2-25-07 -- Last week O'Reilly cried about MSNBC doing a hit piece on Mitt Romney when Chip Reid said Romney was a flip flopper. Which was a joke anyway, because many conservatives and conservative news outlets have also called Romney a flip flopper, something you never heard from O'Reilly. He complained that it was two liberals attacking Romney with nobody from the right to provide any balance, and he said that was unfair.
Yet on thursday night O'Reilly and Dick Morris did a hit piece on Obama, with nobody from the left to provide any balance. So you have O'Reilly doing the exact same thing he complained about Chip Reid doing to Romney on MSNBC. It is total hypocrisy, and a biased double standard.
Not to mention the whole segment was nothing but a hit piece to make it look like Obama is not qualified to be President, because of his limited foreign policy experience. When almost no Presidents have any foreign policy experience, Bill Clinton did not have any foreign policy experience, but look how good of a job he did. And George W. Bush had no foreign policy experience either, but you never heard O'Reilly say he was not qualified to be president because of his lack of foreign policy experience.
The truth is what O'Reilly and FOX news do not want you to know. That Obama is highly qualified to be the next president, and if he wins the Democratic primary, he will be the next president. O'Reilly and FOX news are scared to death of Obama, because he is smart, he is popular, he can raise a lot of money, and he can speak well, unlike Bush who is an idiot, who can not even read a speech without screwing it up.
O'Reilly and FOX news are worried that Obama will win the Democratic primary, and that he will win the presidential election in 2008 if he does. That is why (20 months before the 2008 election) they have already started to imply he is not qualified to be president. The Republicans want Hillary to win the Democratic primary because they think they can beat her. But they are not so sure they could beat Obama, so they are going after him because they are scared to death he will beat Hillary in the Democratic primary.
Bill O'Reilly is a conservative, that is why he does almost nightly attacks on Hillary and Obama. While at the same time all his reports on Republicans running for president are positive. The more O'Reilly and the Republicans attack Obama, the more you will know how worried they are that Obama will win. If they were not worried about him, they would just ignore him, as they do with the other Democrats running for president. The only people they talk about are Hillary and Obama, because they are the only two people that worry them.
Fact: O'Reilly Ignores Real News to Attack NBC News
2-22-07 -- During one week of the no real news Factor, Billy mentioned NBC News 47 times and mentioned Iraq only 9 times. While the war in Iraq rages halfway across the globe, and America's deadliest enemy, al Qaeda, is reportedly rearming, and the Taliban is ready to attack with 10,000 troops in Afghanistan, what does Bill O'Reilly spend night after night talking about, the so-called left-wing bias at NBC News.
The only reason O'Reilly is going after NBC News is Keith Olbermann, note to Billy, Keith is on MSNBC, not NBC. Keith Olbermann exposes the truth about the right-wing bias, the spin, the lies, and the hypocrisy from Bill O'Reilly. He does it by using factor transcripts, or video, of Billy in his own words. Yet he claims it is all out of context lies about him from left-wing smear sites, earth to Billy, quoting your exact words from your own transcript, or showing a video of you saying something, is not out of context lies, it is the truth, in your own words, which is why you hate it so much.
O'Reilly ignores real news like: the UK troop withdrawal, the new study showing a 600% rise in terrorism since Bush invaded Iraq, the IG report showing Bush Justice Department terror stats are inaccurate, the walter reed wounded troop story, the Republican NY businessman charged with terror funding, the un-justified firing of federal prosecutors, Halliburton contract fraud, the IG report showing Rumsfeld, Feith, Cheney, and the OSP put out fake intelligence on Iraq before the war, etc. etc. etc.
Billy has not said a word about any of those news stories, he is too busy covering sex stories, Anna Nicole, and brittany spears, what he does is ignore the real news because it all makes Bush and the Republicans look bad. The O'Reilly factor should now be referred to as the no real news factor, or the tabloid factor.
Here is a Great Example of Republican Bias From Bill O'Reilly
2-21-07 -- This is just one example of how O'Reilly ignores news stories that make Republicans look bad.
Back is 2002 University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian was charged with terror funding. He was fired after he appeared on The O'Reilly Factor. O'Reilly not only had Al-Arian on the Factor as a guest, he did numerous follow up shows on him over the next two years. During the interview, O'Reilly told Al-Arian that if he were with the CIA, "I'd follow you wherever you went" -- clearly implying that he believed Al-Arian was a terrorist.
Last friday a Republican NY businessman was charged in federal court with terror funding, and he faces 95 years in prison. He is a bigshot in the Republican party in NY, where you have the FOX news headquarters, where O'Reilly works and lives, and where he tapes his show. Yet to this day Bill O'Reilly has not said one word about this story, not a word.
Ask yourself why O'Reilly is ignoring this story. Hey Billy, why are you not reporting this story, with multiple follow ups, and telling the CIA to follow this guy everywhere he goes. Simple, because he is a Republican.
Republican Businessman From NY Charged With Terror Funding
Abdul Tawala Ibn Ali Alishtari, also known as Michael Mixon, pleaded not guilty in U.S. District Court in Manhattan to an indictment accusing him of terrorism financing, material support of terrorism and other charges. The charges carried a potential penalty of 95 years in prison.
In the federal indictment, the government said Alishtari accepted an unspecified amount of money to transfer $152,000 to Pakistan and Afghanistan to support an Afghanistan terrorist training camp. He also stands accused of causing the transfer of about $25,000 from a bank account in New York to an account in Montreal, money the government says was to be used to provide material support to terrorists.
Alishtari is a donor to the Republican Party, he gave $15,500 to the National Republican Campaign Committee between 2002 and 2004. That includes $13,000 in 2003, a year when he was named NRCC New York State Businessman of the Year.
Don't Look Now Billy, NBC News is Back to Number One
2-20-07 -- You can bet the farm you wont hear this reported on the O'Reilly factor. O'Reilly will never report NBC news is back at #1 because it would destroy his argument that viewers have left NBC because they moved to the left.
Last week O'Reilly reported that ABC news beat NBC news in the ratings, and he claimed NBC lost viewers because they have moved to the left. That was the week of 2-5-07, ABC had 9.7 million viewers, NBC had 9.52 million viewers.
Now NBC is back at number one. In numbers for last week, NBC had 10,168,000 total viewers, slightly edging ABC's 10,060,000.
Hey Billy, if viewers stopped watching NBC news because they moved to the left, how are they #1 again?
Here are some facts, what you wont find on the factor. In january of 2006 NBC news averaged 10,030,000 viewers a night, last week NBC news had 10,168,000 a night. So as you can see, not only have viewers not left NBC news, they have actually gained a few viewers a night since January of 2006.
