Proof Fox News Has A Right-Wing Bias
By: Steve - March 31, 2014 - 10:00am

If you ever wanted proof Fox News has a right-wing bias, here it is: They produced and aired a special report called: Surrendering America.

Which is nothing but an attack on President Obama, that is premised on myths and falsehoods about the Internet, the defense budget, the changed mission for NASA, and U.S. fossil fuel production and exports.

The name of it alone is proof of their bias, someone at Fox decided to call it Surrendering America, which they would never ever do to a Republican President. It's ridiculous, simply calling it that is total bias. They are basically saying President Obama is surrendering America, which is just laughable, because he saved America from Bush and the Republicans who almost ruined the country.

Everything in the special is right-wing spin and propaganda, and it's as biased as you can get. It was basically an hour long political attack ad against President Obama, but it was not done by a politician, or paid for by a politician, it was done by a so-called fair and balanced news network.

And if MSNBC had done a special like that with that name while a Republican was the President, O'Reilly would want to try them for treason and or sedition. Instead he says nothing, while claiming Fox has no bias.

Now think about this, Surrendering America is not the only one they have done like that, it's just the Latest in a string of irresponsible and biased Fox specials. They do this stuff all the time, here are some other examples.

A June 28, 2013 special titled Benghazi: The Truth Behind The Smokescreen included several debunked myths and falsehoods about the 2012 attack. Among the biggest lies pushed by the special were that an order to stand down from rescue attempts was given, that the administration attempted to cover up the attack, that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed a cable ordering scaled-back security at the Benghazi compound, and that President Obama never referred to the attacks as an "act of terror."

On April 21, 2012, Fox aired the special Fox News Reporting: Stealing Your Vote that claimed "voter fraud is still rampant" and urged viewers to send tips about voter fraud to a tip email address that Fox had set up specifically for the topic. Despite the premise, the special only aired one alleged case of in-person fraud that would have been prevented by voter ID laws, and that example had already been debunked by the South Carolina Election Commission.

On August 9, 2013, Fox aired a special about the food stamp program, titled The Great Food Stamp Binge. The show focused on one food stamp recipient, Jason Greenslate who took advantage of the program's benefits in an attempt to characterize all SNAP recipients as freeloaders. The reality, however, is that, unlike Greenslate, 41 percent of SNAP recipients live in households that earn money, and 76 percent of SNAP households include a child, elderly person or disabled American. But they never reported any of that information.

On December 13, 2013, Fox aired a special on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) titled Behind The Obama Breakdown. The special heavily featured Generation Opportunity, an organization devoted to urging college students not to sign up for Obamacare and is funded by the Koch brothers and conservative lobbying groups, a fact the program did not disclose.

And the great so-called journalist Bill O'Reilly never says a word about any of this, while saying Fox is a fair and balanced News Network. As they do biased special after special slamming President Obama and basically saying he is a traitor who is ruing the country.

O'Reilly Guest Put Out Lies About Nate Silver & Paul Krugman
By: Steve - March 30, 2014 - 11:00am

On the Friday Factor show right-wing guest Tom Shillue named Paul Krugman a pinhead and said this about it:
SHILLUE: "He used to work alongside Nate Silver, who is famous for using data to show that President Obama was going to win the election. Democrats loved Silver and Krugman praised him, but now Krugman doesn't like him anymore because Silver is predicting a Republican victory in the Senate."
Which is a total lie and has nothing to do with why Silver and Krugman are fighting with each other. Here are the facts, as in reality, as in the truth.

Krugman approvingly linked to a criticism of FiveThirtyEight, saying it crystallized his own problem with the site. "For all the big talk about data-driven analysis," he wrote, "what it actually delivers is sloppy and casual opining with a bit of data used, as the old saying goes, the way a drunkard uses a lamppost." Silver tags this, fair enough, as an "unfavorable" post.

That was before Silver made his Senate prediction. Krugman does not like pure data guys, and Silver does not link opinion guys, so they never got along. Then it blew up when Silver left the NY Times. Their little slap fight had nothing to do with the Silver prediction that the Republicans would win the Senate back. Silver even says that Krugman is only attacking him because he left the Times.


Silver left the NY Times and has since come under increasingly sharp attack from Krugman. Now Silver has written a snarky item questioning Krugman's motives for questioning him. Why have the two great icons of the liberal nerd elite turned against each other?

Silver's theory is simple: Krugman is attacking him because he left the Times. In a mocking post, Silver charts Krugman's references to his work, plotting a correlation between their positivity and Silver's status as a colleague, and revealing that Krugman "has expressed substantially more negative sentiments about FiveThirtyEight since it left The New York Times."

The statistical trend is real enough, but Silver's theory to explain the data doesn't hold up. Krugman has since rocketed to higher levels of fame by assailing the phony economics of the Bush administration in the last decade, and then, what he called the "Very Serious People," who clung to superstitious fears of debt and inflation in the face of overwhelming evidence that the economy needed more demand.

Krugman's first incarnation positioned him as a snobbish defender of the economic elite, and his more recent incarnation, as a populist critic. But they both reflect a very particular kind of veneration for credentialed economic expertise.

And this, of course, is what explains his newfound disdain for Silver. Krugman happily cheered on his nerdish ally when Silver was confining himself to electoral modeling. But he was already looking at Silver askance, even before he left the Times, when Silver ventured beyond his narrow specialty.

The real cause of Krugman's disdain is the sheer ambition of Silver's new venture. Silver's great added value was to bring basic statistical literacy to the fields of political forecasting and sports commentary, which are dominated by old-line hacks who rely on horse sense and either disdain data in any form or use data very badly.

The new FiveThirtyEight tries to expand this revelatory contribution to other fields. The trouble is that many of those fields, like economics and climate science, already have real experts. Silver's role, at least in its crudest form, represents the kind of autodidactism that Krugman rose to fame decrying. His war against Silver is nothing terribly new, but merely the return of an old love, or, more accurately, an old hate.

I also read 4 or 5 other articles about the bad blood between the two of them, and not one article said a word about Krugman not liking him because he predicted a Republican victory in the Senate. It was all made up by Tom Shillue, it's nothing but 100% right-wing propaganda and lies. And O'Reilly let him spin that garbage out without saying a word, when the actual facts show that none of it is true.

The Friday 3-28-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 29, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Equality and the President's Falling Poll Numbers. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: As the world waits for Putin to make his next move, President Obama's leadership position is becoming more precarious; a new AP poll says 59% of Americans do not like the job the president is doing. Putin understands the president is having trouble with the American public, and he is taking chances because he senses weakness. The question now becomes, why is our nation in decline?

'Equality' is what is hurting President Obama. The left has seized that word to push its progressive agenda. We have income equality, marriage equality, gender equality, and on and on. So instead of solving real problems, the president is living in a world of theory and is shocked when someone like Putin upsets his idealistic vision.

The truth is there will never be equality in this world, it's impossible. I will never be as smart as Einstein, as talented as Mozart, or as kind as Mother Teresa. President Obama has spent five years trying to social engineer this nation and convince the world to act in harmony. In doing so, he has neglected to fix the economy or set up effective deterrents to villains like Putin.

The only path to social justice is building a strong country that can provide opportunity, and economically only the private sector can make that happen. We have become a weaker country on President Obama's watch. Most Americans know that, and so do all the villains of the world.
Then O'Reilly had the biased far-right Obama hating Col. Peters on to discuss it, and of course no Democratic guest was on for balance. So the TPM and the next segment was all right-wing spin with nobody from the left to counter any of their propaganda.

