taub, it's the Internet climate. Americans are often presented information that is false, libelous, and distorted. There are no journalistic standards on the Internet, few websites even have editors.

Unfortunately, many Americans believe what they read and therefore there is danger to the republic. If you know history, you know that dictators first control the press. The Nazis and the Communists put out a stream of dishonest garbage, brainwashing their population. To some extent that is now happening in free societies with the elevation of the 'net. It is flat-out dangerous.
Note from Steve: Bill O'Reilly is a biased lying fool. Because most internet websites report more honestly than the cable news networks, and Fox is the worst. Studies show that the viewers of Fox News and the Factor are the most uninformed in America, but somehow O'Reilly never mentions that, while saying you should not believe what you read on the internet.

Here is what you should do, read internet websites and watch cable tv news shows, then check other sources to see if they are accurate, I would bet you will find the internet websites put out more truth than the cable news networks, especially Fox. I catch O'Reilly in 3 to 4 lies a night, while most internet people are honest most of the time and try to inform the people with the truth. O'Reilly and the stooges at Fox are paid partisan right-wing liars, and that is a fact.

Then Democratic strategist Nomiki Konst and former blogger Matthew Duss were on to discuss the TPM.

Konst said this: "The Nazis had only two outlets, but today there are millions of ways to communicate messages. Ezra Klein was a Washington Post columnist and he is part of Vox Media - he is a real journalist who has editors working with him."

Duss said this: "I take issue with your description of her writing as 'propaganda.' She's a fine writer, Vox is a fine website, and we do need to understand what motivates these groups."

Then Geraldo was on to talk about efforts to obtain citizenship for Mohammad Gulab, the Muslim man who saved Marcus Luttrell from almost certain death in Afghanistan and whose heroics were portrayed in the movie "Lone Survivor."

Geraldo said this: "Luttrell was wounded and in critical condition, and were it not for Mohammad Gulab, Marcus Luttrell would have been killed or captured. Gulab has now applied for refugee status through the United Nations, but this is a process that has taken far too long."

O'Reilly said he would help Gulab become a full-fledged American citizen, saying this: "The State Department should get him in here on humanitarian grounds right away, you and I will work together on this."

Then the biased hack Lou Dobbs was on to explain the economics behind drastically lower gas prices.

Dobbs said this: "Economies are slowing down around the world, specifically in Europe and China. As a result, there is less demand for oil, and less demand means lower prices. And our production of oil on non-federal land is going through the roof. Fracking and drilling and refining more oil, all opposed by President Obama, are saving his hide."

Dobbs also said this: "This results in about $1,400 per household in extra disposable income. That is a big boost in purchasing power."

Note from Steve: This is just laughable, when gas was almost $4.00 a gallon O'Reilly and Dobbs slammed Obama for the high gas prices and blamed him, now that it is under $2.00 a gallon they are still slamming Obama, which is just ridiculous. Earth to Lou Dobbs, the President has nothing to do with gas prices, it is tied to the price of oil, the supply, and the world oil market, you biased idiot.

Then Heather Nauert was on for mad as hell, a total waste of time e-mail segment.

Pennsylvanian Loretta Yastrebov, is ticked off because politicians are calling for an increase in the federal gas tax. "Some members of Congress," Nauert reported, "want to raise the tax, which hasn't gone up since 1993. It's now at 8.4 cents per gallon and they say a higher tax will help fund our roads and bridges and infrastructure. But John Boehner says it won't happen."

Another viewer, Coloradan Ross Kaminsky, is peeved because The Factor has suggested raising the minimum wage. "3.3 million people in the United States get the federal minimum wage," Nauert said, "which has been $7.25 per hour since 2009. The Congressional Budget Office says 16.5-million people would get a pay raise as a result of raising the minimum wage."

Then Actor Dean Cain, one of Hollywood's few admitted conservatives, has called out Alec Baldwin, Seth Rogen, and others who have savaged "American Sniper" and Chris Kyle.

Cain said this: "Chris and I were on a TV show, and we trained together for about six weeks. We became very good friends, so my reaction was to defend a friend of mine. Chris was the epitome of an American hero and this movie shows the grittiness of war."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Quarterback Sneak? Billy said this: "New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady has always comported himself with dignity and apparent honesty, so it's only fair to give him the benefit of the doubt in the current pigskin controversy."

Mike Huckabee's PAC Paid His Family Almost $400,000
By: Steve - January 24, 2015 - 10:00am

And of course you never hear a word about this from O'Reilly, Rove, or anyone at Fox News, while they defend Huckabee from attacks by liberals and the media. Note to the Republican suckers who give people like Huckabee money for their campaigns, they are using that money to make their family richer, not for the campaigns, and you are fools to donate to their PAC's.

Politics is a family business for potential Republican presidential candidate and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee. Over the last six years, the Fox News host's political action committee, which was created to raise money for GOP candidates, has paid nearly $400,000 to members of Huckabee's extended family, while spending just a fraction of its multimillion-dollar fundraising haul on the Republican contenders.

Huck PAC, which Huckabee launched in 2008 after dropping out of the Republican presidential race, "is committed to electing conservatives across the nation at all levels of government," according to a statement on its website. But according to review of Federal Election Commission records, a significant portion of the money the PAC has collected has gone into the salaries of family members or the coffers of direct-mail fundraising firms.

Katherine Harris, Huckabee's niece, was paid $165,042 between 2008 and 2013 (plus benefits), first as a staffer for the PAC and then as a contract worker.

Sarah Huckabee, his daughter, received $104,308 between 2008 and 2010 as the PAC's executive director.

And Huckabee's daughter-in-law, Lauren Huckabee, who Politico reported in 2012 manages her father-in-law's schedule, donor relations, and endorsements, has been paid $111,274 for her work at Huck PAC. The ex-governor's short-lived non-profit, America Takes Action, Inc. previously paid her $60,548.

Listen up Republican suckers, people like Huckabee are taking you for a ride. They tell you to donate money to their PAC's to get more Republicans elected, then all the money goes to family members, or their friends at direct mail companies, and if you give any of these PAC's a dime you are a moron who deserves to be taken.

The Thursday 1-22-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 23, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Race and Corruption. The biased and dishonest Republican Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Reports out of Washington say that the Justice Department will not file civil rights charges in the Ferguson case, where 18-year-old Michael Brown was shot to death by police officer Darren Wilson, which led to rioting across the county. A grand jury declined to indict Officer Wilson and now Attorney General Holder is doing the same thing.

So what are we to think? Is Holder a racist? All of those people who committed crimes in the name of Michael Brown or judged Officer Wilson without the facts should be ashamed. But of course most of them are not. We are living in a nation that is essentially unfair, not because of income inequality or bias against skin color, but because we the people often form judgments based on nothing.

Talking Points said that you can't convict a fellow American of anything unless you know the facts. And now the facts have been established: no Justice Department civil rights action, no indictment by a grand jury. The charlatan Al Sharpton led the effort to cripple the justice system and impose a vigilante verdict in the case, another terrible entry on Sharpton's resume.

Now let's turn to corruption. 70-year-old Sheldon Silver, the powerful Speaker of the New York State Assembly, is under arrest for corruption. Silver is a vile human being who single-handedly blocked Jessica's Law in New York and imposed a culture of corruption in the State Assembly. Attorney General Eric Holder is to be commended for allowing the U.S. Attorney to pursue Silver.

Talking Points predicts he will be convicted because this man has done more to harm New York State than any other human being alive. Hey Shelly, it's karma. Get it.
Note from Steve: Bill O'Reilly is a biased idiot. The only reason charges were not filed is because they do not have the evidence to get a guilty conviction, and as O'Reilly knows, that does not mean someone is not guilty, it just means they can not prove he is guilty. The white cop still shot and killed an unarmed teen, and the prosecutor who put the case before the grand jury was biased and even allowed a person to testify for officer Wilson who lied. O'Reilly ignores all that and sticks his head in the ground to police abuse and racism.

Then two Fox News stooges were on to agree with O'Reilly. Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle put forth their opinions on the news that the Justice Department will not pursue criminal charges against Darren Wilson.

Wiehl said this: "There was no evidence. Eyewitnesses were all over the place, but three forensic accounts were all consistent with the officer shooting in self-defense."

Guilfoyle said this: "They had access to all of the state's investigation and witness files, and they also ran their own concurrent investigation. But they came to the same conclusion that the grand jury did."

Then attorney Jacques Degraff and radio talk show host Richard Fowler were on to discuss it.

Degraff said this: "The prosecutor in Ferguson failed to do his job. I accept the decision of the federal government, but I am a black American who has experienced the disparities. There is injustice, and not just in Ferguson."

Fowler agreed with Degraff's conclusion that an injustice was perpetrated in Missouri, saying this: "The federal investigation was about whether or not Darren Wilson violated Michael Brown's civil rights. The government is indicating that Brown's civil rights weren't violated, but does that mean Darren Wilson didn't profile Michael Brown? Of course it doesn't. People are protesting because innocent and unarmed black men have been killed by police."

Then Ed Henry was on to talk about the Obama administration no longer referring to the Islamic State as ISIL or ISIS, but is instead using the word "Daesh." With no Democratic guest on for balance.

Henry said this: "Daesh is the original Arabic version, and it is considered an insult to the Islamic State terrorists. So Secretary of State Kerry thinks words will hurt them. The language game that has been going on - ISIL, ISIS, and Daesh - is similar to the game we've seen about whether or not to call it 'Islamic extremism.' The bigger deal is that ISIS hasn't been pushed back, and Al Qaeda, which was 'on the run,' wasn't even mentioned in the State of the Union. Look what's happening in Yemen. The president called it a success, but now Yemen has gone to pieces."

Note from Steve: Henry is lying, reports out today say that ISIS has been badly hurt. Here are some partial quotes from the report out yesterday:

1-22-15 -- According to The Fiscal Times, "Over the last 24 hours, ISIS has been defeated in every front in Iraq in unprecedented way. From Mosul to the north to Anbar to the west and Diyala to the east, Iraqi government forces, Shiite militias, Sunni tribes and Kurdish forces were all victorious in battle. Since the start of the U.S.-led air campaign, ISIS has lost its momentum in Iraq and lost some of the cities and towns that it captured in June 2014."

Sec. of State John Kerry said today that thousands of ISIS fighters have been killed, "Two days after President Obama told Congress that Islamic State's advances in Syria and Iraq were being halted, Secretary of State John Kerry offered specifics Thursday, saying thousands of the fighters had been killed and 270 square miles recaptured in Iraq."

Then Liberal Jennice Fuentes and conservative Andrea Tantaros looked ahead to 2016 and the race for the presidency.

Tantaros said this: "Hillary Clinton is doing well in polls against Republicans, and when you look at her potential threats from the left - Elizabeth Warren or Joe Biden - she crushes them. She's stomping everybody, which is amazing after her disastrous book tour. But she's formidable only until she opens her mouth again - silence is the best thing going for her."

Fuentes portrayed Hillary Clinton as nearly unbeatable, saying this: "She is the former First Lady, former Senator, former Secretary of State. Everyone was thinking that she could be defeated, that she is too old, but she is a colossal candidate."

But of course O'Reilly slammed Hillary Clinton for avoiding comment on the Keystone Pipeline and other contentious issues, saying this: "A true leader doesn't weasel around. When you're asked a simple question, give your opinion."