NBC nightly new with Brian Williams always has 9 to 10 million viewers a night, nobody is leaving them, once in a while ABC news has a spike in viewers and they beat NBC, but it rarely happens.
My Position on a Few Issues That O'Reilly Lies About
1) Terrorism - I support the war on terror 100 percent. O'Reilly claims that liberals do not understand that terrorists are evil, and that we do not want to fight that evil. With all due respect, that is total right-wing propaganda. I want the US Government to find, prosecute, and jail every terrorist they can. But they have to first prove they are terrorists, and then get a guilty verdict in a valid court.
You can not just say someone is a terrorist, then lock them up and throw the key away. You have to charge them, prosecute them, and find them guilty, then you can lock them up forever. I support that, and I understand they are evil, but I only support it if they are found guilty of a terrorist act.
O'Reilly claims liberals just want to give the terrorists therapy, that is ridiculous right-wing propaganda put out to fool the American people so they will vote Republican. I want every proven terrorist locked up in prison for life with no parole, I want them to rot in a 5x10 cell for the rest of their life, that way they can think about the people they killed and die a slow miserable death.
2) The Border- I personally want the border locked down, even though that is probably not even possible, in an ideal world I would want it shut down so nobody gets in illegally. But the Republicans do not want that because they need the cheap mexican labor to get their excessive profits. The border is open so the Corporations can get cheap mexican labor, that is a fact. Dont blame liberals for that, blame the Republicans in the House and Senate who are in the back pocket of big business. Dont forget the Republicans had control of the House for 12 years, yet they did nothing to stop illegal immigration.
O'Reilly claims all liberals want an open border, that is insanity, and a big lie. It is just more right-wing propaganda from Billy O'Reilly, he says that so voters will think all Democrats want open borders, then they will vote Republican. I do not know one liberal who wants an open border, not one. They want reality based immigration policies, but none of them want open borders. If anyone is to blame for the border problem, it is the Republicans in Congress who get all their money from big business.
3) Iraq And The Troops - I oppose the war in Iraq, because we know the war was based on lies about WMD's. This is a fact, Bush, Cheney, the OSP, PNAC, Feith, Wolfowitz, Rice, Powell, etc. knew Saddam did not have WMD's, just ask Scott Ritter. They cherry picked the intelligence and lied about the connection with Iraq, Saddam, Al-Qaeda, and the 9-11 terrorist attack to drum up support for the war. In fact, they still do it, O'Reilly, Bush, and the Republicans still link 9-11 with Iraq and the war on terror, when there was no connection, and they have nothing to do with each other.
While I oppose the Iraq war, I support the war on terror, the war in Afghanistan, and I support the troops 100 percent. I think anyone who joins the military, and fights for this great country is a hero, period. O'Reilly and his Republican friends want the American people to believe if you oppose the Iraq war you oppose the war on terror, and you do not support the troops. This is right-wing propaganda to the extreme, and it is totally ridiculous.
O'Reilly also claims liberals that do not support George W. Bush, and the Iraq war, hate America, that is the most insane thing I have ever heard, it is totally false. I love America, and I think it is the greatest country in the world, and if O'Reilly ever said that garbage to my face he would end up with a broken nose. I do not support George W. Bush, that does not make me an America hater, it makes me a George W. Bush hater, and it's funny how when Bill Clinton was president O'Reilly did not call Republicans who did not support Clinton America haters.
You can love America and hate George W. Bush, and you can love America and hate Bill O'Reilly too.
O'Reilly Dumped by National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
2-9-07 -- They dumped Billy for his insane statements in the Shawn Hornbeck kidnapping. Billy said the kid liked being with the kidnapper, and that he stayed with him so he did not have to go to school. Even though O'Reilly said he NEVER speculates, here is what he said on January 15, right after the story was first reported.
O'REILLY: The situation here for this kid looks to me to be a lot more fun than what he had under his old parents. He didn't have to go to school. He could run around and do whatever he wanted.
-------------------------------
Statement
Collier County, Florida Branch
National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
In response to the numerous e-mails and inquiries we have received, we are providing the following update regarding the Collier County, Florida branch fundraising dinner scheduled for March 9, 2007 in Naples, Florida. Bill O'Reilly, host of The O'Reilly Factor, will not be a speaker at the dinner. The dinner will be held as scheduled. John Walsh, host of America's Most Wanted, will be the keynote speaker.
2-8-07 -- During the 2-5-07 O'Reilly factor Billy had Col. Ann Wright, U.S. Army (Ret.) on to discuss the Watada court-martial case. During the interview Billy said not one person he knows of in international law says the Iraq war was illegal. Not one.
O'REILLY: All right, but that's fine. But there's no person that I know of in international law that says the Iraq War is illegal. Not one. Because of the first Gulf War cease-fire, which was violated 17 times. The first time it was violated, the coalition forces had the right to go back in and remove Saddam. As you know, cease-fire is a document that was signed. They violated it 17 times. They went in and removed him. It's a fairly simple legal deal.
That statement from Billy O'Reilly is a 100 percent flat out LIE. With a simple google search that took 2 seconds I found this:
International legal experts regard Iraq war as illegal
Prominent international legal experts regard the US-British invasion of Iraq as a clear breach of international law. The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) said such "a war waged without a clear mandate from the United Nations Security Council would constitute a flagrant violation of the prohibition of the use of force." The commission emphasises that Security Council Resolution 1441 does not authorise the use of force.
The ICJ added: "The competency of the Security Council to authorise the use of force is not unlimited. It may only do so to 'maintain or restore international peace and security.'" The evidence presented by the governments of the United States, the United Kingdom and Spain is "less than convincing," the ICJ declared.
The ICJ comprises 60 of the world's top jurists on international law.
Legal experts in the United States and Britain have also declared the war illegal. In January of 2003, 315 teachers of law from 87 law schools across the US stated that a US war, unleashed without the approval of the UN Security Council against a country that has not attacked the United States, would itself be an unlawful act, in defiance of America's treaty obligations and a violation of US and international law.
O'Reilly also claimed that because Saddam violated the cease-fire 17 times the coalition could go back in and remove Saddam. That is also a LIE.
The US and British governments (and Bill O'Reilly) have claimed that their invasion is justified by UN Security Council Resolution 1441 and two old Security Council resolutions authorizing force to end the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait and setting out the terms of the cease-fire after the Persian Gulf War of 1991.
John Currie, a University of Ottawa law school professor, described these arguments as fatally flawed. The 1991 resolution stated that the Security Council "decides to remain seized of the matter and to take such further steps as may be required for the implementation of the present resolution." The Security Council--not the United States, Britain or other council members acting on their own--must decide on further use of force.