Peters said this: "This says to me that Ukraine is screwed. As the West folded its cards in the face of Putin's aggression, he just upped his bid. Of those 80,000 to 100,000 troops, about half of them are relatively elite, they're the shock troops that would go in first. If they go in, you're going to see quite a spectacle, attacks on multiple targets. Just to rub it in and show off, Putin might even drop in airborne forces. His military would wrap its arms around eastern Ukraine, and we would do nothing about it. Weakness encourages aggression, I don't know why people can't figure this out."

And nobody can say if Putin would have done the very same thing with a Republican President or not, so it's all speculation and right-wing opinion from O'Reilly and Peters. The very speculation O'Reilly claims to not allow.

Then Geraldo was on with a far more optimistic view, saying this: "You and Col. Peters are way too grim about what has happened in Ukraine. Remember that before Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown by the pro-Western two-thirds of Ukraine, Putin had all of Ukraine. He had Ukraine squarely in the Russian sphere, but what does he have now? He has the Crimean peninsula. If he invades eastern Ukraine, the world will turn against him. We have imposed mild sanctions that are already disrupting the Russian economy, and if he crosses into eastern Ukraine, severe sanctions will crush Putin's economy."

Not to mention this, we have a UN and NATO, they are a big part of dealing with it, the USA should not have to do it alone, but O'Reilly and Peters do not say a word about the UN or NATO.

Then Ed Henry was on to talk about President Obama in Saudi Arabia.

Henry said this: "The headline today, is that some reports are suggesting President Obama may be a little more flexible about sending air defense systems to the Syrian rebels. Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah has been pushing for the administration to give more heavy artillery to the rebels. But the fear is that if you give the rebels heavy artillery, it could wind up in the hands of terrorists who could then take down a commercial airliner."

Henry also reported that Saudi Arabia may eventually go nuclear, saying this: "I'm told by a well-connected source that King Abdullah thinks President Obama will let Iran keep its nuclear weapons program. If that happens, the King is hinting that he'll start his own nuclear program."

Then Tom Shillue and Bernard McGuirk were on to name the week's most ridiculous people. And of course no Democrats were on to select a pinhead so the 3 Republicans picked all liberals.

Shillue singled out New York Times columnist Paul Krugman, saying this: "He used to work alongside Nate Silver, who is famous for using data to show that President Obama was going to win the election. Democrats loved Silver and Krugman praised him, but now Krugman doesn't like him anymore because Silver is predicting a Republican victory in the Senate."

McGuirk picked North Korea tyrant Kim Jong Un, saying this: "He has mandated that his people, primarily college students, get his stupid Moe Howard/Adolf Hitler haircut."

And O'Dummy picked Democratic Congresswoman Barbara Lee of California, saying this: "I called her a 'race hustler' recently after she implied that Congressman Paul Ryan is prejudiced against blacks. In 2011 she accused the entire Republican Party of trying to deny blacks the vote. She said the Bush administration botched Hurricane Katrina relief because blacks were involved, and she branded Congressman Steve King and William Bennett 'racists.' Not only is she a pinhead and a race hustler, she's a liar!"

And that's a lie, because what she said is true. O'Reilly is the liar, and the king of pinheads. Congresswoman called out some racism, and O'Reilly did not like it because he is also a Republican racist.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Giving Back, Double Time. There was no tip, just O'Reilly promoting his tour show with Kelly and Kilmeade.

Dont look Now O'Reilly: Obamacare Enrollment Tops 6 Million
By: Steve - March 29, 2014 - 10:00am

On Thursday, President Obama announced on a call with volunteers that the number of Americans who have enrolled in health insurance plans under Obamacare has hit six million.

With several days left to go before open enrollment ends on March 31, the administration has met its new target. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that Obamacare enrollment would hit six million by the end of its enrollment period.

Although the Obama administration initially projected a seven million enrollment figure by March 31st, that number was revised down after technological issues plagued the insurance marketplaces websites this past fall.

Just ten days ago, the Obama administration announced that enrollments had hit five million -- meaning that the pace of enrollment has significantly picked up in recent weeks.

Which is what I predicted would happen, I said that as the deadline date gets closer more people will sign up at a quicker rate, which is exactly what is happening.

The White House has always anticipated a last-minute surge in enrollment, since previous efforts to enroll Americans in government-run health care programs have demonstrated that people typically wait until the last minute to sign up.

All of which O'Reilly ignored, because a few months ago he said they would never hit 6 million by the end of March because the rate of sign ups was too low. And as usual he was wrong, because he is a biased Republican and he did not calculate the rate of sign ups increasing as the deadline got closer.

Although open enrollment technically ends in four days, there will be a few more weeks for some Americans to sign up. On Wednesday, the administration announced that the people who experienced technological difficulties on the website will be allowed to complete their enrollment in April.

The Thursday 3-27-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 28, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Christianity and President Obama. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Today President Obama met with Pope Francis at the Vatican. The good news for the president is that he and the pope agree on 'social justice.' Christian doctrine demands that the poor and oppressed be given relief by those who can do so, and therefore the president's philosophy is in line with that of Pope Francis. But the nuance is how to provide social justice.

The president believes you take from the affluent and business, and you give without any strings to those in need. Others, like myself, believe you set up safety nets to help the poor but you do it without harming the general population. I don't know where Pope Francis stands on the politics of social justice, but I do know he is a compassionate man who is trying to uphold the teachings of Jesus.

Now, the bad news for Mr. Obama. The Vatican put forth that the president's policy of forcing Catholic nuns and other church agencies to provide birth control insurance, including the morning-after pill, is a violation of Christian doctrine and religious rights. Christian doctrine demands that life be respected; therefore, abortion is considered a grave sin because Christians believe life begins at conception.

Finally, the Pope is against America deporting illegal aliens, something President Obama has done. Therein lies an interesting conundrum for conservatives. The president has been very aggressive in deporting people who have come to America illegally, which the right generally supports. Pope Francis does not like that policy, believing it disrupts families and harms the poor. So there you have the meeting in Rome today.
Then Robert Moynihan, editor of a Catholic publication was on to discuss it. And as usual no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Moynihan said this: "Each of these men was seeking something, and they both received it. President Obama wanted a photo opportunity with the pope, who has become known as the 'pope of the poor.' Pope Francis wanted to communicate his concern about an enormous gap between the wealthy and the poor. President Obama also spoke with the Vatican's secretary of state and foreign minister. It was in that meeting that the Vatican put forward it's concerns about what Obama is doing by compelling birth control."

O'Reilly pointed out that Secretary of State John Kerry, a Roman Catholic, was also present, saying this: "Kerry is pro-choice and these politicians always say, 'I'm personally opposed to abortion but I'm going to carry out the law of the land.' But I say as a Catholic and a Christian you are compelled to protect life. It's a charade when they make this rationalization."

Which is a ridiculous comment from O'Reilly, because when you get elected to public office as John Kerry has, you put your personal religious beliefs aside. Religion is not allowed in government, and O'Reilly knows it, he just jumped at the chance to get a cheap shot in on Kerry because he is pro-choice and O'Reilly is a pro-life right-winger.

Then James Carville was on, O'Reilly said that even though the Obama administration insisted that there would be no extension in the deadline for individuals to enroll in ObamaCare, people who claim "hardship" are being given additional time. Conservative observers, among them Charles Krauthammer, have accused the administration of flat-out lying.

Carville said this: "What they're saying is that if you try to enroll prior to March 31st, they'll extend it for two weeks. Administration officials just changed their minds. On the whole, this thing is starting to move in the right direction."