Note from Steve: Polls show Hillary crushing every Republican that could possibly run against her, and O'Reilly and Tantaros hate Hillary so they are biased against her.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Hillary Clinton mocking Vladimir Putin. Billy said this: "Hillary Clinton, generally considered a very staid and stolid person, has been trying to display some humor of late. And, yes, sometimes it's a very good idea to counter your image."

Note from Steve: Earth to Bill O'Reilly, that is not a tip, it's just you reporting on something Hillary Clinton did, give out real unbiased tips or dump the whole stupid segment.

O'Reilly Downplays Impact Of Minimum Wage Increase For Low-Income Workers
By: Steve - January 23, 2015 - 10:00am

And think about this, O'Reilly claims to support raising the minimum wage, then he slams the people who get minimum wage and says it would not do any good or help the economy, when the facts show it would and that he is dead wrong.

And btw, it sure would help the millions of people making $7.25 an hour and it would instantly be a stimulus for the economy, so O'Reilly and Shawn were lying.

Wednesday night Bill O'Reilly downplayed the impact of raising the minimum wage, in a one sided right-wing biased segment O'Reilly claimed that only an"infinitesimal" number of people would be impacted, and ignoring the 27.8 million Americans that would benefit from a raise in the minimum wage.

During the January 20th State of the Union address, President Obama urged members of Congress to raise the minimum wage, saying those "who still refuse to raise the minimum wage, I say this: If you truly believe you could work full-time and support a family on less than $15,000 a year, go try it. If not, vote to give millions of the hardest working people in America a raise."

On the January 21st The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly and network contributor Eric Shawn undermined President Obama's minimum wage initiative, and diminished the number of Americans that would be impacted by raising the minimum wage.

O'Reilly asserted that only "a very low number" of people make "minimum wage anyways," claiming that the number of people who would be impacted by the change would be "infinitesimal" and saying Obama has been "misleading everybody" by insisting a raise would have a big effect.

It would surely have a big effect on the 28 million people who would get a $2 an hour raise, you idiot, and raising the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour by 2016 would "raise the wages of 27.8 million workers, who would receive about $35 billion in additional wages over the phase-in period."

And according to a Congressional Budget Office report, the "ripple effect" of raising the minimum wage would benefit 16.5 million workers, and would lift nearly one million people out of poverty.

The Wednesday 1-21-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 22, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The World According to President Obama. The biased and dishonest right-wing hack Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Some people were upset by the State of the Union address, believing that Barack Obama is not doing the right thing for the country. But to me the president is consistent, his liberal view of the world was on full display. He believes the federal government should give stuff to people who don't have much and take stuff from the affluent and businesses. That is the core liberal tenet and it will never change.

Also, it is clear the president does not want to confront Islamic terrorism in a major way. He only devoted two minutes to it, and he once again talked about terrorists, not Islamic terrorists. He said, 'We are leading a broad coalition, including Arab nations.' Arab nations? Give us a break! Just five of them are opposing ISIS in a meaningful way and the Obama administration has no strategy to defeat the jihad. This is dangerous and it's only a matter of time until we get hit.

On the home front, the reason Barack Obama remains fairly popular is that many Americans feel they are not treated fairly. Minority communities believe that and some white Americans are frustrated as well. Wages have fallen significantly during President Obama's tenure. He will tell you it's because he inherited a terrible recession, but the wage situation is due to high tech in the marketplace, where machines replace people, and the high cost of doing business in the USA.

Obamacare has constricted hiring, regulations make it difficult for businesses to start, and high taxation drains profit. The result: fewer good jobs and plenty of applicants to fill them, which means lower salaries. The president's entitlement jihad cannot replace upward mobility created by private sector jobs. Bottom line: it's easy to give a speech saying things are great, all presidents do that. The truth is we are not defeating the Islamic jihad and America is not creating enough good paying jobs to drive wages higher.
Note from Steve: That is all right-wing talking points propaganda, that O'Reilly claims he never uses, even though it is almost word for word what the RNC statements say about Obama. It's all lies to make Obama look bad, they deny reality and lie about the actual state of the union, that is very good now. And O'Reilly said some people, but the only people who were upset at Obama and his speech are partisan right-wingers who hate that he told the truth.

Then the former Obama adviser Austan Goolsbee was on, he said this: "There has been a 15-year trend in declining wages, and I don't think that argues against making investments in education and what you call the 'entitlement jihad.' The president agrees that we should cut the corporate tax rate and broaden the base. We have the highest corporate rate, but companies actually pay less than the global average."

Goolsbee also defended the president's anti-terror policies, saying this: "I disagree that there is no strategy. There is a massive rift within Islam and we have to get Muslims to recognize that their own people are getting killed, we have to incorporate them into this fight. What's the alternative, to put U.S. ground troops over there? That's a strategy to make us targets, not to get us out of there."

Then the far-right Laura Ingraham was on to talk about the Obama speech, who of course hates Obama and no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Ingraham said this: "We pay for pre-K, and for breakfast, lunch, and dinner for some kids. Now they want to go all the way through community college. I don't think it's about education, I think the goal for Obama is to re-make America and to amass more control in Washington."

O'Reilly then claimed that "free" community college is actually counterproductive, saying this: "The tuition is rock bottom. I worked my butt off painting houses to get through college. You achieve and you earn and you pay your way through."

Note from Steve: Ingraham and O'Reilly are idiots. People who are poor should get a free education if they want it, case closed. Then they would be on a level playing field with the wealthy kids who get to go to college. What O'Reilly is saying is he had to work to pay to get into college, so everyone else should too. Even though that is a partial lie, because his wealthy Father paid for most of his education, and his sister, which included private schools and schooling in England.

Then the far-right Ian Tuttle was on to talk about Clint Eastwood's movie "American Sniper" that has been attacked by many on the left, who are upset because it glorifies the late Navy SEAL Chris Kyle.

Tuttle said this: "Most of the criticism leveled against the movie is aimed at Chris Kyle. The worst offender is probably Max Blumenthal of the left-wing blog Alternet. He called Kyle an 'occupier' who mowed down faceless Iraqis and he compared Kyle to one of the snipers who terrorized Washington, DC. Blumenthal, Michael Moore and others represent a viewpoint that seems to be gaining traction on the left."

O'Reilly maintained that Kyle was a genuine hero, saying this: "He was shooting Iraqi terrorists and I would have shot them too. People who see this movie like it and they admire Chris Kyle."

Note from Steve: I am the left, and I do not hate Kyle, I think he is a great American who did his job and served the country well. So if some on the left do not like him or the movie, I am not part of that crowd. I think snipers are great Americans, and they do their job.

Then Eric Shawn & Molly Line were on to discuss the State of the Union speech, with no Democratic guests for balance. President Obama argued for a hike in the minimum wage, saying it's impossible to raise a family on a minimum wage salary.

Shawn said this: "You can't raise a family on $15,000 a year, but the fact is that most people earning the minimum are young people between 16 and 24 years old. And of the 3.3 million people earning minimum wage, 66.8% are not married, so we're not talking about millions of people."

Note from Steve: That is total spin, because even a single person can not get by on $15,000 a year, unless you live in a slum or a cardboard box. Basically Shawn is a right-wing idiot who put his spin on it.

Line then scrutinized the president's boast about lower gas prices, saying this: "The statement he's making is actually true, and the biggest driver is that crude oil prices have fallen. The question is whether the president can take credit for this. U.S. crude production on non-federal lands has increased by 61%, while crude oil production on federal land has actually declined."

Note from Steve: Which is just laughable, because when gas was almost $4 a gallon the Republicans blamed Obama, but now that gas is under $2 a gallon they say Obama has nothing to do with gas prices. They are two-faced propaganda frauds.

Then Martha MacCallum was on for did you see that, she reported on an incredible piece of video shot by a man whose car was stalled on the New Jersey Turnpike during an ice storm. He turned around and shot footage of a skidding tractor trailer that came within a few feet of smashing into his car.

"That guy thought he was about to meet his maker," MacCallum said. "There was a quarter-inch of ice all over this whole section of New Jersey and there were 428 accidents. Miraculously, no one was injured in this accident, these guys were very lucky."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day that was once again not a tip, just O'Reilly telling us what a great journalist he is, based on a survey from the biased conservative website Newsmax, that is not a scientific poll and basically worthless.

O'Reilly Caught Lying About His Role In The No-Go Zones Propaganda
By: Steve - January 22, 2015 - 10:00am

Bill O'Reilly falsely claimed that he had no role in hyping the myth that Muslim "no-go zones" exist throughout France, just days after Fox News apologized for spreading the lie.

In fact, O'Reilly previously cited the so called "no-go zones" as one of the contributing causes of the Paris terror attacks.

On January 17th, Fox correspondent Julie Banderas apologized for the network's coverage "regarding the Muslim population in Europe" in the days following the terrorist attacks in Paris, explaining that there is no credible evidence to support the existence of Muslim "no-go zones."

Several other Fox hosts offered additional apologies throughout the day.

On the January 20th O'Reilly Factor, during a discussion about the Parisian mayor Anne Hildalgo's announcement that she intends to sue Fox News for its "prejudiced" coverage following the attacks, O'Reilly denied that the Fox apology was about the Muslim "no-go zone" myth in France.

He insisted that it was only about Steve Emerson's ludicrous claim that the entire English city of Birmingham was Muslim-only and nobody else went to the city. O'Reilly also denied that he had anything to do with the "no-go zones" claim:
O'REILLY: All right, we got a minute. The mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, said she's going to sue Fox News for reporting on so-called no-go zones in Paris. They're dominated by Muslims and police hesitate to go in there -- at least that has been the reportage in some places. I didn't have anything to do with this. But I will point out that the mayor is a socialist.
Which is total spin, because to begin with the idiot guest on Fox said the no-go zones were 100% muslim, he did not say they were dominated by Muslims, so O'Reilly lied about that. And the fact that the Mayor is a socialist (if it is true) has nothing to do with the issue. So O'Reilly throws that out there for no reason, except to distract people from the real issue, that a guest on Fox lied and than later admitted he lied, and then Fox did an apology.

O'Reilly claimed he had nothing to do with any of it, which is also a lie, because on January 9th, O'Reilly cited Muslim "no-go zones" in France as a cause behind the terror attacks in Paris.

Here is the exact quote:
O'REILLY: France brought a lot of this terrorism on itself. We just talked about the no-go zones that they allow. They allow, 10 percent of the population is Muslim. They are all in there, they're radicalized, they don't assimilate.
The actual truth is this: O'Reilly and Fox tell so many lies about Muslims they can not keep them all straight. Then he wonders why the Muslims banned Jesse Watters from their meeting, give me a break. Not to mention the simple fact that they have no-go zones does not mean they brought the terrorism on itself, that is just ridiculous.

The Tuesday 1-20-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 21, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Fighting Terrorism. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: We believe the Obama administration does not have an overall strategy to defeat the jihad, and things are getting worse overseas. In addition to the Paris massacre, reports are that ISIS executed 13 young boys for watching a soccer game. Also, ISIS apparently threw two men suspected of homosexuality off a building and is threatening two Japanese hostages with death.

The jihadists continue to wreak havoc all over the world and there is no coordinated strategy to stop them. In fact, President Obama will not even use the words Islamic terrorism. Talking Points believes there is a fundamental misreading of Islam throughout the world. Some Americans think all Muslims support violence because the Koran justifies it. That's false. Most Muslims are not violent people. But there is a strain of Islam that is destructive and it's not just a few terrorists.