The International Commission of Jurists agrees with this stance. Resolution 1441 did not authorise the use of force, according to Secretary-General Louise Doswald-Beck. She said, "The bottom line is that nine members of the Security Council, including the five permanent members, need actively to support the use of force. Such support is blatantly lacking."
Funny how O'Reilly claims not one international law expert says the Iraq war is illegal, I just found 375 international law experts who say the Iraq was was illegal, and I did it with a simple 2 second google search on a home PC. In fact, you can barely find any international law experts who say the Iraq war was legal, just the opposite of what O'Reilly claims.
O'Reilly Caught Lying Again About WMD Intelligence on Iraq
2-7-07 -- During the 2-5-07 O'Reilly factor tv show, Billy once again stated that everyone thought Saddam had WMD's. He said nobody ever said Iraq did not have WMD's. This is a flat out 100 percent LIE. Those statements are proof that O'Reilly just makes things up to support his politically motivated right wing arguments.
Someone should ask Bill if he ever heard of Scott Ritter. Prior to the US invasion of Iraq in March, 2003, Ritter repeatedly stated that Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction.
And Scott Ritter should know, he served from 1991 to 1998 as a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq in the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), which was charged with finding and destroying all weapons of mass destruction and WMD-related manufacturing capabilities in Iraq.
In July of 2002 Ritter said this in a Boston Globe article:
I bear personal witness through seven years as a chief weapons inspector in Iraq for the United Nations to both the scope of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs and the effectiveness of the UN weapons inspectors in ultimately eliminating them.
While we were never able to provide 100 percent certainty regarding the disposition of Iraq's proscribed weaponry, we did ascertain a 90-95 percent level of verified disarmament. This figure takes into account the destruction or dismantling of every major factory associated with prohibited weapons manufacture, all significant items of production equipment, and the majority of the weapons and agent produced by Iraq.
With the exception of mustard agent, all chemical agent produced by Iraq prior to 1990 would have degraded within five years.
The same holds true for biological agent, which would have been neutralized through natural processes within three years of manufacture. Effective monitoring inspections, fully implemented from 1994-1998 without any significant obstruction from Iraq, never once detected any evidence of retained proscribed activity or effort by Iraq to reconstitute that capability which had been eliminated through inspections.
In direct contrast to these findings, the Bush administration provides only speculation, failing to detail any factually based information to bolster its claims concerning Iraq's continued possession of or ongoing efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction. To date no one has held the Bush administration accountable for its unwillingness - or inability - to provide such evidence.
And we have this, in January of 2003 William Rivers Pitt and Scott Ritter released a book where they detail how Iraq is not a threat to the USA, and how Iraq does not have any WMD's. The book was called; War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn't Want You to Know. Yet Billy (Bush is my hero) O'Reilly still claims everyone was saying Iraq had WMD's, when he knows that is a lie.
For the record: Scott Ritter was proven to be 100 percent right, Bush invaded Iraq in March of 2003 and found no WMD's, none, zip, zilch, nada. When we have conclusive proof that Scott Ritter was telling the world Iraq did not have WMD's, the problem is nobody would listen to him. In fact, people like Sean Hannity and Bill O'Reilly said Scott Ritter did not know what he was talking about, and they called him un-American and a traitor.
Not to mention 23 US Senators (and many Congressman) voted no on the Iraq war because they did not believe Iraq was a threat to the USA, and they did not believe Iraq had any WMD's.
O'Reilly Said he Will Not Call Sean Penn Anti-American, After he Called Him Anti-American
1-31-07 -- On the 1-29-07 O'Reilly factor Michelle Malkin said both Jane Fonda and Sean Penn are Anti-American, then Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: All right, but you say it's anti-American. You know that the Fondas and Penns are going to say, "Listen, I'm as American as you are, Michelle Malkin. I just see things differently." And I'm willing to give them the benefit of that doubt. I don't want to say that they're anti-American.
Yet at the top of the show during his talking points memo O'Reilly called Sean Penn Anti-American.
Here is the proof:
This is a classic example of Billy O'Reilly talking out of both sides of his face, he said he would not call Sean Penn Anti-American, the problem is he said that about 15 minutes after he had already called him Anti-American.
Ellis Henican Nails O'Reilly on His Changing Iraq Deadlines
1-26-07 -- Eighteen months ago O'Reilly said he will give Bush 6 months to get the violence in Iraq under control. He said if the violence in not under control in 6 months then it's over and we have lost Iraq. The 6 months went by and O'Reilly once again said he will give Bush another 6 months. That 6 months went by and O'Reilly said he will give Bush another 6 months. Now, 18 months later he is saying he will give Bush another 6 months.
Finally someone called O'Reilly on his never ending deadlines.
On 1-24-07, O'Reilly declared that the Iraqis have "six months and that's it" to "stop killing each other." Newsday columnist Ellis Henican pointed out that O'Reilly "said that 18 months ago, and 12 months ago ... and six months ago," adding, "You keep pushing the goalposts further back." Henican then concluded that O'Reilly would "have been better off if you'd listened to me," to which O'Reilly replied, "I would commit suicide if I listened to you. ... I'd be Jonestown!" Henican then noted that O'Reilly "would not be in the embarrassing position of sitting here and saying ... 'Please give me another chance. Please, another chance.' "
The sad part is, Henican was right, O'Reilly was wrong. And we know if the President were a Democrat the deadlines would not keep changing. O'Reilly sets these meaningless 6 month deadlines for Iraq, then he just sets a new one when the old one expires. In 6 months he will give Bush another 6 months, so what's the point of even setting deadlines if you just change them when they expire.
O'Reilly said Iraq only has 6 months or it's over, but he said that in August of 2005. Now here we are a year and a half later and he still wants to give it another 6 months. And if you dont support the new Bush (so-called) surge plan, O'Reilly will say you are a Bush hating far left traitor. Even though 99% of the military experts say the surge will not work, and O'Reilly himself said we only have a 6 month window to fix Iraq in June of 2005.
I would support a surge, if it was 100,000 troops, because then it might work, but a 21,000 troops surge is not enough to secure a country of 26 million people, and everyone knows that. And I am not anti-war as O'Reilly claims all liberals are, but I am anti-bad war, like the Iraq war. I supported the afghanistan war to get the Taliban and Bin Laden, and I support the war on terrorism. And I support the troops 100 percent, the only thing I oppose is the Bush administration, and their incompetent handling of the Iraq war.
Before some right wing nut says I took him out of context and mis-quoted him, here is exactly what he said on August 3rd, 2005, and it's in context.