This is real simple O'Reilly, people can claim hardship, that was in the law from the start. The Obama administration is also extending the deadline for 2 weeks because of the problems with the website when it first went online. And if you can not understand that you are an idiot.

Then the right-wing idiot John Stossel was on to cry about the enormous costs of the Obama trips to Africa and Hawaii. And as usual no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Stossel said this: "Air Force One costs $200,000 an hour, and once they were in Africa the president took a number of trips. Judicial Watch says it cost $15-million for that trip, the flight to Hawaii cost $8-million, and it cost $2-million for the president to go on the Jay Leno show. This is the royal presidency, and we don't even know what the Secret Service costs. But this is no worse than George W. Bush or Bill Clinton. All three recent presidents traveled far more than their predecessors."

Now get this, when Stossel mentioned Bush taking 149 vacations and Obama only has about 40, O'Reilly shot back saying Bush only went to Camp David and his ranch in Texas, and he rode his bike so it cost almost nothing. Which is a lie, Bush used Air Force One every time, and also took many trips to Africa, etc. that also cost a fortune. And O'Reilly never said a word about any of it when Bush was in office.

Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about three Secret Service agents who have been sent home from Europe for getting drunk while preparing for President Obama's recent visit. Kelly said that some media outlets have overplayed the story, including O'Reilly.

Kelly said this: "Secret Service agents are human, and they made some mistakes. They are not supposed to drink within ten hours of their service call. I'm not saying it's right, but the breathless headlines about this!"

O'Reilly was far less forgiving of the agents, saying this: "They're sent over there on the taxpayer's dime to protect the president and do their job. They weren't just drinking, one guy got drunk until he passed out! What is it, spring break over there?"

And as usual O'Reilly ignores some of the facts, they were off duty and they did not drink within ten hours of their service call. O'Reilly wants them fired, which is ridiculous, and even Megyn Kelly said they should not be fired, just punished.

Kelly also reported the latest on Nevada Judge Brent Adams, who sentenced 69-year-old Isaac Onsurez to just one year in jail for molesting a 6-year-old girl 100 times. Kelly said this: "Only one newspaper has done a story about this, and this child molester will be out of jail in a year. The judge owes an explanation."

O'Reilly wants the judge recalled and impeached, even though he is retiring in 6 months and as far as we know the judge gave a sentence that was allowed under the law. You may not agree with it, but he had the right to do it.

Then Jesse Watters hit the Florida beaches to talk with college students during their spring break. Here are a few of their observations: "I actually don't know anything about the economy" ... "Most teachers are very very liberal" ... "They tried to convert the entire class to the Muslim religion."

When Watters asked the collegians to grade President Obama, his GPA was predictably mixed: "He ain't the best, but he's definitely not the worst" ... "He's such a wuss when it comes to the Republicans just pushing him around" ... "He killed Osama bin Laden, A-plus!"

And as usual, that segment was just an excuse for the old pervert O'Reilly to show some college babes in bikinis on the beach to get ratings for his lame so-called hard news show.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Killing O'Reilly...With Humor. Which I will not report on because it was not a tip of the day, it was simply O'Reilly promoting a movie that has a guy with a puppet doing an impersonation of O'Reilly in it.

More Proof Bill O'Reilly Is A Biased Republican Hack
By: Steve - March 28, 2014 - 10:00am

Bill O'Reilly thinks President Obama is a weak leader who is getting his butt kicked by Russian President Putin. Almost every night O'Reilly has some Republican guest on to agree with him that Obama is a weak leader, from Charles Krauthammer to Laura Ingraham. They are all put on to agree with O'Reilly that Obama is a weak leader, to make it look like O'Reilly is right.

But they are all Republicans who hate Obama and get paid to have a right-wing bias, and of course O'Reilly never has a liberal on with them to make it a fair and balanced debate. They are always on alone, and they always agree with O'Reilly.

And now the facts, the majority of Americans (who are not partisan Republicans) disagree with O'Reilly, Krauthammer, and Ingraham. A new CBS News poll says that a majority of Americans (53 percent) have at least some confidence in the president's ability to handle an international crisis.

And btw, the same poll said that in the fall of 2012, only 40 percent of voters expressed a lot of confidence in Mr. Obama on this measure, so it has gone up. During the same time O'Reilly said it has got worse, which shows O'Reilly is a biased hack who is out of touch with mainstream America.

The new poll also said that Americans continue to think the president is a strong leader. Fifty-three percent think he's a strong leader compared to 45 percent who don't think so. That 45% is O'Reilly and his Republican friends who are biased and think all Democratic Presidents are weak leaders.

On Wednesday night O'Reilly even tried to deny the poll was accurate, and he was shocked that anyone could think Obama is a strong leader.

O'Reilly said that the poll was taken among adults, not registered voters or likely voters. But he never complained about the same poll in 2012, when they also sampled adults, and the Obama rating was 40% for leadership. He only complains when it is up to 53%, proving once again he is a biased right-wing hack.

O'REILLY: "The harsh truth is that many of us are blatantly ignorant and lazy. We simply will not pay attention to the world around us. We get our information from other people, who may be as dumb as we are. Apathy in America is through the roof."

Which is total speculation, the very speculation he said he does not do, and does not allow on his show. Because he has no idea where or how the people who took the poll get their news. It's ridiculous, and total bias. O'Reilly also says the people who slam him do not even watch his show and they do not know what they are talking about.

Well I am one of those people, and I watch the Factor every night. I watch it, and I have for 14 years. And I slam him for what he does, for being a biased right-wing spin doctor, while claiming to be a non-partisan Independent with a no spin zone. I know what I am talking about, because I watch the show every night, and I have done this website for 14 years. And yet, O'Reilly still claims that everyone who talks bad about him does not even watch his show, which is a 100% lie.

O'Reilly said ideologues are the second reason for the poll results. "President Obama can count on core support from liberal people who put theory over reality," he said.

O'Reilly also said it's "almost unbelievable" in the face of these facts that Americans think Obama is a strong leader.

And that is all right-wing propaganda, the very same propaganda O'Reilly said he never puts out. Because the CBS News poll is done the same way every time, and back in 2012 when it showed 40% thought Obama was a strong leader, not once did O'Reilly complain about the poll or any bias in it.

But as soon as it shows 53% think Obama is a strong leader, suddenly O'Reilly thinks the poll is bogus and biased. And btw, the only people saying Obama is a weak leader are Republicans, and yet O'Reilly says he is not a Republican. While spinning out right-wing propaganda as fast as any Republican you can find.

And one last thing, another poll says that 61% think we should mind our own business and leave Russia alone. O'Reilly claims to believe in the majority of the people, except when they support a Democratic President. During the Bush years when the majority supported Bush on an issue O'Reilly used that as an argument to support him, but when the same thing happens under Obama what does O'Reilly do, claim the poll is bogus and biased of course.

The Wednesday 3-26-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 27, 2014 - 11:30am

The TPM was called: Why Americans are Confused about President Obama. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: A new poll from CBS News says 53% of Americans believe President Obama has 'strong qualities of leadership.' How can that be possible with all the problems of ObamaCare and the dire situation overseas? There is no reputable foreign affairs expert who says America and Europe are being tough on Putin, so why do most American adults think the president's leadership is strong?

First, the poll was taken among adults, not registered or likely voters, and the harsh truth is that many of us are ignorant and lazy. We get our information from other people, who may be as dumb as we are. Second, ideologues will never turn against their guy, so President Obama can count on core support from very liberal people.