It's millions of Muslims who follow the teachings of extremist clerics, including the Mullahs who rule Iran. Irrational violence is plaguing the entire Islamic community. If every good Muslim united against the bad Muslims, this problem would be solved, but that's not happening. So it is left to non-believers to confront and defeat the jihad. The leader of the effort should be President Obama, but the president is not leading.

The American people know this and 76% of them rate terrorism as the number one problem facing America. Talking Points does not expect clarity or new solutions to this vexing problem. This has been a 14-year horror odyssey. We have spent trillions, lost thousands of military people, and still the terrorists reign.

It is apparent that if the Muslim world does not confront the savagery, it will continue. President Obama is looking away from the issue, but even President Bush, who sought to confront it, could not defeat it. The next president of the United States will inherit a problem of monumental proportions. It is about Islam because that's where the solution lies.
Note from Steve: Earth to Bill O'Reilly, you are an idiot. You can not defeat terrorism, it is impossible. All you can do is try to stop it before it happens, and try to deal with it after it happens, case closed moron.

So what does O'Reilly do then, have two terrorism experts on to discuss it, of course not, he had two Fox News hacks on to discuss it. Kirsten Powers and Monica Crowley were on to say how they would fight ISIS and other Islamic extremists.

Crowley said this: "This is a complicated war, but I do know that we have been fighting this in a very half-assed way. The military component is not sufficient, what is missing is the ideological component - we have not been honest about the nature of this threat. Do most Muslims act out violently? No, but we're talking about something that goes to the heart of the Koran and the heart of the faith. The burden should be on the Muslim world to clean up its own house."

Powers said this: "Most of the victims of these radical Islamists are Muslims, so the idea that most Muslims endorse this is completely wrong. Should there be a mass demonstration about the fact that they're being murdered? They're too busy fighting for their lives, they're being murdered! You love blowing up people with drones, but that creates more terrorists."

Note from Steve: This is why Muslims hate O'Reilly, Fox, and Republicans. Because they lie to you, there are billions of Muslims and only a few thousand are involved in terrorism. Which does not mean most Muslims support terrorism, or that they do not speak out against it, or that if they did it would end terrorism, that is ridiculous.

Powers was right about one thing, you can not stop it by killing more of them as O'Reilly claims, for every terrorist you kill 10 new terrorists replace them. People who say we just need to kill more of them, as O'Reilly does, are idiots who have no clue what they are talking about.

Then the Republican Senator Marco Rubio was on to talk about the Obama stste of the union speech, and of course as usual no Democratic guest was on to discuss it.

Rubio said this: "You can't be prosperous unless you're safe, and one of the problems I have with this administration is that they think that radical jihadists are just unhappy because we did something. They don't understand the nature of jihadists, who want the whole world to be under the flag of radical Islam. That's what we're at war against. Radical Islam's goal is that everyone has to be a Muslim someday, and they are willing to kill to make that happen!"

Rubio also disputed President Obama's claim that the economy has turned a corner, saying this: "People are stuck between low wages and high prices, and the American dream is slipping out of reach for them. We have to win the global competition for investment and innovation, we have to give people 21st century skills, we have to have a pro-family tax code, and we have to repeal and replace ObamaCare."

Note from Steve: Rubio is a biased and clueless right-wing idiot. The economy has turned a corner, and it turned that corner a long time ago. The Republicans just can not admit it because then they would have to admit the Obama economic policies are working, which they will never do, and that includes the biased right-winger Bill O'Reilly who also will not admit the economy is doing great, even though it's 100% true.

Then John Stossel was on with his take on the state of the union, and of course no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Stossel said this: "What's this talk about raising taxes, when we're already spending $3.5-trillion. We have a spending problem, not a taxing problem. President Obama always offers 'free stuff' such as free college, free 'Obama phones,' and free time off from your work. Let workers and employers make their own decisions, the market sorts this stuff out. It's free people, not government, that make our lives better."

Note from Steve: Stossel is a biased idiot. Obama is going to lower taxes for the vast majority of Americans, only the very wealthy would have their taxes raised, and it would also close some corporate tax loopholes. Proving that Stossel is a biased fool. And O'Reilly is just as bad because he lets Stossel spin out these lies.

Then Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about liberals and Beyonce, and no Democratic guest was on for balance.

O'Reilly and Goldberg cried that some liberal bloggers got in a snit this week when Republican Mike Huckabee criticized the singer Beyonce. O'Reilly asked Bernie Goldberg why many media types are so defensive of the hyper-sexualized songbird. Without reporting the fact that the hypocrite Huckabee also slammed Obama for letting his kids listen to Beyonce songs, while praising the a-hole Ted Nugent who has songs about having sex with underage girls.

Goldberg said this: "Let's acknowledge that social conservatives have a history of sometimes going overboard and being too prudish, but now we have Beyonce, who influences young girls. When she sings, 'He Monica Lewinsky-d All Over My Gown,' liberals ought to care if 10-year-olds hear that. Young girls are not adult women, but liberals would rather drink Drano and walk on broken glass than come off as un-cool or square or prudish, especially when it's about sex. So they won't align themselves with social conservatives, even when conservatives have a legitimate point. The fact that Beyonce is black is also relevant because liberals see themselves as the protectors of black people."

Note from Steve: That is nonsense, for one thing it is a free country and singers are free to say whatever they want in a song, and the people have the choice to buy it or not, or listen to it, nobody makes them buy it or listen to it, O'Reilly, Huckabee, and Goldberg do not seem to understand that. If you do not like it, do not listen to it, just ignore it and mind your own business.

Who are you to tell someone else what music they can listen to, it's ridiculous. And liberals do not protect Beyonce because she is black, that is racist right-wing garbage. They defend her because she has free speech and she has a right to put out whatever kind of music she wants to, without a bunch of right-wing a-holes trying to tell her what to do, or tell the Obama's what music they can let their kids listen to, it is none of their business and a ridiculous topic to cover on a so-called news show.

With "American Sniper" breaking box office records, O'Reilly then re-aired portions of a 2012 interview with Chris Kyle, the subject of the movie. Which I will not report on because it is a re-run. And the show ended for the Obama state of the union speech.

Jon Stewart Totally Exposes Huckabee's Beyonce Criticism Hypocrisy
By: Steve - January 21, 2015 - 10:00am

During Monday night's The Daily Show, host Jon Stewart tore into former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee over his criticism of singer Beyonce.

Recently, the ex-Fox News host had made waves over a chapter in his recently released book, where he targeted the pop singer for her sexualized performances and the influence she has on children and young adults.

Bill O'Reilly also does the same thing, he slams Beyonce for her sexual music but praises Ted Nugent, because he agrees with him politically. It's all about politics, if Beyonce was a conservative neither Huckabee or O'Reilly would slam her.

Huckabee also called her husband, Jay-Z, "a pimp" for objectifying her sexually.

In the interview, which was edited for broadcast but posted in its entirety on the show's website, Stewart took Huckabee to school, pointing out his hypocrisy due to his own close friendship with has-been rocker Ted Nugent. After Huckabee had made a ridiculous statement regarding 12-year-olds and stripper poles in relation to Beyonce, Stewart told him that "was truly outrageous" and decided to roast Huckabee then and there.

Stewart aired a clip from Huckabee's Fox show where the ex-governor was playing bass guitar during a live performance with Ted Nugent. The song they played was "Cat Scratch Fever," and the clip focused on the lurid lyrics, specifically "I can make that pussy purr with the stroke of my hand."

After the video, Huckabee tried to defend his obvious hypocrisy and differentiate the content of Nugent's songs with the "crudeness" of today's music.

Nugent also has a song called wang dang sweet poon tang, among others like that. In fact, in the case of Nugent, he sees child sexual abuse as some sort of eccentricity or harmless vice. Can you imagine anyone else who had been accused of having sex with a 12-year-old, written a song about raping a 13-year-old and adopted a 17-year-old so that he could have sex with her going on to campaign alongside all the most conservative "family values" candidates?

When Ted Nugent was 32 years old, he released the song "Jailbait." Here's a taste of the lyrics (written by him):

Well, I don't care if you're just 13
You look too good to be true
I just know that you're probably clean...
Jailbait you look fine, fine, fine...
It's quite alright, I asked your mama
Wait a minute, officer
Don't put those handcuffs on me
Put them on her, and I'll share her with you

Two years before recording "Jailbait," Ted Nugent had the novel idea of becoming legal guardian to a 17-year-old girl, so that they could have sex without, you know, her parents having legal recourse. They acquiesced. "I guess they figured better Ted Nugent than some drug-infested punk in high school," he told VH1, years later. In the same documentary, he claimed to have had several relationships with young girls, and seems to brag about gaining their parents' approval, too.

Basically Huckabee's defense amounted to claiming Nugent's songs were made for adults and they were not nominated for a Grammy, unlike Beyonce's music today.

The Daily Show host wasn't having any of it. He pointed out that Huckabee is fine with Nugent's sex-obsessed music because he agrees with him politically and "with his stance on firearms."

Stewart also told Huckabee he is just put off by Beyonce "because she is a liberal who seems alien to you."

Huckabee is a total far-right hypocrite who is a biased fool and will never be President, he is most likely running for President to get more famous and to get more money for speaking fees.

The Monday 1-19-15 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - January 20, 2015 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama and the Real State of the Union. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The president gives his State of the Union address Tuesday and is expected to ask for higher taxes on businesses and the affluent. He also may ask Republicans and some Democrats to back off on Iran, which is evolving into a very dangerous situation. Mr. Obama knows that Republicans will not accept a tax hike, but he doesn't care. He continues to play Robin Hood, taking from the rich and appropriating that money to the poor and working class.

His income re-distribution policies have stifled the economy and he needs to just stop. The situation is finally improving slightly, don't muck it up with social justice stuff. With about 35% of American homes getting some kind of welfare apart from Social Security and Medicare, critical mass has been reached. A culture of dependency is making America weaker, no question.

On the Iran front, the president is correct. Republicans and some Democrats want to re-impose economic sanctions against Iran, which would kick in if Iran doesn't make a nuke-weapons deal. But it's not necessary and might give Iran a bad-faith argument. The Mullahs could say they do not respond to threats. Let it play out. If a nuke deal does not get done, drastic sanctions are back big time.

Again, the world must know that America is the reasonable country here. That is very important. The State of the Union address is an evening of propaganda. The truth is the president's economic policies have not worked, America's stature overseas has fallen, and there is no effective plan to counter the jihad. That's the state of the union, the Talking Points edition.
Note from Steve: That is all nonsense, the state of the union is great, because of Obama, and his tax plan would be great for the economy. Remember folks that O'Reilly has been spewing this same right-wing propaganda out for 6 years and it has been proven to be all lies. The economy is doing great, gas prices are low, jobs are back, unemployment is down, and the stock market is at record highs, and O'Reilly ignores it all to claim the Obama policies are not working, reality check, they are, open your eyes.

Then the biased hack Charles Krauthammer was on, he said this: "You're right on taxes and wrong on Iran. Obama knows there is not a chance in hell of the taxes getting passed. He calls it 'tax reform,' but this is 'tax and spend' and he's doing it for one reason He's campaigning for his legacy, he wants to be the man who brought the Democratic Party back from being a party that was moderate and center-left. He wants to change America and he wants to change the party."