COWAN: But I'd add one thing, if I could, Bill. When you talk about the Iraqi people, you're right. A lot of responsibility on the Iraqi people to change things. But they don't know what's going to happen. They're still not sure what side they're going to land up with at the end of the game here. And the killings, intimidation, fear, kidnappings of Iraqis, it's not something we talk about regularly here on the news, Bill. But my friends in Iraq say it's rampant.
O'REILLY: Of course.
COWAN: It's unbelievable. And you mention coming in here, the killings down in Basra. In Baghdad itself, Shiites killing Sunnis, Sunnis killing Shiites.
O'REILLY: But that's what I'm talking about. I'm talking about that American forces can't provide security for the people.
COWAN: Can't do it, Bill. They can't. Because the people are afraid. They can't provide it.
O'REILLY: So either the Iraqi forces are going to have to provide the security, and you guys both say they're not, or we lose.
COWAN: Bill, we are not on a good glide path right now. And it's going to be tough. And David's exactly right. When we're talking about pulling out, all the Iraqi people are sitting back saying, well, if they're pulling out, I better decide where I want to be.
O'REILLY: If they've got 90 battalions of Iraq troops, I mean, within six months, they either do it or they don't. I mean, we can't be South Vietnamese all over again. Either you fight or you don't. That's it.
O'Reilly Website Poll: 70% Support More Troops to Iraq
1-12-07 -- This shows how out of touch the billoreilly.com visitors are with the rest of America. It also shows how biased the people who visit his website are, only far right nutjobs support sending more troops to a 4 year old failed war. Even the majority of active duty troops do not support sending more troops to Iraq. Because they know it will not do any good, and they know this is just a political move by George W. Bush to delay things in Iraq from really getting out of control until after the 2008 elections.
And everyone who supports this troop increase in Iraq will go to hell for getting more Americas killed for political reasons. And this is not just my opinion, look at what the former National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter said in a 1-12-07 Washington Post editorial.
"The commitment of 21,500 more troops is a political gimmick of limited tactical significance and of no strategic benefit. It is insufficient to win the war militarily. It will engage U.S. forces in bloody street fighting that will not resolve with finality the ongoing turmoil and the sectarian and ethnic strife, not to mention the anti-American insurgency."
In a new AP-Ipsos poll that came out yesterday (1-11-07) a full 70% of the American people DO NOT support sending more troops to Iraq, and this was a real poll taken by telephone with a random sample, not a bogus, unscientific, and biased poll taken on O'Reilly's right wing biased personal website.
Factor Poll
More Troops - 70%
USA/Gallop Poll
More Troops - 39%
Rasmussen Reports
More Troops - 31%
ABC News/Washington Post poll
More Troops - 36%
Scarborough Challenges O'Reilly to Debate Anywhere Anytime
1-5-07 -- Scarborough: Bill O'Reilly says everybody—and I mean all of you, all of you in here—everybody hates President Bush. There's not a single conservative at NBC. He said it an hour ago. Oh, really, Bill?
SCARBOROUGH: Bill O'Reilly's at it again, saying just about an hour ago on his TV show that NBC News is, quote, "far left." Watch this.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BILL O'REILLY: You have a major shift in a major news organization. "Today" show, very powerful, Brian Williams, news, they have "Dateline NBC," two cable networks. It's a business decision to go to the left.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
SCARBOROUGH: And this follows earlier comments made on his radio show today that there's not a single conservative at NBC News and everyone at this network hates President Bush. Listen to what else he said.
(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)
O'REILLY: Bush can't win, no matter what he does! NBC News, "The New York Times," "The Washington Post," they're going to say he's an idiot. There's no sense of balance or fairness in their reporting. That's activist journalism!
(END VIDEO CLIP)
Scarborough: Bill O'Reilly, just attack Rosie. You‘re way off base on MSNBC, on NBC and certainly on me. And I challenge you to debate me anytime, anyplace, anywhere, and find one thing I have said on this program over the past year that is not consistent with the conservative congressman who was against military adventurism when I was in Congress, that was against exploding deficits, that was against reckless spending and against turning Congress into the type of swamp that we Republicans have turned it into over the past six years!
That doesn't make me liberal, that makes me conservative! That may make you, though, a suck-up, if you defend the Republicans that have done that to this country and to our party over the past six years!
Note from Stewert: Hey Billy, you idiotic right wing fool, you say there are no conservatives at NBC, tell that to Tucker Carlson, Don Imus, Joe Scarborough, and Pat Buchanan. They are all conservatives, every one of them, and three of them have their own shows on MSNBC, the other is their #1 Political Analyst. O'Reilly also said that only liberals like Tom Brokaw are saying the hanging of Saddam was a PR disaster, and he claims that is proof that Brokaw is a liberal, that is also a lie. Many Republicans are saying the same thing, including Charles Krauthammer, Joe Scarborough, and many other Conservatives.
------
BARNICLE: Here's the reality of it. The way he died made Saddam a folk hero among savages whose only intent is to kill Americans. So more Iraqis are going to have more resolve to try and kill more Americans because of the way Saddam Hussein was executed, like it was a chapter in "Deadwood" HBO!
SCARBOROUGH: And I'll tell you what. In the end, I guess the thing that made me the most angry about it is not because I'm a liberal, it's because I'm a conservative. It's not because I oppose our troops, it's because I support our troops, because I represented our troops for eight years on the Armed Services Committee! The people who are going to be suffering on this aren't people at Fox News or MSNBC, they're going to be the 19-year-old kids that are going to be touring Sunni neighborhoods, trying to keep things in order, and getting blown up because of the sectarian violence that's going to continue ripping apart the country, probably at a more intense pace because of the sloppy way that execution was handled! I think it was a disgrace. I think it was a PR disaster. But that's just my opinion.
Update: O'Reilly And The Kansas Abortion Doctor
12-22-06 -- Recently O'Reilly went after the Kansas abortion doctor George Tiller, he said he had seen evidence that the Doctor was performing illegal abortions. Even though that is a violation of their privacy, and the Kansas attorney general had promised if he got those records nobody would see them.
Well lets see if O'Reilly reports this, I doubt it.
----------
Charges against Kan. abortion doc dumped
WICHITA, Kan. — Kansas attorney general, a vocal abortion opponent, charged a well-known
abortion provider with illegally performing late-term abortions, but a Sedgwick County judge on Friday threw out the charges after less than a day.
Judge Paul W. Clark dismissed the charges against Tiller after Sedgwick County District Attorney Nola Foulston said her office had not been consulted by Kline. Clark signed his one-page order only hours after Kline's complaint against Tiller was unsealed.
Attorney General Phill Kline's office did not immediately return calls seeking comment. Kline lost his re-election bid in November and leaves office in three weeks.
Most of the 30 misdemeanor counts Kline filed against Dr. George Tiller involve abortions performed on patients 17 or younger, including a 10-year-old, according to the criminal complaint unsealed Friday in Sedgwick County District Court.