After more than five years in office, the facts are these: The American economy is still very troubled, the Affordable Health Care Act is a mess, poverty is on the rise, income for working Americans is falling, and America has lost credibility almost everywhere overseas. In the face of those facts, 53% of Americans still believe Barack Obama is displaying strong leadership? It's almost unbelievable.
What's really unbelievable is how much you hate Obama that you can not understand why some people like him and think he is a good leader. O'Reilly is so biased in his opinions of Obama that he can not see why anyone thinks he is a strong leader. Which shows his bias, because the majority think Obama is a strong leader.

Then Kirsten Powers was on to explain the apparent anomaly between President Obama's performance and his leadership poll numbers to the biased idiot Bill O'Reilly.

Powers said this: "People are thinking about whether they like the qualities of President Obama, and we see consistently that they do, even when people disapprove of his job performance. He's a good orator, he has kept the country safe, and a lot of people think he turned the economy around. If someone asked me whether President Obama has some strong leadership qualities, I would say yes. But do I think he has been a strong leader across the board? No, I don't."

O'Reilly stressed that the president's record in foreign affairs has been inadequate, saying this: "We haven't had a terror attack and President Obama has done a good job with the drones, but every place else is a mess. A lot of things are unraveling."

With President Obama in Europe urging America's allies to put greater pressure on Russia, O'Reilly asked the conservative foreign policy analyst from AEI Michael Rubin to assess the EU's response. And as usual no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Rubin said this: "The European Union has been put to the test, and they've been found lacking. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, Margaret Thatcher told George H.W. Bush, 'Don't go wobbly now.' Unfortunately, Angela Merkel is no Margaret Thatcher and Barack Obama is certainly no George H.W. Bush."

Rubin also criticized President Obama's overall leadership, saying this: "Being good with rhetoric doesn't make you a good leader, it makes you full of hot air if you're not going to put that leadership into practice. Unfortunately, Barack Obama has established that he is an empty suit."

Said the biased Republican who hates Obama and was on without a Democratic guest to counter anything he said, as the rules of fairness in journalism call for.

Then James Rosen & Carl Cameron were on to talk about the missing plane and the Obama military cuts.

Rosen said this: "The hard drive from the simulator was delivered to the FBI lab in Virginia, and the technicians are trying to see if they can recover files that were deleted. They also want to see if Captain Shah practiced any unusual or even suicidal movements on that simulator. The FBI will also interrogate the estranged wife of Captain Shah, which could also produce some clues."

Cameron said this about military cuts: "We're talking about $496 billion dollars in mandatory cuts, and yesterday Army Chief of Staff Ray Odierno warned that it will be very hard to win a long ground war or fulfill the president's national defense strategy if those cuts go through. The Army is going to shrink from 520,000 to 420,000, a full 20% drop. An aircraft carrier and 80 aircraft may be decommissioned years ahead of schedule and the Navy may actually scrap the Tomahawk and Hellfire missile programs."

And what O'Reilly failed to tell you is that almost everyone supports these cuts, they are cutting the stuff we do not use or need, it's called cutting some wasteful government spending.

Then Thomas McAdam was on to talk about dozens of young people who went on a rampage in Louisville, Kentucky last weekend, marauding through stores and assaulting bystanders. O'Reilly examined the violence with Louisville attorney Thomas McAdam.

McAdam said this: "This stems from a stabbing two weeks ago, when two teenagers were stabbed by an old man on a city bus. This past Saturday night there was a 'flash mob' of kids who gathered at our waterfront for a memorial service. It got out of hand and people of both races were attacked. The city administration is trying to sweep this under the rug."

O'Reilly accused officials of ignoring the violence, saying this: "This has been going on in Louisville for quite some time and the city fathers don't want to talk about it."

Then Martha MacCallum was on for did you see that, she screened some disturbing footage from Albuquerque, New Mexico, where police shot and killed a homeless man.

MacCallum said this: "They were talking to the man for three hours in the foothills where he was camping, telling him he couldn't stay there. They had stun guns and bean bag guns that they shot at him and there were at least four police officers there. It appears in the video that the homeless man was turning around to pick up his stuff, but the police say he had a knife and was ready to go at them. There's every reason to believe they could have taken him without that kind of force."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Saving Some Shekels. Billy said this: "If you're on the lookout for a bargain, and who isn't, check out"

Chris Hayes Calls O'Reilly A Race Baiter
By: Steve - March 27, 2014 - 11:00am

Democratic congresswoman Barbara Lee joined MSNBC's Chris Hayes Wednesday night to continue slamming Bill O'Reilly for calling her a race hustler for her criticism of Paul Ryan's comments about black culture.

In the segment intro, Hayes took on O'Reilly and Fox for constant use of the terms "race-baiter" and "race hustler," which only seem to "apply to people of color talking about race and racism."

And here is the reality, O'Reilly calls them race hustlers because he does not like it when they rightfully call Republicans racist. O'Reilly tries to dismiss and discount what they say to make it look like they are wrong, when they are right, and they are speaking out against racism. The very same racism O'Reilly denies there is in the Republican party.

Hayes surmised that O'Reilly's definition of "race hustler" is someone who tells their audience they're off the hook and aren't responsible for social problems.

He accused O'Reilly of doing the same with his audience and remarked, then, "Bill O'Reilly is a pretty accomplished race-baiter himself."

Lee said O'Reilly's "code words" should be rejected from public discourse, denying the very idea she thinks so lowly of her constituents as O'Reilly asserted.

She said O'Reilly promotes "harmful" stereotypes for comments like that, and shot down the idea she owes Ryan any kind of apology.

And think about this folks, O'Reilly has never once called out a Republican for racist statements, ever. Instead, he defends them, denies it was racist, and calls the person who mentioned the racist statement a race hustler. Which is proof O'Reilly is a right-wing stooge, and that he will defend racism, as long as it's a white Republican doing it.

Congresswoman Lee Responds To O'Reilly's Personal Attack
By: Steve - March 27, 2014 - 10:00am

Congressman Paul Ryan came under fire this week for a remark about inner city culture that set off accusations of racism, including a condemnation from Congresswoman Barbara Lee that Ryan's words were "deeply offensive" as well as "statistically inaccurate."

Bill O'Reilly found Lee's response to be beyond absurd, and twice this week referred to her as a "race hustler."

The first time was on Monday, when he read Lee's statement calling Ryan's words a "thinly veiled racial attack" and said, "Ms. Lee, by the way, a notorious race hustler."

The second was when Ryan actually appeared on The Factor Tuesday night and O'Reilly told him that hustlers like Lee have no interest in the real problems the black community faces.
O'REILLY: "These race hustlers make a big living, and they get voted into office, by portraying their constituents as victims, and it's all your fault and my fault, it's the rich people's fault, it's the Republicans fault... So, no matter what you say, congressman, you're gonna be branded, because the race hustlers don't want to solve the problem."
Lee issued a statement firing back at O'Reilly for using "divisive" language:
LEE: "Unfortunately we've come to expect language like "welfare queens," "food stamp president," and now "race hustlers" from the right wing and Mr. O'Reilly. It is disgusting and divisive and should never be accepted in our national discourse.

"For us to achieve the American dream for all, we must engage in this conversation that has been sparked about race and poverty, even if it is difficult for some. Racial discrimination, poverty, and income inequality remain issues that must be debated and addressed, and these kinds of 'code words' only get in the way of solving the real problems.