Turning to Iran, Krauthammer laid out his policy for dealing with the mullahs, saying this: "I don't want military action, but I do think our one chance to get a deal is by putting economic pressure on them. President Obama promised that if we didn't have an agreement without six months, he would re-impose sanctions, but he extended the deadline twice without imposing sanctions. Nobody thinks Obama will do it unless he is forced."

Note from Steve: Remember this, these are the same right-wing neocons that had it all wrong on Iraq, so now we are supposed to listen to them on Iran now, haha, not hardly. O'Reilly and Krauthammer have been wrong on everything, Iraq, taxes, the economy, economic policies, everything.

The Army has spent months preparing a report on Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the alleged deserter who was swapped for five terrorists. So O'Reilly had Mary K. Ham and Juan Williams on to talk about report.

Williams said this: "I love a conspiracy theory as much as you do, but it's not worth it to the Obama administration or the military to stonewall this. Whether Bergdahl was AWOL or a deserter, he was being held in a cage by the bad guys."

Ham said this: "The military was put in a bad position by the Obama administration's apparent inability to 'Google' Bowe Bergdahl before they made this swap. They did not anticipate the fallout and it is in their interest to slow-walk this."

O'Reilly urged the Army to finally release the report, saying this: "This was finished in October and now they're sitting on it. We want to know what the investigation says, but they won't put it out."

Then Karl Rove was on to cry about a New York Times columnist Gail Collins, who slammed former Texas Governor Rick Perry, who will probably run for the Republican presidential nomination.

Rove said this: "Gail Collins has an obsession with Texas, and she has a personal obsession with Perry. Texas has a phenomenal record in job creation, between 2007 and last year the state added 1,320,000 jobs."

O'Reilly agreed that some on the left want to stop Perry in his tracks, saying this: "They're afraid of Rick Perry because of his economic record in Texas and the fact that he's a conservative guy."

Note from Steve: That is just laughable, Rick Perry is an idiot who can not even name the departments he would get rid of in the government from his own plan, and nobody on the left is scared of Perry. they think he is a joke. Here is what O'Reilly and Rove did not tell you, from the WaPo fact checker. Perry failed to tell the whole story about the quality of jobs in his state. He also relied on a flawed method for calculating Texas’s share of the nation’s job growth, and he overstated the percentage of Texans making more than minimum wage.

Overall, the governor's employment gains are nothing to fawn over, since a large percentage of the jobs pay low wages and lack benefits. Texas boosted its employment numbers during some very lean years for the nation as a whole, but many of the new jobs fall on the low end of the desirability scale.

Perry earns two Pinocchios for presenting only favorable and exaggerated facts while not providing adequate context for his claims.

Then Mike Huckabee was on to promote his lame book, which I will not report on, and Megyn Kelly was on after him.

Kelly talked about some black Americans who are upset because the movie "Selma" was largely snubbed by the Academy Awards. Meanwhile, some Hollywood lefties are taking aim at "American Sniper," which has been a box office smash.

Kelly gave her take on the films, saying this: "The left doesn't like 'American Sniper,' because Chris Kyle once referred to killing the enemy as 'fun.' They question whether we should be glorifying someone like that, and Michael Moore even said snipers are cowards. 'American Sniper' was nominated for Best Picture, and so was Selma,' but the director of 'Selma' didn't get nominated because she said she didn't want to make a movie with LBJ as a 'white savior.' She ticked off the one group you can not tick off in Hollywood, the liberal elite."

O'Reilly slammed Moore, saying this: "He hates the country and he sees anyone who supports the country as a bad person."

Note from Steve: Which is ridiculous, because Moore also said he liked the movie, and he does not hate the country, that is insane nonsense from O'Reilly.

Then the moron Jesse Watters was on, he headed to Texas and a conference called "Stand With the Prophet," which attracted Muslims from across America. He wasn't allowed into the conference, but he did talk with some attendees outside.

One young Muslim man said this: "It says in the Koran that women shouldn't be able to go out in public wearing regular clothes, I believe the Koran."

Across the street, a group of protesters expressed their anger at Islamic practices and Sharia Law. "We love Muslims," one woman insisted, "but we just don't agree with what they do." Watters concluded with this lamentation from outside the convention hall: "We've been out here for six hours and haven't been allowed in. I just spoke to someone who said the organizers specifically barred The O'Reilly Factor from coming inside."

Note from Steve: Good for them, if I were Muslim I would ban O'Reilly too, because he is a racist and biased idiot.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: What Would Dr. King Think? Billy said this: "Martin Luther King Jr., who valued a person's character above all, would most likely be disgusted by what's going on in today, particularly the widespread selfishness and lack of compassion. Far too many of us, regardless of color, are interested only in ourselves."

Note from Steve: That is ridiculous and total speculation, the same speculation O'Reilly says he never does. Not to mention, an old rich white Republican (O'Reilly) telling us what MLK would think, it's just laughable. What MLK would be disgusted by is that in 2015 there is still all this racism against Obama and blacks, he would be disgusted by that you moron O'Reilly. And he would slam you and Fox for your right-wing bias and racism, so speculate about that, jerk.

The Facts On The Obama Tax Cut Plan
By: Steve - January 20, 2015 - 10:00am

O'Reilly and the dishonest Republicans put their partisan spin on the Obama tax cut plan, so now I will give you the actual facts about it.

Here is what President Obama wants, a Simpler, Fairer Tax Code That Responsibly Invests in Middle Class Families.

In the lead up to the State of the Union address, the President has put forward proposals to help strengthen the middle class and build on the progress we have made to create good jobs and grow our economy.

From proposing to make community college free for every responsible student and extending sick leave to working families, to acting on his own to cut mortgage premiums by $900 for families looking to buy a home, the President has already taken steps to ensure that all Americans can share in the benefits of our economic recovery.

Over the past six years, we've rescued and begun to rebuild our economy on a new foundation. Now we have to build on this progress, to raise wages and incomes, and strengthen the standing of working families in a new economy.

On Tuesday, the President will lay out his vision for how to do that. A key part of that vision will include a new strategy to simplify our complex tax code, make it fairer by eliminating some of the biggest loopholes, and use the savings to responsibly pay for the investments we need to help middle class families get ahead and grow the economy.

The President's plan will eliminate the biggest loopholes that let the wealthiest and big corporations avoid paying their fair share of taxes:

Closing One of the Biggest Tax Loopholes -- the Trust Fund Loophole: The President will propose to close the single largest capital gains loophole, which lets hundreds of billions of dollars escape taxation each year, to ensure the wealthiest Americans pay their fair share on inherited assets.

Raising the Total Top Capital Gains and Dividends Rate Back to the Level Under President Reagan:

The President will propose to raise the top capital gains rate to 28 percent -- the same rate we had under President Reagan.

Making the Biggest Financial Firms Pay Their Fair Share:

The President will continue to reform the way the largest financial firms do business by proposing a fee on the biggest financial firms, making it more costly for them to borrow heavily.

The President proposes to use the savings produced by these measures to reinvest in the middle class, helping millions of families each year and strengthening their standing in the 21st century economy.

Helping Working Families: The President will lay out a new $500 second earner credit to help cover the additional costs faced by families where both spouses work -- benefiting 24 million couples.

Tripling the Child Care Tax Credit:

The President’s proposal would streamline and dramatically expand child care tax benefits, providing up to $3,000 per child under 5, and helping 5.1 million families cover child care costs for 6.7 million children.

Making College Accessible and Affordable:

The President's plan reforms the education tax system by consolidating six overlapping education provisions into just two and providing students up to $2,500 a year toward completing a college degree.

His plan cuts taxes for 8.5 million families and students and simplifies taxes for the more than 25 million families and students that claim education tax benefits.

The President has also proposed to make the first two years of community college free to any hardworking student.

Saving for Retirement:

The President's plan makes it easy and automatic for workers to save for retirement -- giving 30 million more workers the opportunity to easily save for retirement through their employer.

The President's proposals to take these and other steps to make the tax system more fair will also finance the his plan to make community college free for responsible students and additional investments in improving child care quality, access, and affordability for working families.

Obama Job Approval Numbers Up: O'Reilly Ignores It
By: Steve - January 19, 2015 - 11:00am

When the Obama poll numbers were below 50% O'Reilly loved it and reported it almost every day. He slammed Obama for it, saying he is a failure as a President because the majority of the people did not approve of the job he was doing.

Now that the Obama poll numbers are back up to 50%, O'Reilly is silent. Just like Obamacare, the stock market, and gas prices, when they are down O'Reilly uses it for partisan political reasons, but when they all go back up and show it's good news for Obama and that his policies are working, O'Reilly says nothing, unless it is to spin it to defend his biased attacks from the past.

President Barack Obama has enjoyed a sizable shift in approval ratings since the midterm election last November that cost his party the Senate.

A Washington Post/ABC News poll released Monday, shows that Obama's approval rating is back to 50%, the highest recorded in that poll since spring of 2013, and a nine-point shift since December. 44% disapprove of Obama, ten points lower than in December.

The Post poll echoes those by PEW and Gallup that have also found Obama's approval rating trending upward in the last two months.

The spike in his approval is largely attributed to steadily improving job numbers combined with plunging gas prices.

And btw folks, Presidents have very little direct influence over gas prices, but tend to absorb the blame for rising prices and the credit for plunges anyway.

Perhaps more importantly for Obama as he heads into a State of the Union in which he will propose tax increases on the wealthy to pay for middle class tax relief, a plurality believe Obama has "better ideas about helping the middle class" over the GOP Congress.

Miami Beach Police Caught Using Mug Shots Of Blacks For Target Practice
By: Steve - January 18, 2015 - 11:00am

Officers from a South Florida police department are taking heat after getting caught using photos of real-life African-American suspects for target practice.

Critics told NBC South Florida, which first reported the controversy, that the North Miami Beach cops are racially insensitive because the six mug shots used at the firing range feature only African-American suspects.



And Willard Shepard from NBC6 News said the Police chief is defending the use of photos of real people for target practice.

A Florida National Guard sergeant arrived at the shooting range on a Saturday last month for training and recognized her brother's 15-year-old booking photo among the bullet-riddled targets left behind by North Miami Beach police officers, the station said.

Major Kathy Katerman tried to spin it saying that the department has multiple lineups for target practice. Some feature only white men, others are all Latino and one features photos of only women.

"The public thinks there should be one woman and one white man and one black, but that's not really what test is about," Katerman said. "We have targets of all races."

On Thursday, North Miami Beach Police Chief J. Scott Dennis denied that his department has a racial issue, but said that his officers should have used better judgment. He said that the sniper team included minorities, that no one would be disciplined and that no department policies were violated.

Late Friday, the city responded to the public outcry over the sniper target shooting story. A mass email was sent to media outlets with photos of other targets used by the city's two snipers. Among them: A photo of Osama Bin Laden, and another of a man holding a gun to woman's head.

In a five paragraph statement Dennis said the department realizes how, taken out of context, the photo of the six black males in the photo lineup may appear to be offensive.

"For that reason," Dennis said, "I immediately suspend the sniper training program as we conduct a thorough review of our training process and materials, ordered commercially produced training images, and opened an investigation into the matter."