Tiller's clinic, known for being one of the few in the country to perform late-term abortions, has been a high-profile target of anti-abortion protesters for decades. The clinic was bombed in 1985, and Tiller was shot in both arms by a protester in 1993.
Joe Scarborough Calls O'Reilly Insane Over Civil War in Iraq
11-30-06 -- While I rarely agree with Scarborough, he was exactly right this time. Except for the part at the end where he says there are not a lot of networks other than FOX who have conservatives like him, that's a lie.
For one, MSNBC has a ton of conservatives, Tucker, Imus, Scarborough, Buchanan, Crosby, etc. CNN even has a few, Paula Zahn, Lou Dobbs, Bill Schneider, Bay Buchanan. And they had Tucker Carlson and Bob Novak too, until they were both fired from crossfire.
Cable news media is dominated by Conservatives. So Scarborough is wrong when he says nobody but FOX has conservatives on the air, they are everywhere on cable news.
---------
SCARBOROUGH: And you know, Matthew Felling, though, when we're talking about bias, I got to-let's bring in Fox News anchor Bill O'Reilly because he actually went after NBC News for the decision to use the term "civil war" to describe the situation in Iraq. Take a look at Bill O'Reilly's attack on NBC.
O'REILLY: NBC News has declared that there is indeed a civil war in Iraq. Now, that's not shocking because NBC is the most aggressive anti-Bush network these days, as they have made a calculated effort to woo left-wing viewers. The question is, Is NBC wrong about Iraq? The answer is, Yes. Of course, the American media is not helping anyone by oversimplifying the situation and rooting for the USA to lose in Iraq, and that is what some media people are doing.
SCARBOROUGH: I think that's insane, that he's suggesting there that NBC is rooting for America to lose in Iraq. Bill O'Reilly has had questions about this war from the very beginning. Bill O'Reilly knows we're engaged in a civil war over there. I'm stunned. What is going on at Fox News? Why is Bill O‘Reilly claiming that my network, NBC News, is rooting for terrorists? That's truly insulting to me.
Note: Everyone knows that Iraq is in a civil war, from Colin Powell to Newt Gingrich to civil war experts, and virtually all the military analysts and terrorism experts, they all think Iraq is in a civil war. Even the majority of the American people believe it, in a new Harris poll 68% of Americans believe Iraq is in a civil war, only 14% disagree. O'Reilly once again falls in line with the Bush administration with his denial that Iraq is in a civil war. He is doing it for political reasons, just as Hannity, Coulter, and Rush are doing. They dont want to admit it because then it would show the Bush policies in Iraq have put them in a civil war. Only kool-aid drinking right wing idiots disagree Iraq is in a civil war, and they dont really believe it, they just say it to support the Bush lies.
O'Reilly Caught Lying Again (Does he Ever Tell The Truth)
11-18-06 -- Once again oreilly-sucks.com has documented proof that BIll O'Reilly is a compulsive liar. Now he claims the FOX News Channel has nothing to do with the FOX Broadcasting Network. Nothing could be further from the truth.
From the 11-15-06 O'Reilly Factor:
O'REILLY: "Here's a man many believe did kill those two Americans, Nicole Brown Simpson being mother of his two children. Yet Simpson is participating in a project that is exploiting the murders. Shamefully, the Fox Broadcasting Unit is set to carry the program, which is simply indefensible, and a low point in American culture. For the record, Fox Broadcasting has nothing to do with the Fox News Channel."
And now the real no spin facts:
-- The FOX News Channel, the FOX Broadcasting Network, and HarperCollins are all owned by News Corp.
-- Fox News Channel chief Roger Ailes also chairs Fox Television Stations, the group behind the forthcoming "low point in American culture." The shared "Fox" moniker is no coincidence either. Fox Broadcasting and the Fox News Channel are both owned by News Corp. founder Rupert Murdoch.
-- The Fox Broadcasting Corporation regularly airs Fox News-produced programming, from coverage of presidential speeches to O'Reilly's special documentaries.
-- HarperCollins, the publishing house that is paying Simpson $3.5 million for his book is also owned by News Corp.
-- Hey Billy, what happened to the full disclosure you ask for from other media outlets. O'Reilly never mentioned the book publisher by name, or pointed out that it's also owned by the same people who cut his very own paycheck. Yes the very same corporation who is paying O.J. Simpson $3.5 million for his book, also pays Bill O'Reilly.
-- Judith Regan, who will be conducting the interview with O.J. also publishes all of Sean Hannity's books. And Roger Ailes himself, once gave Regan a show -- Judith Regan Tonight -- on the Fox News Channel.
O'Reilly Falsely Claims U.S. Still Has a Conservative Majority
11-17-06 -- Bill O'Reilly recently stated that America still has a Conservative majority, he claims that the people only voted against Republicans because of Iraq, even though exit polls show Corruption as another big reason why the Republicans lost. Once again O'Reilly is long on right-wing propaganda, and short on facts.
In 2004 the Gallup poll showed that 35% of registered voters identified themselves as Republicans, while 34% identified themselves as Democrats. Hardly the vast majority O'Reilly claims, a 1% difference is pretty much a tie.
Now (According to a recent Gallup poll) the number of Americans who identify themselves as Republicans has dropped to 30.2%, a decline of more than 5 percentage points. The proportion of Americans who call themselves Democrats has grown to 36.3% now, a gain of more than 2 points.
Independents, just 29.5% of the electorate in 2004, have now surpassed the GOP share, at 33.4% -- an increase of nearly 4 points. So the Democrats are now the majority, that means when you hear O'Reilly say there is still a Conservative majority in America you will know he is lying.
O'Reilly Caught Lying About Misleading Headline in L.A. Times Article
11-13-06 -- On the Thursday Nov, 9th O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly said The L.A. Times used a "misleading headline" to claim CNN had a ratings victory in their election coverage. He called this policing the press, yet he is a liar, and the only Press who should be policed is Bill O'Reilly. The truth is not even close to what O'Reilly reported, this is a perfect example of how O'Reilly spins things to make papers like the L.A. Times look like far left liars.
Here is what O'Reilly said:
O'REILLY: "Policing the Press" segment tonight: The ratings are in -- FOX News Channel once again the cable news champion on election night, CNN second, nobody else close.
Now, "The Los Angeles Times" reported today -- quote -- "CNN enjoyed a rare ratings victory." Of course, that isn't true.
"The L.A. Times" went on to cite a demographic category to cover its misleading headline. That kind of stuff happens all the time.
---------------------------------
And now the truth, as in the facts:
The headline on the L.A. Times article was "Stars help ABC glide to top of election ratings" and not "CNN enjoyed a rare ratings victory" as O'Reilly claims.