"As members of Congress, we must come together to present a budget and funding priorities that create opportunity for all. We must make critical investments in job creation, education, and job training. Among many issues, we must address extending unemployment insurance, raising the minimum wage, enacting criminal justice reform, and securing voting rights for communities of color, so that we can truly find solutions to these critical issues."
O'Reilly is just a right-wing slimeball, he called the Congresswoman a race hustler for simply telling the truth and calling out Congressman Paul Ryan for his racist statement. But of course O'Reilly spins and defends for him, because he is also a Republican.

And notice the coward O'Reilly called her a race hustler with her not there, he did not even have her on to respond and make it a fair and balanced segment, even though he claims to be a non-partisan Independent. But he sure let Ryan come on his show and lie that it was not a racist statement, even though he said he was sorry for saying it. Fair and balanced? Haha, not!

Not only was it not fair and balanced, that O'Reilly claims to be all about, it was a violation of the rules of journalism by only giving one side of the story.

The Tuesday 3-25-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 26, 2014 - 11:30am

The TPM was called: Putin Wins. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: It is clear that President Obama and the rest of the world will not punish Russia and Putin for seizing Crimea. A few wishy-washy sanctions have been put in place, but nothing substantial. So what's going on? After Iraq and Afghanistan, Americans are rightfully fearful of becoming involved in another international conflict, but there's a lot more in play than most Americans know.

What Putin does will influence what Iran, China, and North Korea do, thus the weak response sends a signal to the villains of the world. I'm not talking about military action, I'm suggesting that much tougher economic sanctions be imposed on Russia. While Putin has expanded his military budget by 79%, President Obama is cutting back meaningful military programs here in America.

Putin knows Barack Obama has no appetite for confrontation, so all Americans should expect the world to get more turbulent. That will affect all of us because every time there's a conflict overseas, the economy takes a hit. What Congress should do immediately is bolster military spending and oversee our armed forces so they become a true deterrent. Russia doesn't fear the West, Iran believes it can develop a nuke and nothing will happen, and China is just waiting to seize more territory. 'Grim' doesn't even come close.
What a joke, if someone had said Putin wins under Bush O'Reilly would have called them an un-American traitor and offered to pay for their plane ticket to Russia. Then he says the President is weak, which hurts him even more. And when people said that about Bush O'Reilly slammed them and said you must support the President. But when a Democrat is in office O'Reilly does the same thing he tells other people not to do.

Then Charles Krauthammer was on to analyze the situation in Russia and President Obama's reaction. And of course no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Krauthammer said this: "Obama really looks weak, and the allies and the Russians know he's weak. Our adversaries are emboldened and our allies in the world are scared to death. Obama has this ridiculous rhetorical bravado - today he said Russia is just a 'regional power' acting out of weakness. Acting out of weakness? He just became the first person in history to take Crimea without firing a shot or without so much as a sprained ankle in his army. There is no reason for Putin to fear anything from the United States because the world knows what happens with President Obama's 'red lines.' They disappear the moment they are crossed."

Hey idiots, polls show that over 60% of the people do not want Obama to do anything about Russia, so he is going by the will of the people, so get over it, losers. It's only the Obama hating right-wing idiots who think Obama is doing wrong on Russia, the majority of Americans think he is doing the right thing.

Then O'Reilly had the Republican Congressman Paul Ryan on to spin and defend his racist statement about inner city blacks. That O'Reilly claims was not racist, even though it was, he even said he was sorry for saying it, so if it was not racist why did he apologize.

Ryan said this: "There was nothing racial in what I said, so let's get beyond throwing baseless charges. Let's have a real conversation about what we need to fight poverty in America. We spend $800 billion a year on government programs to fight poverty and it's not working."

Now here are the facts: Ryan said this: "We have got this tailspin of culture, in our inner cities in particular, of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work, and so there is a real culture problem here that has to be dealt with."

Ryan went on to cite the work of Charles Murray, a conservative social scientist who believes Blacks collectively are less intelligent than Whites due to genetic differences.

A black writer at wrote this:

Yes Paul Ryan's "Inner city" comments were racist. The bigger problem is that Ryan doesn't understand poverty and the systematic factors at play that hurt the very people he’s pretending to want to help. Nonetheless, if you're going to blow your racist dog whistle, stand tall. And no offense to some of you White people out there who are ready, willing, and able to explain racism to the people most affected by it. Us Blacks have the basics already, but cute for you trying to explain why stereotypes that never affect you are much ado about nothing.

Then Kimberly Guilfoyle & Lis Wiehl were on to talk about the latest child abuse outrage in Nevada, where Judge Brent Adams sentenced 69-year-old Isaac Onsurez to just one year in jail, even though Onsurez molested a 6-year-old girl 100 times.

Guilfoyle said this: "This is a travesty of justice, because the judge had the opportunity to sentence this individual to life. Instead, he sentenced him to one year in jail and five years probation. The DA's office is very upset."

Wiehl said this: "The judge initially sentenced Onsurez to 10 years to life, then inexplicably he said he got that wrong. There was no reason given, nothing on the record. The judge is retiring in a couple of months."

Imminent retirement notwithstanding, O'Reilly demanded that Judge Brent Adams be impeached: "This judge should be impeached. He knew that a 6-year-old girl in his county was molested 100 times by a despicable human being. There is no excuse on earth!"

Then Arianna Huffington, founder and editor of the Huffington Post was on. She asserted that her publication, unlike other liberal outlets, is not loath to criticize President Obama.

Huffington said this: "We do not reflexively defend anyone. We have a lot of criticism of the president on various issues that we care about, such as the failed war on drugs or poverty being at a 50-year high. There are a lot of problems in the country and we criticize the Obama administration for those. There is no question that some ideologues always defend their side, but we don't do that."

O'Reilly claimed that all they do is defend Obama, which is a lie and he must not even read the site, because they slam Obama all the time. O'Reilly just made it up and hopes someone believes it.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Fish Stories. Billy said this: "If a prankster invites you to go fishing for tilapia or scrod, don't take the bait. There are no such fish, although they appear on many a menu."

Are you serious O'Reilly, that may be the dumbest tip of the day you have ever put out, please stop it, these so-called tips of the day are ridiculous and worthless.

Latino Fundraiser Leaves Republican Campaign Over Racist Jokes
By: Steve - March 26, 2014 - 11:00am

On late Thursday, billionaire Mike Fernandez abruptly resigned his post as the finance co-chair of Governor Rick Scott's (R-FL) reelection campaign. The prominent Cuban-American health care mogul's departure has fueled rumors of racism among Scott's campaign staff.

Tensions between Scott's campaign staff and Fernandez had been building for weeks. And the last straw, according to people within the campaign who spoke with the Miami Herald this weekend, was an incident in which several of Scott's campaign staffers allegedly began joking around in a cartoonish, over-the-top Mexican accent while on the way to a Mexican restaurant.

Fernandez, who is Cuban, shot off an angry email to campaign leadership after word of the incident leaked out. In statements made to the press following his departure, he didn't address the controversy at all, instead pointing to disagreements with the direction of the campaign and shouldering some of the blame himself.

But the charges of racism by members of his staff comes at a delicate time for Scott, who has been on something of an Hispanic outreach kick in recent weeks. He came out in favor of allowing in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants earlier this month, and selected Carlos Lopez-Cantera as his lieutenant governor in January, the first time a Latino has held that position in Florida.

Complaints of racial insensitivity by people in his employ could further undermine Scott's efforts to attract more Hispanic voters in November. Republicans on the national and state level have been very public about their minority outreach in states like Florida, where non-white voters make up a huge percentage of the eligible voter population, but they continue to alienate even their own minority employees.