Read more here: Police chief suspends training program after outcry over use of black men’s mugshots for target practice The misstep was reminiscent of a flap in 2013 over a Port Canaveral, Florida police sergeant who was fired for distributing targets of Trayvon Martin for shooting practice.

Martin was the 17-year-old unarmed teenager who was followed and fatally shot by George Zimmerman in February 2012.

In other words, they only stopped doing it after someone in the media reported it, and at first they did nothing and said there was nothing wrong with it, until it got to be a big story, then for PR reasons they stopped it.

And of course the so-called journalist Bill O'Reilly never said a word about it.

Obama Schools O'Reilly With Facts About His Economic Record
By: Steve - January 17, 2015 - 11:00am

Bill O'Reilly has spent 6 years lying about the Obama economic policies, so Obama laid out the facts, and of course O'Reilly never said a word about any of it. Remember that O'Reilly never reports any of this, ever, as he claims the economy is a disaster and in chaos, while we also have gas under $2.00 a gallon and the stock market setting new record highs almost every month.

In his speech in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, President Obama unleashed a barrage of facts about his economic record that was devastating body blow to his Republican critics.

Last year was the strongest year for job growth since the 1990s.

Unemployment fell in 2014 faster than any year since 1984. Our businesses have created more than 11 million jobs in the last 58 straight months -- that's the longest stretch of private-sector job growth in American history.

Since 2010, America has put more people back to work than Europe, Japan, and every other advanced economy combined. A lot of folks talk about some of the jobs are being created in the service sector, they're not paying as much -- the truth is, American manufacturing is in its best stretch of job growth since the 1990s.

Manufacturing is actually growing faster than the rest of the economy.

Meanwhile, America is now the number-one producer of oil and gas in the world. And by the way, you're saving about a buck-twenty a gallon at the pump over this time last year.

President Obama rattled off eight facts that all devastated the Republican argument against his economic record. In fact, it is becoming increasing more difficult for Republicans to come up with reality based criticisms of the economy's performance.

For example, Speaker of the House John Boehner began his latest statement on the decreasing unemployment rate by admitting that it was good news, "It's always welcome news when more Americans find work. Yet while the economy is showing some signs of improvement, far too many middle-class families are struggling to bridge the gap between rising costs and stubbornly flat paychecks."

The bad news for Republicans is that the American people are noticing President Obama's economic success. President Obama's job approval ratings are surging. According to the latest CBS News poll, more Americans say President Obama's economic policies have helped the economy (43%) than say have hurt the economy (34%).

The president is vocally taking credit for the success of the economy, and the many Americans are agreeing with him. The Republican plan (That O'Reilly is a big part of) to make sure that Obama is a failed president is now in tatters.

President Obama is defying the historical trend of presidents past. He is a president on the upswing, and Republicans are back on their heels as the Obama presidency is gaining momentum.

Which is why O'Reilly never talks about it now, because he is part of the Republican propaganda machines that tried to destroy President Obama with lies.

Fox Will Issue Correction for Guest Muslim Birmingham Comments
By: Steve - January 17, 2015 - 10:00am

On Jeanine Pirro's Fox News show last weekend, guest Steve Emerson made the mind-bogglingly ridiculous claim that the city of Birmingham in England is "totally Muslim" and a "no-go zone" for non-Muslims.

Emerson was relentlessly mocked, even by David Cameron himself, and his apology didn't save him from a severe grilling over how the hell he thought it was true in the first place.

Well, now Pirro is planning to fix the record. According to The Washington Post, she'll issue an on-air correction for Emerson's remarks. And the Fox News spokeswoman who spoke to the Washington Post said it's "highly unlikely" Emerson will be invited back on anytime soon.

And all of this doesn't even include the claims of another Fox News guest about "no-go zones" that were so off-base, a French TV show has started a campaign to make Fox apologize for that error too.

More Proof Bill O'Reilly Is A Partisan Right-Wing Hack
By: Steve - January 16, 2015 - 10:00am

Wednesday night O'Reilly said this about the President Obama terrorism and economic policies:
O'REILLY: "His leadership in the war on terror has been lacking and I don't think he has a vision for the economy."
Which is just laughable, and here is why. Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks in the USA under Bush: One big one, it was called 9-11 and thousands of Americans died.

Al-Qaeda terrorist attacks in the USA under Obama: None.

Obama basically continued the same terrorist fighting tactics that Bush and Cheney put in place, except for the waterboarding, that we think has now stopped. But O'Reilly slams Obama over his terrorism policies anyway, even though they are working, simply because he is a Democrat. If Obama was a Republican O'Reilly would love what he is doing on terrorism and praise him.

The economy: It's laughable to slam Obama for the economy, because it is doing great, GDP is high, unemployment is down, the stock market is at record highs, gas is under $2.00 a gallon, and we are adding over 200,000 new jobs a month, and have for about 15 straight months. There is no bad economic news, none. And yet O'Reilly says Obama has no vision for the economy, it's just ridiculous, and nothing but a biased dishonest opinion of reality.

If Obama was a Republican with this economy O'Reilly would call him a great President and praise him every night for things being so good. But since he is a Democrat O'Reilly not only can not admit the economy is doing great, he will not give Obama any credit for it, none. Simply because he is a biased partisan right-wing hack who hates Obama, especially now, for making him look bad and proving him wrong about the economic policies of Obama.

Harvard Media Center Chief Says Right-Wing Pundits Are Hurting America
By: Steve - January 15, 2015 - 10:00am

And of course Bill O'Reilly has ignored the entire story.

Right-wing commentators like Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly have damaged the country, according to Alex S. Jones, the outgoing head of Harvard University's Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy, who announced his departure Wednesday after 15 years leading the prestigious media training center.

"I wish they could be more objective, I don't begrudge them their particular politics, I just wish they weren't simply one note, I think it's damaging," said Jones, a longtime media critic.

Jones cited the conservative media's coverage of President Obama: "Obama certainly is the president and the president is always legitimate prey for criticism, but I don't think that they have done a good thing for our country to be completely undermining him in every way they possibly could."

"I don't think that's good for any president, Republican or Democrat."

And btw folks, when Bush was in office O'Reilly said it was treason to oppose and speak out against the President. O'Reilly basically said at the time all liberals were guilty or treason and un-American, but when legal experts said he was wrong, he then wanted to know if they were guilty of sedition, which the legal experts also said no. Now he does the very same thing he said liberals that do it are traitors, proving his hypocrisy, his bias, and his double standards.

Jones, who announced his pending departure in a letter to supporters published on the Center's website, said it was "time for change," but did not state what his next plans would be.

In an interview, Jones cited concerns about what he deemed the "highly polarized political environment on cable news."

"There's no question that the people like the right wing pundits -- left wing too, to a degree, but they are dwarfed by the right wing -- have done a lot of damage to this country in my opinion, I don't consider that journalism, I consider that to be advocacy."

Jones added of O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and Fox's Sean Hannity, "I don't think that they don't believe what they say, I just wish that they looked at the world in a different way, something more constructive."

He added, "it's more catering to what will draw an audience rather than what is important ... if anything it's the shift toward what has been thought of as the local television model, anything that will attract a crowd, but not necessarily invested in issues and in policy questions and in political debates and things that are of genuine importance."

In other words, Jones is saying O'Reilly and Hannity are the same as Rush Limbaugh, except they do it on tv instead of radio. Even though O'Reilly denies he is even a conservative, which is just laughable and a flat out lie. O'Reilly, Limbaugh, and Hannity take the same positions, report on the same things, and one is just as conservative and biased as the other. O'Reilly just lies about it, which means you should not believe anything he says if he can not even admit his political bias.

Jones also had advice for more credible news outlets. He stressed the need for journalists to keep focused on accuracy, fact-checking, and credibility as they increase speed and technology in reporting.

"I think it's gotten worse, I guess because it's gotten so much faster," he said of inaccurate and incomplete reporting. "All of the inherent weaknesses of a human enterprise like journalism are exaggerated and amplified by the speed of technology, being careless and being wrong and jumping to conclusions and not doing your homework, those were all there before the web, but the web makes them all realized quickly.

"The technology of course has changed everything, the thing that I hope would not change and the thing I would express as my number one concern is that the values that were imbedded in the journalism that has been traditional, I hope that they will endure and be projected in this new media world. I think that is essential to there being credibility that will keep genuine news a force for good."

He also pointed to the demand for profits and easy revenue over substance: "What has happened is that as the economic model has collapsed, all kinds of news organizations have made the overwhelming priority of getting the largest audience. That has meant, in some cases, pandering, cutting expenses and in the face of reduced revenues cutting the quality of the news. A lot of it has to do with the fact that the economic model has not been discovered that will support high-quality news on an enduring basis."

In other words, he is telling the rest of the corporate media like CNN and MSNBC, to report the news people need to know with no bias, instead of serving their corporate masters and the corporations that buy the advertising that pays their salary.

The corporate media is why a lot of people get their news from the internet now, because they are tired of the garbage the corporate media puts out to get ratings, instead of news that informs the people, and I am tired of it too.

Republican Has $900 Million Dollar Deficit: O'Reilly Silent
By: Steve - January 14, 2015 - 10:00am

When California had a big deficit O'Reilly hammered them for months saying it was because of liberal policies and he also said it has put the state so far in debt they will never get out of it. And now California has their debt under control and they are actually running a surplus, so O'Reilly was wrong that they would get it under control. Even with liberal policies.

So we go to Kansas, where they have a Republican in charge. Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R) is getting ready to propose some form of revenue increases as part of a plan to fix the nearly $900 million budget hole his tax cuts created for the state. And yet, O'Reilly is silent, he says nothing. So when liberals do it he screams bloody murder, when Republicans do it he is silent.

But whatever cracks are emerging in his anti-tax facade, the conservative governor's response to the budget crisis is more likely to focus on spending for the state's already flailing schools.

"Revenue didn't come in quite as was projected," chief of staff Jon Hummel told the Wichita Eagle over the weekend, in reference to tax collections that have fallen hundreds of millions of dollars short of what Brownback's administration predicted when it passed deep tax cuts in 2012.

Brownback's State of the State address Thursday will outline how he plans to both cover a $200 million shortfall in the current fiscal year and fill an additional $648 million gap in next year's projections, and Hummel told the Eagle that the proposal "will include what he called revenue enhancements."

In other words, as usual their massive tax cuts did not work, all it did was make the rich richer and create a budget shortfall, so of course to fix it he is going to take the money from the school budget.

None of this means the diehard conservative will reverse course or even make small concessions to critics who have warned for years that his trickle-down tax cuts would harm the Kansas economy, however. "If you want to know what we're likely to do, I would look at what we've proposed before and statements that he's said before. This is not going to be inconsistent with his previous proposals," Hummel said.

Since even delaying the final stages of his signature income tax cut would mean admitting that his Democratic opponent from the last election was right, the Eagle predicts, Brownback has relatively few revenue raising options available to him. The governor's critics say that sales tax increases and other options they've heard discussed are both insufficient to the size of the budget problem and unfair to the people who will get stuck paying for them.

"When we talk about a sales tax increase, those disproportionately impact the most vulnerable Kansans" who already got a tax hike as part of Brownback's 2012 reforms, said Annie McKay, executive director of the Kansas Center for Economic Growth (KCEG). Instead of using taxing consumer spending to "throw a little dirt back into this giant hole," McKay said, lawmakers should focus on fixing the holes in Brownback's business tax plan.