And here is the full quote from the actual article. Notice that the article clearly states CNN enjoyed a ratings victory in the 25 to 54 year old demographic, and that they never claim CNN was #1 in total viewers. In fact, they also clearly state that FOX News maintained an edge in total viewers, on top of that they also report the actual numbers showing FOX to be #1 in total viewers.
Among the cable news channels, CNN enjoyed a rare ratings victory, drawing the largest number of 25 to 54 year old viewers, the key demographic advertisers seek on news programs, throughout the day and during prime time. Top-ranked Fox News maintained an edge among total viewers, but just barely, with an average prime-time audience of 3.06 million to CNN's 2.97 million.
Dont believe me, go read the article for yourself. Then tell me how O'Reilly is not a lying spin doctor.
Kansas MD to Ask For Investigation of State AG & Bill O'Reilly
(AP) 11-5-06 -- Dr. George Tiller said he will ask the Kansas Supreme Court on Monday to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate and take possession of the records of 90 patients from two clinics.
Attorney General Phill Kline obtained the records recently after a two-year battle that prompted privacy concerns. He has said he sought the records to review them for evidence of possible crimes including rape and illegal abortions.
During a Friday night broadcast of "The O'Reilly Factor," the conservative host said a "source inside" told the show that Tiller performs late-term abortions when a patient is depressed, which O'Reilly deemed "executing babies."
O'Reilly also said his show has evidence that Tiller's clinic and another unnamed clinic have broken Kansas law by failing to report potential rapes with victims ages 10 to 15.
A spokeswoman for Kline, who received redacted copies of the records Oct. 24, said Saturday she doesn't know how O'Reilly obtained the information.
A request to Fox in Washington to interview O'Reilly or someone associated with his show wasn't answered Saturday.
NOTE: This is exactly what Kline said would never happen. When he asked the court to give him these private medical records, he said they would be used to find evidence of crimes, and that nobody would ever see that information except for him or other people who work in his office. Now we find out someone leaked this information to Bill O'Reilly.
10-29-06 -- Bill O'Reilly at one point in his face off with David Letterman attempted to stump Letterman and prove Iraq had ties to terrorism by citing Ansar al-Islam. According to O'Reilly, Ansar al-Islam was a terrorist group tied to al-Qaeda who was in Iraq before the war working with Saddam Hussein. Of course, it's a BIG lie.
The Senate Report of Pre-War Intelligence on Iraq has concluded that Ansar al-Islam was considered a threat to the Saddam regime. They were enemies -- not allies.
Here's the quote from the Republican led Senate committee (page 92-93):
According to the DIA [Defense Intelligence Agency], detainee information and captured document exploitation indicate that the regime [of Saddam Hussein] was aware of Ansar al-Islam and al-Qa'ida presence in northeastern Iraq, but the groups' presence was considered a threat to the regime and the Iraqi government attempted intelligence collection operations against them. The DIA stated that information from senior Ansar al-Islam detainees revealed that the group viewed Saddam's regime as apostate, and denied any relationship with it.
10-28-06 -- The Oprah show was kinda lame, it was a town hall format with Oprah playing the neutral moderator. And with O'Reilly spending the whole week on his radio and tv show telling factor supporters to get in the audience so he could have a lot of softball questions, and make it look like a lot of people agree with him. It left little time for people who disagree with O'Reilly to get their say. It was basically a platform for O'Reilly to spew his right wing propaganda in front of a national audience, and to promote his book.
Frankly i'm surprised Oprah fell for his marketing trick, he only wanted on her show to sell more books. Oprah played the clip of O'Reilly saying if we go into Iraq and dont find any WMD's he will say he is sorry and never trust the Bush administration again. Yet every night he does nothing but defend Bush and everyone in his administration. If anyone dares to say one negative thing about Bush O'Reilly calls them an un-American traitor who just hates Bush and hates America. He combines the Iraq war and the war on terror, and if you oppose the Iraq war O'Reilly twists that into you oppose the war on terror. When they are two different issues, you can oppose the Iraq war and support the war on terror, as I do.
In the world of Bill O'Reilly, George W. Bush, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, etc. If you oppose Bush on anything, and you oppose the Iraq war, then you are a Bush hating un-American traitor who does not support the war on terror, and you hate America. All of which is a ridiculous lie, it's nothing but right wing spin put out to make people think if you oppose the Iraq war you dont support the war on terror. And they imply that if you dont like how Bush is running the country you have no valid arguments, you just hate Bush, which is another ridiculous lie. O'Reilly said nobody in the Bush administration lied about WMD's, and there is no evidence to show they did, another lie, this one from O'Reilly. Look around the internet, you can find tons of evidence the Bush administration knew Saddam did not have any WMD's, and that they spun the intelligence to show he did.
Ask O'Reilly why the OSP (Office of Special Plans) was formed, and what their job was. And notice that O'Reilly never mentions one word about the OSP, PNAC, karen kwiatkowski, or Greg Theillman. How come neither karen kwiatkowski or Greg Theillman have ever been on the factor, even though Karen worked for Rumsfeld in the OSP, and Greg was the #1 man on Iraq intelligence at the Pentagon. Karen and Greg both claim Bush and Cheney cherry picked the intelligence to support their claims, funny how O'Reilly dont want to talk to the people who can prove Bush and Cheney lied us into war in Iraq.
Ask yourself why O'Reilly will not put Thomas Ricks on the factor, he wrote the book Fiasco, it's a detailed look at Iraq from the military point of view, yet O'Reilly refuses to have him on the factor. Because Thomas Ricks has the facts on Iraq, and if he put him on the air he would de-bunk all the spin on Iraq from O'Reilly, and we cant have the truth about Iraq from the guy who wrote the book getting out on the factor now can we.
O'Reilly on Letterman was pretty good, Letterman called O'Reilly a bonehead, and he said his head is filled with artifical facts. O'Reilly lied about the connection between Iraq and al-qaeda again, there was no connection, yet Billy and his Republican buddies keep saying there was. Even though it has been proven wrong by virtually everyone, even the Bush administration has admitted there was no connection, only Billy, Rush, Hannity, Coulter, etc. continue to claim there was.
I have the transcript with O'Reilly and Letterman, you can read it here.
10-19-06 -- Watch O'Reilly get his ass handed to him by Rosie, Barbara, and Joy.
O'Reilly's Internet Popularity Falls Drastically (92% Drop)
10-16-06 -- For the sixth year in a row, Howard Stern continues his reign as the most searched talk radio personality with web users, generating 232 percent more online interest than Adam Carolla, who holds the number two spot this year.