Fernandez's departure from the campaign is the latest blow to Florida Republicans' outreach efforts. Last May, the RNC's State Director of Hispanic Outreach, specifically hired to attract more Hispanic voters in Florida, resigned and registered as a Democrat after noting his former party's "culture of intolerance."

Earlier this year, Ana Rivas Logan, a former Republican state representative, changed her party affiliation because she felt the GOP was becoming "a party that attacks women and minorities."

Scott's campaign manager Melissa Sellers tried to downplay the severity of the racist remarks that supposedly motivated Fernandez's departure, but stopped short of denying they took place. "Mike was not in the van," she told the Miami Herald via email. "I spoke to every staffer in the van...If something was said in an accent, no one remembers what it was. We are a diverse organization and we do not tolerate inappropriate comments."

In his four years as governor, Rick Scott has faced tremendous backlash from the state's sizable Latino population after supporting legislation like HB 7089, which contained many similar provisions to those found in Arizona's controversial SB 1070 bill.

He is also the chief architect and staunchest defender of many of the state's voter suppression efforts, which Republicans have admitted was targeted at the state's minority population, a constituency that has historically favored Democrats by a wide margin.

Hey O'Reilly: Majority Want Obama To Leave Russia Alone
By: Steve - March 26, 2014 - 10:00am

Here is a poll you will never see reported by O'Reilly. Because it disagrees with his position on Russia, even though he claims to represent the will of the people.

lawmakers are largely in agreement over the necessity of intervening against Russia's aggression in the Crimean peninsula, largely through sanctions on Russia and economic aid to Ukraine's transition government (debate is ongoing over various forms of non-troop military aid).

So of course the United States public is in bipartisan agreement that we should avoid the situation altogether. A CBS News poll found Tuesday morning that 61% of respondents do not believe the U.S. is obligated to involve itself in the Ukrainian crisis, almost double the 32% who do.

Slightly more (65%) believe the U.S. should not send military aid, compared to only 26% who think it should. The opposition to military aid stretched across party lines, with slightly more Democrats and Independents opposing it.

The numbers are in line with previous public opposition to involvement in foreign conflict, especially the recent civil war in Syria.

The Monday 3-24-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 25, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Flight 370 Update. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Finally, the Malaysian government has told the world that the missing jetliner crashed in the southern Indian Ocean. Our condolences to the families who lost loved ones aboard that airliner. Talking Points believes some parts of the plane will be found, but not the black box, so the reason the plane crashed is likely to remain shrouded unless the FBI can pinpoint a motive.

One week ago, I told you exactly what happened to that plane. It was obvious from the facts that the pilot or pilots took the plane off course intentionally and it eventually crashed. That was obvious, but the media misled you and exploited the story to manipulate viewership. The media allowed charlatans to put forth preposterous theories, which denigrated the entire journalism industry. It is long past time for we the people to wise up.

On some very important matters we are not being told the truth by the national press, and in many cases we are being actively misled and exploited. The coverage of the Malaysia jetliner was embarrassing, irresponsible, and dishonest. You can not traffic in fiction when more than 200 lives are in peril. That's just cruel!

I gave you the truth last week, and for doing that I got hammered by some dishonest, contemptible media people. I'm proud we got the story right. We will always tell you the truth, and we will always present facts to back it up.
Shut up O'Reilly, you are a biased liar and just as bad as any of them. In fact you are worse, because you claim to be a non-partisan Independent with a no spin zone who is fair and balanced. When you are none of that, you are a biased one sided hack of a right-wing spin doctor. And that is a fact, you just refuse to admit it.

Not to mention this, O'Reilly has said in the past that if it gets good ratings it is worthy of reporting. He has even used that line to justify reporting he has done. Now all the sudden he is mad that the media reported so much on the missing plane, and that they speculated on it. When he does the very same thing, including speculation that he says he never does and does not allow. O'Reilly is a biased right-wing liar and a massive hypocrite, and that is a fact.

Here is the truth, the other news outlets reported on the missing plane story because they were getting good ratings, and it was an important story. O'Reilly was mad because it caused his ratings to go down, so what did he do, he added segments on his show to report on it to get some of those ratings back. So he is just as bad as the rest of them.

Then Bernie Goldberg was on to discuss it, and of course he agreed with O'Reilly. And no Democratic or liberal guest was on for balance.

Goldberg said this: "I agree with every syllable. You made the allegation that the media's coverage was corrupting the news business, but Eric Wemple of the Washington Post said that was nonsense. He's dead wrong! When an anchorman asks a panel whether the plane could have disappeared into a black hole, that is stupendously dumb and jaw-droppingly stupid. That person doesn't simply embarrass himself, he embarrasses his entire network. And when a retired general goes on this network and says he has sources that tell him the plane is in Pakistan or eastern Iran and will probably be used as a weapon, that speaks to the credibility of the entire network."

Which is just insane, because every day so-called journalists ask dumb questions that are not possible, and most of them are on Fox. It does not corrupt the news business, it just makes that person look stupid. But O'Reilly and Goldberg never mention any of it from Fox, because they are biased hacks who see what they want to see, and have biased opinions about what the rest of the media is doing. Here is a tip, mind your own business and do your job, stop crying about what other people are doing.

Then Mary K. Ham and Juan Williams were on to follow up on the missing jetliner story and how it has been covered.

Williams said this: "I was trained as a hard news journalist, and the basic rule is, 'If you don't have a story, shut up!' In this case they had nothing and you called them out. You were saying we have to pay attention to what's taking place with Putin and what's going on in this country."

Now that is funny, because Fox covers more non-news and ridiculous news stories than anyone, and even their so-called hard news is biased. Juan Williams is a fool, and nothing but a Fox stooge who just says what the network wants to hear.

Ham said this: "The ideological bias and this drive for ratings can really turn into a toxic stew. Granted, people are fascinated by this story, but a news organization has to be responsible. When you've got black holes and psychics, it's fair to say you are off the rails."

But here is what's ridiculous, when one person in the media slams another person in the media for what they report on or how much. It's stupid, and nobody cares. Just do your job and stop worrying about what other people in the media are doing. Nobody cares what you think about it, and it's just a waste of tv time. Especially when it's coming from biased and dishonest right-wing hypocrites like you idiots at Fox.

Then Brit Hume was on to talk about President Obama, who is in Europe trying to rally the world to punish Vladimir Putin. Now think about this, Hume is a biased Obama hating Republican, so his opinion is biased, and of course no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Hume said this: "It's worth noting that they didn't throw Russia out of the G8 permanently. They just said they won't have the planned G8 summit in Russia, but they'll meet without Russia in June. This is a suspension, not an expulsion, and it throws a spotlight on the fact that countries like Germany would bear some real pain if they go along with more extensive sanctions. Also, President Obama's foreign policy in dealing with places like Syria and Iran depends upon Russian cooperation. If he has daggers drawn with Russia, he's got problems in other parts of the world."

Hume was back for a 2nd segment to analyze Hillary Clinton's attempt to put some distance between her foreign policy and that of President Obama.

Hume gave his biased opinion, saying this: "She can't escape, because she was the secretary of state when these policies were put into place and pursued for four years. She's got Benghazi hanging over her, she's got the Russian 'reset' that she introduced, and she has the Obama foreign policy hanging around her neck. She may attempt to distance herself from the president on foreign policy, but it won't be easy to do."

Then O'Reilly even reminded Hume that Hillary Clinton can claim she was merely a loyal soldier in the Obama administration, saying this: "When you're the secretary of state you're appointed by the president to represent his point of view, but you may not agree with that point of view."