"That was the one piece that was lifted up by both the left and the right as being just this terribly misguided aspect that's not going to create any significant benefits," McKay said, and fixing it "doesn't impact the most vulnerable Kansans."

The 2012 legislation eliminated all business income tax for what is called pass-through revenue, a "highly fiscally irresponsible" move according to Michael Leachman, director of state fiscal policy research for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. "It was billed as a small business tax break that would cause more businesses to move to Kansas and cause existing small businesses in the state to add more jobs and grow the economy.

In other words, it was right-wing propaganda and the people fell for it.

There's no evidence that happened," Leachman said, and "that portion of the tax cut package has turned out to be significantly more expensive than the state originally expected."

Besides, small businesses that have the potential to grow into large job creators don't need help with their taxes nearly as much as they need help connecting with other businesses in their sector and assistance finding the workforce they need to make their product. "You can do those things for a lot, lot, lot less money than a very broad tax cut for any income that happens to fall under this one kind of category," Leachman said.

Whatever the specific ideas about revenues Brownback tucks into this week's address, the primary action is likely to come on state education spending. "The governor feels like the growth in spending that's occurred the last several years in school finance is unsustainable," Hummel told the Eagle.

But judges have already ruled that the state's current school funding is too low to meet the requirements of the Kansas Constitution in a case that is likely to end up in the state Supreme Court. Instead of flat-out cuts, then, Brownback may seek the first wholesale reform of Kansas education funding formula in over a decade, in hopes of simultaneously reducing the overall cost of education in the state and increasing the amount of funding that goes to classroom instruction.

Schools funding goes to a variety of different things including teacher compensation, administrative costs, and building and equipment costs. Tallman warned that any fight over school funding rules will hinge on the semantics of those categories. While administrative spending might sound like easy-to-cut overhead, it actually goes to "counselors and nurses, transportation costs, social workers, libraries, librarians, a whole host of student support functions," he said.

"The problem is we really have no clear agreement as to what any of those terms even mean." Schools already compete for scarce resources from the state, and money is so tight at one Kansas City school that school nurses are instructed to use frozen sponges instead of buying ice packs.

Given the complexities of the status quo, Tallman said, specific legislative ideas from the governor would surprise him. "At this point I really can't see Brownback making anything more than a call to say, here are the problems and the legislature should look at them."

In closing, it was all a scam by the Republican Governor, it did not work, so now he is going to get the money from the school budget that is already too low. Open your eyes folks, this is what Republicans do, over and over, and you idiots keep electing them.

Bill O'Reilly & Megyn Kelly Lie That Dish Is Censoring Fox News
By: Steve - January 13, 2015 - 10:00am

Fox News has enlisted two of their top anchors in the fight against Dish Network. As the satellite system's blackout of Fox and Fox Business enters its fourth week, Bill O'Reilly and Megyn Kelly are appearing in a new ad that accuses Dish of "censoring" the cable network.

"Attention Dish customers," O'Reilly says in the ad, posted to YouTube on Saturday. "Dish has dropped Fox News, now you should drop Dish."

"13 years at number one, no Dish doesn't want you to have Fox?" Kelly asks. "They're censoring what you see," O'Reilly adds. "Enough is enough."

And now the facts, O'Reilly and Kelly are liars. The facts show it is all about money, Fox wants Dish to pay higher fees for other Fox channels. It's like the mafia.

Which O'Reilly and Kelly fail to mention in their dishonest ad. It's not even close to censorship when you refuse to pay ridiculous fee increases, it's nowhere near censoring anything, and if Fox had not demanded the fee increases Dish would still be showing their networks.

The dishonest ad spot directs viewers to a website where they can contact Dish to complain and even search for a new TV provider that currently carries Fox.

While the ad attempts to frame Dish's decision to remove Fox from its lineup as ideological, it all comes down to money. Dish says 21st Century Fox is using the popularity of Fox News to demand higher carriage fees for less popular channels like FXX and FS1, and is apparently unwilling to budge on its position.

So Fox is refusing to deal with Dish, they told them to pay the fees or you lose the two Fox news networks. Which is strongarm tactics, that O'Reilly and Kelly also never mention.

Dish CEO Charlie Ergen said the parties were nearing a deal, even though Fox News was looking for an increase doubling its rate. He said the talks, broke down when Fox introduced a third network into the conversation, for which it was eyeing a "surcharge" that would have trebled the cost for a service that was not scheduled to expire for some time.

Many believe that network in question was either Fox Sports 1 or FXX, which were converted from Speed and Fox Soccer Channel on Aug. 17, 2013 and Sept. 2, 2013, respectively.

Jeanine Pirro Has Clueless Terrorism Expert On Her Show
By: Steve - January 12, 2015 - 11:00am

Source: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/

Fox News terror expert says everyone in Birmingham is a Muslim

Pundit on right-wing channel says non-Muslims "simply don't go" into Britain's second largest city, prompting immediate Twitter backlash

An American "terrorism expert" on the right-wing Fox News channel has declared that Birmingham is "a totally Muslim" city "where non-Muslims just simply don't go."

Steve Emerson made the claim, which may come as a surprise to the hundreds of thousands of non-Muslim residents of Britain's second-largest city, during a television discussion about no-go zones in Europe where Muslims are apparently in complete control.

"In Britain, it's not just no-go zones, there are actual cities like Birmingham that are totally Muslim where non-Muslims just simply don't go in," he said.

Mr Emerson, who describes himself as "an internationally recognised expert on terrorism", did not stop there.

"Parts of London, there are actually Muslim religious police that actually beat and actually wound seriously anyone who doesn't dress according to Muslim, religious Muslim attire," he proclaimed, without giving examples.

He described Birmingham as one of a number of European cities "where sharia courts were set up, where Muslim density is very intense, where the police don't go in, and where it's basically a separate country almost, a country within a country."

Mr Emerson is a regular contributor to Fox News and was appearing on Judge Pirro, a show hosted by the failed Republican politician Jeanine Pirro. Ms Pirro responded to her guest's claim that the British government doesn't "exercise any sovereignty" in Birmingham by saying: "You know what it sounds like to me, Steve? It sounds like a caliphate within a particular country."

Mr Emerson did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Disgruntled Brummies took to Twitter to express their disdain for Mr Emerson's characterisation of their home city.

Jobs Up & Unemployment Down: Not A Word From O'Reilly
By: Steve - January 11, 2015 - 11:00am

More good economic news and the biased right-wing hack Bill O'Reilly once again never said a word about it. Because if he reported it he would have to admit he was wrong and the Obama economic policies are working. The new numbers once again show O'Reilly is wrong and that he is nothing but a partisan hack who ignores good economic news.

Here is the story O'Reilly will not report:

1-9-15 -- Employers Do The Most Hiring Since 1999

The percentage of Americans who are either working or looking for work fell back to a 37-year low last touched in September. December capped off the nation's best year of hiring since 1999, with employers adding a healthy 252,000 payroll jobs and the unemployment rate declining to 5.6 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday.

Last year's progress pushed the jobless rate down to a six-year low, and near the range that the Federal Reserve considers consistent with a healthy economy. The year of growth supports expectations that the United States will strengthen further in 2015 even as overseas economies stumble.

Remember this folks, O'Reilly still claims the Obama economic policies are not working, and that the economy is in chaos. Even though they are working, the economy is doing great, the stock market is setting records, and gas prices are below $2.00 a gallon.

Which is the same propaganda the Republican party has put out for the last 7 years, and the very same Republican talking points O'Reilly says he never uses. It's like he wrote it for them, they say the very same thing, over and over, even though it's all lies.

"Firms are out there and they're hiring," said Esmael Adibi, economist at Chapman University. "It could be for part time, but if somebody is unemployed, there should be opportunities out there."

In 2014, nearly 3 million Americans found a new job. As they got hired, the unemployment rate dropped by 1.1 percent, continuing a decline in the rate since peaking at 10 percent in October 2009. Tony Cherin, a finance professor at San Diego State University, called the increase in payroll jobs and the decline in the unemployment rate a double dose of good news.

"We want available labor to come to the market, especially when the economy is improving," he said. "When the economy is sinking, people leave to go back to school, or stay home. Now is a time for them to come back."

Additionally, the plummeting oil prices are helping keep inflation lower than the Fed's 2 percent target rate. Many economists think inflation may fail to reach even 1 percent this year. A result is that the Fed could feel pressure to avoid raising rates anytime soon.

While inflation may continue to decline, wages could begin to face upward pressure as hiring ramps up and the unemployment rate continues to fall. Lynn Reaser, chief economist at Point Loma Nazarene University, said wage growth should pick up in the coming year as the labor market improves and there is more competition for workers.

Zimmerman Arrested & Charged For Aggravated Assault With A Weapon
By: Steve - January 10, 2015 - 11:30am

George Zimmerman, the Florida man who was wrongly acquitted in the death of Trayvon Martin, was arrested last night for aggravated assault with a weapon.

The Seminole County Police Office booked Zimmerman last night around 10 p.m., and is expected to make a court appearance this morning.

No details are available about his arrest, but Zimmerman has a long history of arrests: apart from the Trayvon Martin case, he threatened to kill a driver during a road rage incident, and was once accused of pointing a gun at his girlfriend's face. Both victims declined to press charges.

UPDATE: More details about Zimmerman's arrest, include an additional charge of domestic violence, battery and criminal mischief. According to his lawyer, Zimmerman allegedly "threw a wine bottle during the incident."

Zimmerman's bail has been set at $5000, and he is prohibited from contacting the victim, entering her home, or entering the county she resides in, and must surrender all weapons.

This Is Not A Joke: Republicans Take Credit For Economic Recovery
By: Steve - January 10, 2015 - 11:00am

Mitch McConnell: Credit Republicans for the economic recovery they did everything in their power to prevent

Between the country's impressive economic growth and robust job figures, it's finally beginning to look like a real recovery is underway, six years after the official end of the Great Recession. Amid this improving economic climate, President Barack Obama's job approval rating has ticked up slightly.

Continued strength in the American economy would also be a boon to Democrats hopes of holding onto the White House and recovering ground in Congress in 2016. But according to newly installed Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, voters should thank Republicans for the recovery.

"After so many years of sluggish growth, we're finally starting to see some economic data that can provide a glimmer of hope; the uptick appears to coincide with the biggest political change of the Obama administration's long tenure in Washington: the expectation of a new Republican Congress," the Kentuckian said today. So this is precisely the right time to advance a positive, pro-growth agenda."

So let me get this straight, after 7 years of doing nothing and blocking every economic and jobs bill the Democrats and Obama tried to pass, and the economy is doing great anyway, Republicans now claim they should get credit for it, which is insanity. And on top of that, Republican cuts to food stamps and unemployment benefits have actually hurt the economy.

The Democratic National Committee responded to McConnell's remarks in an email with a subject line reading , "DNC to McConnell: Hahahahahahahahahahaha."

McConnell's claim that the anticipation of a GOP Congress magically boosted the economy would indeed be quite funny, if not for how maddening his remarks are.

At every available opportunity, Republicans in the Obama era have taken measures that (intentionally or not) undermined the economy's performance. Starting with the GOP's near-unanimous opposition to the administration's 2009 stimulus, the party has opposed countercyclical fiscal policies geared toward priming the country's economic pump.