Some favorites from past years saw notable drops in 2006, the biggest being Bill O'Reilly. O'Reilly is 92 percent less popular than he was in 2005, falling completely out of the top 20 this year.
Note: Al Franken came up from a minus ranking in 2005 to number nine in 2006.
The Top 10 Most Searched Talk Radio Personalities of 2006 are (numbers in parentheses reflect last year's rank):
1. Howard Stern (1)
2. Adam Carolla (-)
3. Tavis Smiley (29)
4. Don Imus (-)
5. Rush Limbaugh (2)
6. Tom Joyner (-)
7. Lionel (-)
8. Wendy Williams (-)
9. Al Franken (-)
10. Art Bell (7)
Marine Officer in Iraq Names O'Reilly Worst TV Talking Head
10-8-06 -- This was written by a Marine Officer in Iraq, Time.com has a copy of his letter that he sent to his family.
Biggest Outrage — Practically anything said by talking heads on TV about the war in Iraq, not that I get to watch much TV. Their thoughts are consistently both grossly simplistic and politically slanted. Biggest Offender: Bill O'Reilly.
O'Reilly Said we Dont Torture, Then he Said we Did Torture
9-26-06 -- For how long has O'Reilly been saying we (the USA) do not torture anyone, a year, 2 years, 3 years?
All during that time whenever someone says the Bush administration has used torture O'Reilly tells them they are wrong. He flips out and calls them liars and basically calls them a nut who just hates Bush.
Yet the other night during the Brian Ross segment O'Reilly admitted the CIA has used waterboarding.
Earth to Billy, THAT'S TORTURE.
The whole world says waterboarding is torture, except for Billy. O'Reilly characterized waterboarding as "putting a little water on their face". "waterboarding," is when a person is strapped down, dunked under water and made to believe that he might be drowned. Hey Billy, that's a little more than just putting water on their face.
Note to Billy, waterboarding is against the law, and a U.S. General was once courtmarshaled for doing it. It is also a violation of the Geneva Conventions, and a violation of the human rights treaties America has signed.
Not to mention if the arab world finds out we are using torture on their people dont you think that will create more terrorists? And our goal is to get rid of the terrorists, not create more of them.
O'Reilly claims that some people in America do not consider waterboarding torture, yeah, but only far right wing-nuts like O'Reilly and Hannity, and Coulter, etc. The issue is not what we think here in America, I could care less if some arab terrorist is waterboarded. The issue is what they think about it in the arab world, and if they hear we are using known torture methods it is going to create more terrorists.
Somehow O'Reilly dont understand that, he is so far in the tank for Bush and the Republican Congress, he throws out all common sense to defend torture.
O'Reilly Smears Judge Who Ruled NSA Warrantless Wiretapping Is Illegal
8-30-06 -- Last week, Judge Anna Diggs Taylor ruled that President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program was unconstitutional. Subsquently, Taylor was attacked by Bill O'Reilly and the conservatives who claimed she had a "conflict of interest" because she "serves as a Secretary and Trustee for a foundation that donated funds to the ACLU of Michigan, a plaintiff in the case."
And now for the whole truth, not just the partial truth O'Reilly and his Republican friends wanted you to have.
-- Over the last two years the Community Foundation for Southeastern Michigan has donated about $50 million to charitable causes. Its $45,000 in grants to the ACLU represents just .09% of their total giving.
-- The money to the ACLU had nothing to do with their activities relating to this litigation or government surveillance. The grant funded "a gay rights project."
-- Judge Gibbs is one of 50 community members on the foundation's board. It wasn't a personal decision by Judge Gibbs.
None of this information was disclosed by Bill O'Reilly or any other conservatives. Once you know the facts, there is not a "reasonable question about her impartiality" based on the foundation's activities.
NOTE: The vast majority of legal experts agree that Bush did violate the FISA law with his NSA wiretapping program. And Democrats are not opposed to wiretapping, they just want Bush to follow the Federal FISA law and get a court order to do it.
I support the NSA wiretapping program, as most liberals and Democrats do, we just want Bush to go by the law and get a court order to do them. O'Reilly spins it like Democrats and Liberals are opposed to the wiretapping, this is a lie, we are not opposed to the wiretapping, what we oppose is doing it without a court order from the FISA court.
Whenever a judge makes a ruling O'Reilly dont like he attacks the judge personally and tries to discredit him or her. Yet if someone does a personal attack on him, or some other Republican O'Reilly says that is wrong. Then he does it, or he has a guest on to do it for him..
It's a double standard and total hypocrisy, but Business as usual for Bill O'Reilly. .
O'Reilly Caught Lying Again (He Claims he Never Said Liberals Want us to Lose in Iraq)
7-21-06 -- E-mail to the Factor:
John Schneider, Cedar Rapids, Iowa: "Bill, you continue to say that liberal America wishes to see America lose the war in Iraq."
O'REILLY: I know it's hot in Iowa, sir, but you need to lay off the Kool-Aid and stay off the dishonest websites. I've never said liberal America wants the USA to lose in Iraq. Never.
And now the truth, something O'Reilly has a big problem with:
O'Reilly frequently accuses members of the "far left," media outlets, and even Democratic politicians, such as House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, whom he accused on the May 8 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, of wanting "us to lose in Iraq." O'Reilly added: "Pelosi and her acolytes ... want there to be chaos in Afghanistan. They want this. They're rooting against their own country."
O'REILLY: "there are some Americans who actually want the USA to lose in Iraq, primarily so that President Bush will look bad. Few will admit that, but it does exist, primarily on the far left." [The O'Reilly Factor, 12/17/04]
O'REILLY: "I've been telling you for more than a year now that some on the far left want the USA to lose the war in Iraq and not do very well in the war on terror." During the same broadcast, O'Reilly also said that "Michael Moore, Barbra Streisand, The New York Times, the L.A. Times, Stuart Smalley [Al Franken], and the Air America crew all want President Bush" to lose "the war in Iraq." [The O'Reilly Factor, 3/16/2005]
While praising Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) for not being "a cut-and-run guy," O'Reilly accused "the loony left" of not "caring about the country," "wanting the country damaged," "rooting for the enemy," and "wanting the Bush administration to lose" in Iraq. [The O'Reilly Factor, 8/10/2005]
O'Reilly has accused The New York Times, which he claims is liberal, of "hating Bush so much" that the paper "wants the USA to lose the conflict in Iraq." [The O'Reilly Factor, 10/17/05]
Bill O'Reilly has also called liberals who dared to criticize President Bush un-American traitors who hate Bush and hate America. When in reality they love America, as I do, they only hate George Bush and the Republicans. I am a liberal, and I love America, and I want us to win in Iraq. As do most liberals, we criticize Bush on Iraq because we should not even be there, and he has screwed it up so bad. O'Reilly is lying, he says those things to make liberals look bad, it is all lies, and he is a liar.