Bingo, for once O'Reilly got something right. Clinton will just say I was only representing the point of view of President Obama, that was not my view of the issue, and it's over, except with the right-wing loons like Hume who will try to blame it on Clinton.

Then O'Reilly had George Will on to defend the racist statement made by the Republican congressman Paul Ryan. O'Reilly and Will put their spin on it to defend Ryan, because they are Republicans who are trying to help him get away from the racist statement, that he said he was sorry for saying btw. And of course no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Congressman Paul Ryan recently said this: "We have got this tailspin of culture in our inner cities, in particular of men not working and just generations of men not even thinking about working." Which is a racist statement, but of course O'Reilly would not admit that, even though it's true.

O'Reilly said that naturally, he has been roundly denounced by Al Sharpton, Congresswoman Barbara Lee, and other race hustlers. So he asked George Will to comment on Ryan's accusers.

Will said this: "There is a verbal tic on their part to call people 'racist,' and they're frightened of Paul Ryan. But most important, they are terrified of his fundamental message, which the president himself has said and which social scientists have documented. The fundamental problem is cultural, and family structure is the best predictor of life chances."

And now the facts, what Ryan said was racist, and nobody is terrified of the fool Paul Ryan. Ryan basically said all black on the inner city are lazy bums that do not want to work. When half (or more) of the people on welfare etc. are white, but he said nothing about them. It was a racist statement and he said he was sorry for it.

But the dishonest and biased O'Reilly said that Sharpton and others of his ilk want to shut down any debate, saying this: "There is a cultural problem that we have documented for years, and that problem holds certain Americans back from competing in the marketplace."

Which is putting a spin on what Ryan said, Ryan targeted blacks, and that is racist. Plain and simple.

Then the idiot Jesse Watters was on, he hit the bricks to ask some people about the missing Malaysia Airlines flight. A few of their thoughts about what happened to the plane: "It might be retaliation for all the stuff that's happening in Ukraine and Russia" ... "Black holes everywhere" ... "Somebody took the plane to Antarctica" ... "Obama knew about it and covered it up."

Back in the studio, Watters summarized his findings, saying this: "People that have responsible theories say the media has been irresponsible, but the people who aren't really hard-core news consumers are the ones who are pontificating about these crazy theories."

Now lets get something straight, most people do not care about the news, they have jobs to do and lives to live. And one more thing, sometimes when they see someone from Fox they say stupid things on purpose because they know you are not real journalists and they are pranking you. If a Fox idiot stuck a mic in my face I would say something crazy just to mess with you, I would never give anyone from Fox a serious answer to anything.

Note: Not one liberal was on the entire show to discuss anything, not one, so much for fair and balanced. Juan Williams was on, but he is more of a moderate Republican than he is a Democrat, and he is clearly not a liberal. He even agreed with O'Reilly so you know he is not a Democrat. In fact, he has even admitted he is more conservative than liberal.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Bill on Religion. Which was not a tip about religion, it was simply O'Reilly telling people to read the lame softball interview he did with Washington Post columnist Sally Quinn. It was lame, and in it he compares himself to Jesus, which is just ridiculous.

Conservative PR Agency CEO Slams O'Reilly For Jay-Z Attacks
By: Steve - March 25, 2014 - 10:00am

Ronn Torossian wrote this at

As CEO of a leading New York PR agency, we have represented countless hip-hop artists, including Sean Diddy Combs, Ice-Cube, Snoop Dogg and others -- and it's been a great experience.

Too often conservatives are out of touch with youth culture, and a perfect example of that is overlooking the countless ways that hip-hop has made America a better country.

Bill O'Reilly's perpetual attacks upon the hip-hop industry are wrong and misguided. Recently, O'Reilly confronted Valerie Jarret, a senior advisor to President Obama, on-air as they were discussing Obama's new My Brother's Keeper initiative, which seeks to help minorities find role models. O'Reilly said, "You're gonna have to get people like Jay-Z, alright, Kanye West, all of these gangsta rappers to knock it off. That's number one."

He continued, saying that young males idolize "these guys with the hats on backwards and terrible rap lyrics," and that these gangsta rappers and tattoo guys need to speak to kids and tell them that they've "got to stop the disruptive behavior or you're going to wind up in a morgue or in prison."

O'Reilly continually speaks negatively about hip-hop, and inaccurately claimed that Jay-Z and Kanye West were gangster rappers. They aren't. While Jay-Z made many mistakes growing up - as a drug dealer he undoubtedly hurt many people - none of us are perfect. The man is tremendously influential and has shown so many of us how to overcome adversity and become successful.

With sheer determination, Jay-Z has succeeded as a world-class entrepreneur, and demonstrated how self-confidence, passion and a strong work ethic can allow anyone in this great country to get anywhere.

At times, as an entertainer, Jay-Z curses and is inappropriate. The Terminator was inappropriate as well, as were other characters played by Arnold Schwarzenegger in countless movies. Indeed, there are PG-13 and R-rated movies and actors. But the real life of Jay-Z today is parental-encouraged, and worthy of being viewed by all.

People should watch and learn from Jay-Z.

Neither Jay-Z nor Kanye West are gangster rappers and the fact that they may wear their hats backwards, and may have tattoos, doesn't say anything more about them today than the clothing style of someone wearing a suit says about that person. Marc Zuckerberg, Jan Koum of Whats App and many others have non-traditional viewpoints on corporate rules and how to dress. Whether it's a hoodie, or someone with a tattoo, people cannot be defined by how they dress or what they look like.

So often, hip-hop represents the greatness of America - opportunity, risk-taking, thinking outside of the box -- and Jay-Z is at the forefront of that movement. Hip-hop embraces entrepreneurship and a culture of self-sufficiency. As the American business icon Warren Buffett said:
"Jay is teaching in a lot bigger classroom than I'll ever teach in. They're going to learn from somebody. For a young person growing up he's the guy to learn from."
From becoming one of the world's most recognizable artists, to investing in professional sports teams, cosmetics brands, restaurants and much more, Jay-Z shows first-hand the results and importance of hard-work, responsibility, and risk-taking. Jay-Z's values today are of a family man who is the face of major American brands - married to one of the most beautiful, charismatic artists of our time.

He has taught so many of us to strive for more, to work hard at what we love. Jay-Z is worth $475 million dollars according to Forbes Magazine and is still going. For so many Americans, myself included, Jay-Z is worthy of our immense respect. As a grown man, Jay-Z is a business role model for so many people.

Mr. O'Reilly: Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. As Jay-Z said, "I'm not a businessman, I'm a business, man." Jay-Z's business skills show so many Americans that even if we aren't Ivy League graduates, we can still succeed in a major way.

The Five Slams O'Reilly For Missing Plane Media Complaints
By: Steve - March 24, 2014 - 11:00am

The crazy O'Reilly has been screaming about his disdain for cable news wall-to-wall coverage of the missing plane, but on Friday, he actually received some pushback from his colleagues at The Five.

Co-host Andrea Tantaros talked about the irony in O'Reilly criticizing others for being in the ratings game.

O'Reilly said last the media doesn't get bogged down in complex stories like the IRS and Benghazi, but can cover something as apolitical as the missing plane without suffering political consequences. And the key to all this: ratings, because as O'Reilly warned, a "combination of cash and politics" is a problem in a supposedly fair and free media.

Eric Bolling said that "with all due respect" to O’Reilly, the entire world is completely riveted by the missing Malaysian Airlines flight and it is actually an important story that the media needs to focus on.