As the initial stimulus proved too small and states and localities cut public sector jobs amid dire budgetary straits, Republicans blocked a measure championed by Obama that would have allocated $35 billion to state and local governments to create or save jobs for public workers like teachers and firefighters.

But Republicans have done far more than obstruct. No less destructively, the party successfully pushed a woefully counterproductive austerity agenda once it assumed control of the House of Representatives in January 2011. (The administration should not be absolved of blame for its part in acceding to a regime of drastic spending cuts.) In October 2013, the research firm Macroeconomic Advisers calculated that budget cuts had decreased annual growth by 0.7 percentage points since 2010; meanwhile, austerity increased the unemployment rate by 0.8 percentage points.

GOP-pushed cuts in unemployment compensation and food stamps took money out of the hands of people who would have spent it in the economy. Food stamp benefits, for instance, generate $1.74 in economic activity for every dollar put into them, according to Moody's Analytics.

More than half a decade into a recovery whose benefits have mostly accrued to the nation's wealthiest citizens, many American workers are finally experiencing a real improvement in their economic fortunes, and data on GDP, employment, and wages increasingly reflect that. But the nation's economy is improving despite, not because of, a Republican Congress.

The Right-Wing Cop Terror Plot The Media Totally Ignored
By: Steve - January 9, 2015 - 11:00am

Here is a perfect example of how corrupt and biased our media is, and I am not just talking about Fox, CNN and MSNBC also ignored this story, none of them reported it.

Members of a right-wing militia in Georgia plotted to attack police and other government agents.

Following the murder of two NYPD officers in New York City, Bill O'Reilly and much of the political right moved to blame Mayor de Blasio and other progressive critics of police brutality for inciting the violence, claiming that the mentally ill man who was behind the attack was motivated by left-wing rhetoric. O'Reilly was very mad at him and even called for the Mayor to resign.

But that narrative does not fit very well with an actual terror case brought this week by the FBI against three Georgia men, all members of a right-wing militia that plotted to attack police and others. Yesterday, Terry Peace, Brian Cannon and Cory Williamson pleaded not guilty to a charge of domestic terrorism, as well as charges of conspiring to defraud the government.

Northwest Georgia News explains:
Peace, Cannon and Williamson -- all members of a right-wing militia in Georgia -- participated in online chat discussions between Jan. 23 and Feb. 15, 2014, that were monitored by the FBI.

During the conversations online, they discussed using guerilla war tactics and planned to launch attacks against a metro Atlanta police station and several government agencies in February of 2014.

The three men attempted to "recruit other individuals to join them and to carry out similar operations in those individuals home states."

Peace allegedly told other militia members to choose targets including "road blocks, TSA checkpoints, sheriffs/police conducting operations outside the Constitution" as well as to participate in the "removal of government people who support extra-Constitutional activities."
In other words, the three men plotted to launch large-scale explosive terrorist attacks against local government and police that, if successfully carried out, would have been the largest terror attacks on U.S. soil since 9/11.

But only two small news outlets in all of America reported it, the Rome News-Tribune and Northwest Georgia News.

They did not report it because it involved Republican white men, even though it was a planned attack on the police and Government officials. This is 100% bias and corruption from the media, and there is no way around it.

If a so-called far-left liberal shoots a cop it's a world wide story and reported 24/7 for weeks, but when white Republicans plan an attack on the police the media says nothing, not a word.

O'Reilly and Fox ignored it all, not one word was reported about it. Which also proves there is no liberal bias in the media, because if there was that story would have been all over the NY Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc.

Cable News Shows Ignore Bombing Of NAACP Office
By: Steve - January 8, 2015 - 11:00am

And as expected, O'Reilly never said a word about it.

A bomb detonated at the Colorado chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) last night, but you may not have heard much about it. It appears that the major 24-hour cable networks gave the incident little to no air attention.

A search of television databases shows CNN gave one cursory report on the incident at 6:34 a.m., while MSNBC and Fox News have not mentioned the incident on air since it happened. Other networks, including Headline News, (HDLN) mentioned the incident one time during the morning news.

The database TVEyes and Critical Mention from Tuesday evening through Wednesday afternoon, using the terms, NAACP, colored people, and bomb along with Colorado. It found only one mention on CNN, at 6:34 a.m., in the course of what appeared to be a scheduled interview on community-police relations.

The incident was mentioned when the interviewer asked former NYPD officer and Secret Service agent Dan Bongino whether he thought the bomb in Colorado could be "seen as retaliatory" and Bongino said it was possible.

Representatives from CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News did not respond to inquiries on their coverage of the bombing.

Outside of broadcast, CNN sent a breaking news tweet last night and posted a story on its website. Local and regional outlets, NBC News, and the wire services have posted stories about it. And on Rachel Maddow's website, a morning roundup by Steve Benen included the story.

The improvised explosive device detonated at the headquarters of the Colorado Springs, Colorado NAACP office Tuesday night. The makeshift bomb did not ignite a gas tank placed next to it, so it did not cause any injuries, and "only minimal surface charring to the exterior wall of the building."

But it could have been much more destructive had the bomb ignited, and sent a clear anti-civil rights message, although the FBI is investigating the motives behind the bombing and says domestic terrorism is still a possible motive.

Many on social media noted the minimal coverage of the incident, with the hashtag #NAACPBombing.

One man wrote this on twitter: "Anyone else pissed they found out about the #NAACPBombing on twitter. And not from ANY of the 24 news outlets?

Not one mention on Fox or MSNBC, so much for O'Reilly saying they are race baiters and biased to the left, they reported the story the exact same way Fox and O'Reilly did, they totally ignored it.

O'Reilly Gives Duke A Platform For Racism Bias And Hate
By: Steve - January 7, 2015 - 11:00am

O'Reilly should be ashamed of himself for giving this racist idiot a platform to spew out his racist hate on television.

Bill O'Reilly interviewed the former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke about GOP Rep. Steve Scalise's address to a white supremacist group in a segment Duke turned into a bizarre defense of his reputation.

Scalise, who has a leadership position in the GOP as the House Majority Whip, has apologized for speaking to a white supremacist conference in 2002.

Notice that Scalise never apologized for it, until it was reported in the media.

Duke and O'Reilly briefly discussed the allegations surrounding House Majority Whip Steve Scalise's (R-LA) appearance at a conference hosted by Duke's group, the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, in 2002.

"I can't be sure he was there," Duke said, seemingly backing away from his threat last week to reveal more Republican politicians who have met with him. "I know he was scheduled to speak, but I don't know if he spoke."

Duke then complained that his own past with the Klan is mentioned more than that of former Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV), who was in the Klan before he was elected. O'Reilly replied that Byrd repudiated his past before his death in 2010, while Duke was still promoting white American interests.

"I love my people, my heritage," Duke explained. "I'm going to preserve my heritage like every people does."

"Preserve your heritage -- what does that mean?" O'Reilly asked.

"You don't know what European heritage is?" Duke asked a visibly annoyed O'Reilly. "You don't know what Mozart is, and Bach, and Beethoven?"

"They're people," O'Reilly shot back. "They come from different countries. Look, the problem with this garbage -- on both sides -- is that we're all in it together, and skin color shouldn't matter."

The conservative media are divided on whether Scalise is a victim of the media, or made a mistake serious enough for him to resign his leadership post.

During his January 5th Fox News appearance, Duke denied he was ever a white supremacist, insisting that his organization, the European-American Unity and Rights Organization (EURO), was "a chartered human rights organization," and described affirmative action programs as racially discriminatory.

Duke gave cover to Scalise, insisting that he can't be sure if Scalise ever addressed his organization. O'Reilly pushed back against Duke's insistence that he was never a white supremacist, saying "don't sit here and tell me that you're not trying to promote the cause of the white people, because you are."

As the interview ended, Duke held up a picture of President Obama labeled "Communist Terrorist Murderer."

Grand Juror Sues Prosecutor Over Darren Wilson Case
By: Steve - January 6, 2015 - 11:00am

And of course the so-called Journalist Bill O'Reilly has ignored the entire story, because he is a biased right-wing hack who only reports what he wants to report, not all the facts as he claims. O'Reilly also totally ignored the story about McCulloch knowingly using perjured testimony from Sandra McElroy as an eyewitness to the Grand Jury. Here is the story O'Reilly has ignored.

1-5-15 -- A grand juror in the Darren Wilson case is suing St. Louis County Prosecutor Bob McCulloch. The grand juror, whose name has not been disclosed, is filing suit so that he or she can speak publicly about the case.

The 58 point suit alleges that McCulloch presented the legal case in a muddled and untimely manner, and that he put a great deal of focus on Michael Brown rather than Darren Wilson. The implications seems to be that the juror felt the prosecutor was in effect, putting Michael Brown on trial rather than the man who shot and killed him.

If successful, the suit would permit the juror to comment on the case without being subjected to criminal prosecution for speaking out. Missouri state law makes it a class A misdemeanor to disclose evidence given in grand jury trials.

The suit alleges that in the circumstances of this case, the interests in securing the First Amendment should outweigh any interest served by maintaining grand jury secrecy.

Bob McCulloch's handling of the case was deplorable in many different ways. He knowingly used perjured testimony from Sandra McElroy as an eyewitness even though he publicly acknowledged that she "clearly wasn't present" at the scene of the confrontaion between Wilson and Brown.

In other words, McCulloch knew she was lying and he had her as a witness for the Grand Jury anyway, which is the worst thing a prosecutor can do, except for withhold evidence. And O'Reilly never said a word about any of it.

The suit suggests that, even in the eyes of one of the grand jurors, McCulloch practiced deception to try to keep Darren Wilson from being indicted for the shooting death of Michael Brown. The lawsuit alleges that McCulloch prejudicially mismanaged the entire grand jury process to seek the outcome he desired.

Whether or not the lawsuit succeeds, McCulloch's actions as prosecutor in this case are indefensible. Since McCulloch deliberately put a liar on the stand to further his personal agenda in the case, it seems only fitting that the courts should permit one of the jurors to exercise his or her right to publicly speak the truth.

Top 11 Dumbest Things Conservatives Said About Climate Change in 2014
By: Steve - January 5, 2015 - 11:00am

Here are the 11 dumbest things conservative media said about climate change in 2014, including Bill O'Reilly who claims to believe in Global Warming:

11. Bill O'Reilly: "It's Easier To Believe In A Benevolent God, The Baby Jesus" Than Manmade Climate Change.

On the December 16 edition of The O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly led a discussion on whether or not it is easier to believe in the birth story of Jesus than in manmade climate change, positing that it is "easier to believe in a benevolent God, the baby Jesus, than it is in some kind of theory about global warming."

When his guest pointed out that 97 percent of climate scientists agree that human activities are driving global warming, O'Reilly baselessly countered, "I wouldn't put it that high. I've read a lot about it." He concluded: "It's a choice -- people choose to believe."

And on a side note, the 3 percent of climate scientists that do not believe in Global Warming are on the payroll of oil companies, etc. In other words, they are biased partisans and they are paid to say Global Warming is not real. A fact that O'Reilly never reports, even though he claims to report all the facts.

10. Forbes on Fox Panelists: Global Warming Is A "Massive Human Delusion" Because The Free Market Disproves It.

In a panel discussion dismissing the science behind climate change on the January 4 edition of Fox News' Forbes on Fox, panelist John Tamny derided global warming as "a massive human delusion" and "left-wing hubris at its worst."