He is also a coward, a total right-wing coward. He calls liberals who refuse to go on the Factor cowards who are hiding under their desk, yet he refuses to have David Brock on the Factor, or Al Franken, or me Steve Senti, or many other liberals. Bill O'Reilly is nothing but a biased, one sided, lying, right-wing coward. He is basically nothing more than a propaganda mouthpiece for President Bush and the Republican party.
New Comprehensive 6 Month Study Proves Total Conservative Bias at The Factor
7-15-06 -- Starting 0n January 1, 2006 I watched every single O'Reilly Factor show, and read the transcripts the next day, then I recorded all the attacks by Bill O'Reilly on left leaning persons and groups, and all the attacks on right leaning persons and groups.
That study is now done, and the results show conclusive proof that Bill O'Reilly is nothing but a total right wing propaganda mouthpiece for the Republican party, and the Bush white house.
Final Totals for the 6 month study from January 1, 2006 to June 30, 2006 -
Total attacks on left leaning groups for 2006 - 221
Total attacks on left leaning persons for 2006 - 238
Total attacks on right leaning groups for 2006 - 0
Total attacks on right leaning persons for 2006 - 7
Think about this, not only does O'Reilly claim to be fair and balanced, and an Independent, the President is a Republican, the Senate is majority Republican, and the House is majority Republican, so the Republicans and Bush have all the power. Yet there are almost no attacks on any Republican persons, 7 in 6 months, and no attacks on any right leaning groups, none.
The Democrats have no power to do anything, yet O'Reilly spends all his time attacking left leaning groups and persons. In that 6 months he did not attack one right leaning group, yet he attacked left leaning groups 221 times. In that 6 months he attacked left leaning persons 238 times, even though none of them have any power because the entire government is controlled by the Republicans.
A real "fair and balanced" journalist would have an equal number of attacks on left and right leaning groups and persons. And the party with total power should have more attacks on them when things go wrong because they are running the government. Yet O'Reilly has a left to right imbalance of about 99 percent to 1 percent against left leaning groups and persons. And this is after O'Reilly said if we go into Iraq and do not find any WMD's he will never trust the Bush administration again. Then every single night he defends everything the Bush administration does, and calls anyone who dares to criticize Bush an un-American traitor who hates America.
I have detailed records (with notes) for each show, for the whole 6 months from January of 2006 to June of 2006. So now if any right wing nut says O'Reilly is not biased you can show him my data and the numbers I have. Spread the word about this study, tell everyone you know, link to it on your blogs and your website, do whatever you want, just make sure everyone sees these numbers.
Note: These numbers are from 4 Factor shows a week, because O'Reilly takes most fridays off, and he also had a couple vacations where he took the whole week off. I did not count any attacks on re-runs, or from any guests on the show. I only counted the left and right attacks from Bill O'Reilly, and only when he was doing a live show. And almost all the attacks on right leaning persons were against President Bush, over the immigration issue. That is about the only thing O'Reilly ever attacks anyone on the right for, immigration.
O'Reilly Caught Lying About Boxer Statements on Troop Mental Health
7-13-06 -- O'Reilly said the far left believes the U.S. military is falling apart in Iraq. And he based that conclusion on a statement from Senator Boxer. Here is what she said.
BOXER: They are in deep trouble over there, our troops are. And many of them are being sent onto the battlefield with anti-depressants. I really feel that the whole issue here is getting out of there.
Can someone explain to me where she says the U.S. military is falling apart, all she said is that U.S. troops are coming home with mental health issues, and some are being sent back with anti-depressants, which is 100 percent ture. She stated that 30 percent of the U.S. troops have mental health issues, and O'Reilly called her a liar.
O'REILLY: "I'm afraid there's some lying going on. Boxer knows better. She took a statistic and embellished and once again used soldiers for her political purpose, and that's just wrong."
Not only was Boxer exactly right, she under-stated it by 5 perent, here is what the Army said. Army statistics indicate that 35 percent of soldiers and Marines returning from Iraq sought mental health care and 19 percent were diagnosed with a mental disorder like post traumatic stress disorder, depression or anxiety within a year of coming home.
OLBERMANN: Senator, give me your reaction to Mr. O'Reilly and Colonel Hunt.
BOXER: Well, all I could say is, they don't know what they're talking about, plain and simple.
I have it in writing from Dr. David Chu, who is an undersecretary of defense, works with Secretary Rumsfeld, that they absolutely put troops on the field with depressants. And today, I had a meeting with General Kylely, who will head up the mental health task force that I got put into law to look after our soldiers and come to grips with this. And he confirmed to me today that that is absolutely the fact, that we are sending the troops out with antidepressants.
And the other thing they called me a liar on, I said, I said a third of the troops that are coming back from Iraq and Afghanistan are seeking mental health help, are having trouble, mental health trouble. And they basically said, Oh, yes, some are, but no—nothing like 30 percent.
Turns out I understated it. It's 35 percent. And that is from an Army report from Walter Reed.
Conclusion: What we have is a biased one sided right wing tv news anchor calling an elected U.S. Senator a liar, when she is exactly right, and the Army's own report backs her up. Basically O'Reilly smeared her to make her look bad because she is a Democrat, and he hates her.
Fox Edits Transcript To Cover O'Reilly's Factual Errors
6-1-06 -- During an interview by Bill O'Reilly of Wesley Clark on the Factor, he once again showed how he is wrong on the facts a lot of the time.
Claim:
"In Malmedy, as you know" Bill O'Reilly said, in some feeble attempt to defend the events of Haditha, "U.S. forces captured S.S. forces who had their hands in the air and were unarmed and they shot them dead, you know that. That's on the record. And documented."
Fact:
The victims at Malmedy in December, 1944, were Americans. Americans with their hands in the air. Americans who were unarmed. That's on the record. And documented.
And their memory deserves better than Bill O'Reilly.
Then FOX edited the transcript to cover for O'Reilly's factual and very wrong error, when O'Reilly has claimed his show is never edited, and the transcripts are never edited.
O'Reilly Said The Press Has no Solutions For Anything
5-15-06 -- O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Finally, the liberal press doesn't want any part of this. They have no solution to illegal immigration, drug trafficking, Iraq, Iran, the war on terror. They have no solution to anything. And if you don't know that by now, you're never going to know it.
--------
Earth to O'Reilly, it is not the job of the press, liberal or conservative, to come up with solutions to anything, ever. Their job is to report the news, period. And what solutions does the conservative press have, none. Because it is not their job, they should report the news, not come up with solutions for anything.