Tamny concluded: "If global warming were real, Solyndra would be booming today and ExxonMobil would be going out of business ... market signals say [addressing global warming] is a big, economy-sapping waste of time."

Disregarding that market economics do not prove or disprove scientific literature, companies like Solyndra are the exception rather than the rule, with 98 percent of the businesses in the the Department of Energy's loan guarantee program -- from which Solyndra received its loan-- being successful ventures.

In addition, a study released by the Risky Business Project this year on the economic impacts of climate change showed that failing to address climate change could results in costs of tens of billions of dollars in coastal property and infrastructure.

9. Fox's Bolling Denies Existence Of Decades Of Science.

On the February 28 edition of Fox News' The Five, co-host Eric Bolling proclaimed: "There's no science to global warming." But the scientific basis for manmade climate change stretches back decades, with the first scientific evidence of the greenhouse effect traced back to the 1800s.

A search in Google scholar for "manmade climate change" produces over 50,000 results. And the overwhelming majority of scientific literature taking a stance on climate change agrees with the consensus: of nearly 11 thousand scientific papers published in 2013 alone, only two rejected the notion of manmade global warming. Unfortunately for Bolling, simply saying something doesn't exist doesn't make it go away.

8. Fox's Kilmeade Likens Addressing Climate Change To Committing Treason.

On the June 26 edition of Fox News Radio's Kilmeade & Friends, host Brian Kilmeade made a stretched analogy between the present and the "record warm" temperatures that colonists encountered at Jamestown, noting that warm temperatures did not prevent the colonists from settling the town.

Kilmeade then derided President Obama for discussing climate change, suggesting he should "wait till he gets out of office" to address climate change so he can "attend to" other "crises." Kilmeade concluded: "It's almost treason for Obama to be focusing" on climate change.

7. CNBC's Joe Kernen Compares Climate Science To "Witchcraft" And "Orwellian Groupthink."

CNBC co-host Joe Kernenmade his contempt for climate science very clear this year. On the February 27 edition of Squawk Box,he likened climate change to "witchcraft," saying, "In the Middle Ages, you would attribute adverse weather events to witchcraft. Now we just have CO2."

In a subsequent edition of Squawk Box, Kerner also called belief in climate change "Orwellian Groupthink," adding, "You know what's going to happen? Pitchforks, and people are going to be outside of CNBC, I'm not going to argue on what's faith-based... but I don't want them protesting out in front... because any dissent at this point is totally not tolerated."

6. Fox Guest Predicts We Are Heading Into An "Ice Age."

On April 14, Fox host Eric Bolling interviewed David Archibald, who has no scientific credentials other than a bachelor's degree in geology yet claims to be a "climate scientist," to advance his claim of "an impending ice age."

In the segment, Bolling warned that harsh, cold winters "could be the new norm," and Archibald claimed that the globe will enter a "20- to 30-year cooling period" because the sun is "going to sleep."

Yet Archibald blaming the solar cycles for global warming has been debunked as solar cycles and global temperatures have been moving in opposite directions, and much of the research Archibald conducted to make these assertions has been criticized as "too erroneous to meet the standards in standard peer-reviewed journals."

5. Sean Hannity Announces That "Nothing" Will Convince Him Global Warming Is Not A Hoax.

On the January 29 edition of Premiere Radio Networks' The Sean Hannity Show, Sean Hannity claimed that "climate change hysteria has been politically motivated" and that scientists have altered data "so they could make a political point."

His guest brought up a recent report showing that only one out of of 9,136 scientists that authored scientific papers published from November 12, 2012, to December 31, 2013, rejected manmade global warming, but Hannity dismissed it immediately.

He asserted: "I don't care what your liberal friends say... It means nothing to me. I think global warming is a hoax, there's nothing you're going to say here today that's going to convince me otherwise."

4. Fox News Host Ignores Decades Of Arctic Sea Ice Decline To Cast Doubt On Climate Change.

On his show Cashin' In, host Eric Bolling attempted to cast doubt on global warming by displaying a graphic showing an increase in Arctic sea ice from 2012 to 2013, claiming that the Arctic has seen a "full icecap recovery."

It was an egregious case of cherry-picking; while Arctic sea ice reached record lows in 2012 which it recovered from slightly in 2013, the ice cap has been in decline for decades, and is nowhere near recovery. One year's increase does not negate the long-term trend.

3. Fox News Cites Birther To Claim NASA "Faked" Global Warming.

On June 24, Fox & Friends co-host Steve Doocy claimed that 1934 was the hottest year on record contrary to NASA's current data, "at least until NASA scientists fudged the numbers to make 1998 the hottest year to overstate the extent of global warming."

The Fox hosts based their comments on a blog post -- published under pseudonym Steven Goddard -- by Tony Heller, even though experts and even climate skeptic Anthony Watts identified fundamental flaws in his analysis. Heller touting conspiracy theories is nothing new: he previously promoted the myth that President Obama was born in Kenya.

2. Eric Bolling: Climate Change Is A Scam To Fund "Vacations Up In The Antarctic" And Researchers' "Lifestyles."

In a segment on climate change on the January 3 edition of Fox News' The Five, host Eric Bolling said that he did not believe in climate change because if scientists did not say there was global warming, there would be "no reason for them to get billions upon billions of dollars to fund their research projects" and "vacations in the Antarctic."

1. CNBC's Climate "Expert": "Demonization Of Carbon Dioxide Is Just Like" Demonization Of "Jews Under Hitler."

CNBC's Squawk Box invited Princeton professor William Happer to discuss climate change on the July 14 edition of the show, even though he has never written a peer-reviewed paper on the issue.

When co-anchor Andrew Ross Sorkin brought up Happer's past comments comparing climate science to Nazi propaganda, Happer defended his analogy, saying, "the demonization of carbon dioxide is just like the demonization of the poor Jews under Hitler; carbon dioxide is actually a benefit to the world."

Happer is the chairman of the Marshall Institute, which has received more than $800K from ExxonMobil.

Democrats Have The Votes To Sustain Obama Keystone XL Veto
By: Steve - January 4, 2015 - 11:00am

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced on CBS's Face The Nation that Senate Democrats have enough votes to sustain the widely expected veto that President Obama will issue after Republicans pass a bill authorizing the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline.

Schumer said this: "I think there will be enough Democratic votes to sustain the president's veto. Our Republican colleagues say that this is a jobs bill but that really is not true at all. By most estimates it would create several thousand temporary construction jobs and only 35 permanent jobs. Why create very few jobs with the dirtiest of energy from tar sands when you can create tens of thousands more clean jobs using wind and solar? Our Republican colleagues are doing what they always do: they're appeasing a few special interests -- in this case oil companies and pipeline companies and not really doing what's good for the average middle class family in terms of creating jobs."

Senate Republicans won't get anywhere near the 67 votes that they will need to override a presidential veto of the bill to authorize the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. President Obama made it clear that he was leaning towards vetoing the bill during his final press conference of 2014.

When the president was asked about Keystone XL, Obama said this:

At issue in Keystone is not American oil. It is Canadian oil that is drawn out of tar sands in Canada. That oil currently is being shipped out through rail or trucks and it would save Canadian oil companies and the Canadian oil industry an enormous amount of money if they could simply pipe it through the United States and all the way down to the Gulf.

Once that oil gets to Gulf, it is then entering into the world market, and it would be sold all around the world.

So there is no. I won't say no. There is very little impact, nominal impact on US gas prices, what the average American consumer cares about, by having this pipeline come though. And sometimes the way this gets sold is, let's get this oil, and it's going to come here and the implication is that it's going to lower gas prices here in the United States.

It's not. There's a global oil market. It's very good for Canadian oil companies and it's good for the Canadian oil industry, but it's not going to be a huge benefit to US consumers. It's not even going to be a nominal benefit to US consumers.

President Obama is going to veto whatever bill the Republicans pass that would authorize the construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. Republicans are going to try to spin this veto as the president being against job creation, but enough Senate Democrats will stand with the president to sustain his veto.

Republicans better get used to it, because they don't have enough votes to pass anything on their own. Congressional Democrats and President Obama are going to present a unified front against Republicans giving Big Oil the gift of Keystone XL.

Four Republican Predictions About Obama That Were All Wrong
By: Steve - January 2, 2015 - 11:00am

It's now 2015, nearly two years after Obama took the oath of office for the second time. A few years ago, Republicans were very confident about what would happen to America by now because of Obama's reelection. Let’s see how their predictions turned out:

1. Gas was supposed to cost $5.45 per gallon.

In March 2012, on the floor of the United States Senate, Mike Lee (R-UT) predicted that if Obama was re-elected gas would cost $5.45 per gallon by the start of 2015. Lee said that gas prices would rise 5 cents for every month Obama was in office, ultimately reaching $6.60 per gallon.

Newt Gingrich, who was running for the GOP nomination, predicted that if Obama was re-elected he would push gas to "$10 a gallon." Gingrich said he would reduce gas prices dramatically by reversing Obama's energy policies. Gingrich even had campaign signs promising $2.50 gas if he was elected.

Fact: Gas in now $1.98 here in East Peoria Illinois, and the Republicans do not say a word about it, including O'Reilly, who blamed Obama for high gas prices when it was near $4.00 a gallon. But does not give him credit for gas now when it is under $2.00 a gallon.

2. Unemployment was supposed to be stuck at over 8%

In September 2012, Mitt Romney predicted that if Obama is reelected "you're going to see chronic high unemployment continue four years or longer." At the time, the unemployment rate was 8.1% and had been between 8.1% and 8.3% for the entire year.

What would breaking out of "chronic high unemployment" look like in a Romney presidency? Romney pledged that, if elected, he could bring the unemployment rate down to 6% by January 2017.

The unemployment rate currently stands at 5.8% and has been under 6% since September 2014. Since January 2013, the economy has created nearly 5 million new jobs.

3. The stock market was supposed to crash

Immediately after Obama won re-election in November 2012, many right-wing commenters predicted that the stock market was toast. Including Donald Trump, who said this on his twitter account: @realDonaldTrump - "The stock market and US dollar are both plunging today. Welcome to @BarackObama's second term."

The Dow Jones Industrial Average currently stands at a record high of 17,823, and is up over 35% since Obama was reelected. Which means all the rich white Republican guys who hate Obama have made 35% on their investments, proving they are partisan idiots who slam the very guy who is making them more money than ever, for purely political reasons.

4. The entire U.S. economy was supposed to collapse

Rush Limbaugh predicted that "the country's economy is going to collapse if Obama is re-elected."

Limbaugh was even confident in his prediction: "There's no if about this. And it's gonna be ugly. It's gonna be gut wrenching, but it will happen"

The economic freefall would begin, according to Limbaugh, because "California is going to declare bankruptcy" and Obama would force states like Texas to "bail them out."

Fact: California currently has a $4 billion budget surplus.

Limbaugh added, "I know mathematics, and I know economics. I know history. I know socialism, statism, Marxism, I know where it goes. I know what happens at the end of it."

The U.S. economy grew at a robust 5% in the 3rd quarter of 2014, following 4.6% growth in the second quarter.

And btw, O'Reilly was saying the very same things, predicting nothing but doom and gloom if Obama was re-elected. To this day he has not admitted he was wrong, and still says the country is a disaster with Obama in office, even though all the facts show the exact opposite.





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