Greg Gutfeld agreed with Bolling's point to say there are still potentially serious and even dangerous reasons the plane might be missing, and so "I don't know if you should be saying there are other things" to cover, pointing to the media's coverage of Duck Dynasty to argue that by comparison, this story is far more important.

Tantaros also found it a little odd that O'Reilly would act above the media fray, so to speak.

"It's easy for Bill O'Reilly to, you know go after the media on this, but Bill O'Reilly is the media on this! I mean, he acts like he's a citizen journalist who's doing this for free! I mean, it's the most downloaded post on Facebook. People have strong opinions."

Dana Perino did jump in towards the end of the segment to note O'Reilly's brilliance in being able to "talk about the plane in a way that could still get him ratings, but he could criticize people talking about the plane."

In other words, she was calling him a hypocrite in a nice way, by saying he has a brilliance in how he gets away with slamming the rest of the media for covering it to get ratings, when he does the very same thing and is all about ratings.

Town Pays Ted Nugent 16K To Not Play At Their Event
By: Steve - March 23, 2014 - 11:00am

The town of Longview, Texas has paid the idiot/racist conservative rocker Ted Nugent $16,000 to make sure he does not play at their annual 4th of July concert this summer. That figure represents half of the amount Nugent would have been guaranteed if the performance happened as scheduled.

"We decided that that wasn't the direction we wanted to go for the festival," Longview's public information officer Shawn Hara said of the decision, which happened in mid-February. That was after Nugent came under fire for calling President Barack Obama a "sub-human mongrel."

Those comments did not cause Texas Republican gubernatorial candidate Greg Abbott to stop campaigning with Nugent, but it evidently did make Longview decide he wasn't the best 4th of July headliner.

"I'm sad the City of Longview has done this. I think it was done by a great deal of political correctness, political pressure," Gregg County Republican Party Chair Keith Rothra told KLTV.

"We have various performers who have made all kinds of statements that rattled people's conscience and yet they are still slated as performers."

Hara said the money paid to Nugent will not impact the town's ability to hire a replacement headliner for this summer's concert.

The Friday 3-21-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 22, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Missing Malaysian Flight 370. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The FBI has taken the Malaysia Airlines pilot's flight simulator, removed from his home in Malaysia, to Virginia for analysis. I also believe the FBI is looking into the pilot's and co-pilot's cell phone transmissions. That is the key to figuring out the airliner mystery, since the strong evidence is that the pilot or co-pilot sabotaged the plane. As far as the search is concerned, good luck!

The vast Indian Ocean is the most difficult place on earth to find anything, so a clear resolution to the jetliner mystery seems to be far off in the future. Now, on to our pal Putin. He and his thug cronies in Moscow are mocking the USA for imposing a few sanctions against Putin's enablers. However, since Putin's land grab in Crimea, the Russian stock market is down 10% and the ruble is losing value.

If President Obama and the other Western democracies impose harsh sanctions next week, that could be enough to wreck the Russian economy. Let's see if Putin will yuk that up. Barack Obama must take the leadership role here, so next week in Holland is a stern test for the president.

Talking Points believes there are two immediate ways to damage Russia: One, American financial institutions should stop accepting the Russian currency; two, the president should urge credit card companies not to accept any purchases made in Russia, which will kill travel to and from that country. The world must teach Putin a lesson he will never forget, or he will continue to cause trouble and other villains will be emboldened.
Then Lou Dobbs, who is skeptical about the efficacy of economic sanctions, was on to discuss it.

Dobbs said this: "This is not as easy as one might expect, Russia is a major economy with a GDP that is sixth or seventh in the world. It is a sophisticated economy and a difficult economy to injure through sanctions. There would be so many unintended consequences - Putin has it within his power to nationalize oil companies and energy companies, and he is sitting on vast reserves of oil that the world needs, especially Europe."

O'Reilly said that President Obama needs to lead the way, saying this: "Europe is cowardly, they're not going to do anything against their self interest unless President Obama leads them."

Then Geraldo was on with his theory of what happened to the missing Malaysia Airlines jet.

Geraldo said this: "A fully loaded Boeing 777 took off on a hot tropical night, and there was a smoldering fire in a tire. After the pilots reached cruising altitude, that smoldering tire led to a fire in the cockpit. So what does the pilot do? He turns to the closest airfield at Langkawi, an island that has a 13,000 food landing strip. But they are overcome by smoke inhalation, they die, and the plane keeps flying until it runs out of fuel."

Exasperated by Rivera's smoke, O'Reilly insisted that the pilots would have used their still-functioning radio to report a fire in the cockpit.

Then aviation expert Scott Brenner was on to discuss it.

Brenner said this: "Since the plane first disappeared, we continue to get half measures from the Malaysian government. We need to get all the facts, we need to open the investigation to all the parties and let everyone understand what's going on. We will find that black box, it may take a year or two, but I don't know if there will be a lot of answers on the black box."

O'Reilly questioned whether the black box will ever be found, but nevertheless sounded an optimistic note, saying this: "It is very encouraging to me that Malaysia has allowed the FBI to take the pilot's flight simulator to Virginia for analysis. And I know the FBI is looking at the cell phone records of the pilots."

So let me get this straight, O'Reilly says the media is speculating and over-reporting the missing plane story, so what does he do, spend half his show every night reporting on it of course, what a total hypocrite.

Then Howard Kurtz was on, who after spending two weeks watching coverage of the missing plane mystery, assessed the media's performance.

Kurtz said this: "When CNN anchors are talking about 'supernatural' explanations and 'black holes, the media's credibility is vanishing into a black hole. This is a fiasco for journalism, this is 'March madness! I'm so distressed at how out of control this has spun. A lot of people tell me they're tuning it out, but CNN's ratings have doubled."

O'Reilly claimed that the entire profession will pay a price, saying this: "Polls say that journalists are about as popular with the American public as bookies, and I think we're going to descend even further."

Yeah because you are all a bunch of biased corporate liars, not because of the missing plane story.

Then O'Reilly talked about Fortune magazine, who has ranked the "World's Greatest Leaders," a list that does not include President Obama but does contain Bono and Angelina Jolie.

Mike Huckabee was on to talk about the man at the top of the list, Pope Francis. And of course no Democratic guest was on for balance, not to mention O'Reilly and Huckabee loved the fact that Obama was not on it.

Huckabee said this: "It's a great choice. He has transformed the focus of the church back to poor people, he has done a remarkable job reaching out to the 'untouchables' of the world, and he's cleaned up the Vatican Bank. This is a world leader!"

Huckabee also praised the runner-up, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, saying this: "She has brought stability to a struggling economy and she's been forceful in speaking out when she has issues with the United States."

Then Bernard McGuirk, who named the week's most ridiculous person. Without hesitation, he picked Ellen DeGeneres, who fawned over President Obama and declared that "everyone is very grateful" for ObamaCare. "She's entitled to conduct a friendly, obsequious, and even slobbering interview," McGuirk said, "and I can just see Chris Matthews flying into a jealous rage. But she's not entitled to misrepresent the facts. This has not been successful and not everyone is grateful."

O'Reilly singled out Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai, who continues to spit in the eye of the United States, saying this: "This idiot is giving the United States a hard time, but we are the only entity on earth that can protect the Afghans from the Taliban. He is doing everything he can to get the United States out of there, leaving women and children at the mercy of the Taliban. 'Pinhead' doesn't even cover it."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called How to Say "No" Billy said this: "There are times in life when you're well-advised to reject a request, whether from your child or a friend. Consider changing the entire tone and direction of the conversation, which might lead the favor-seeker to forget the whole thing."

O'Reilly Slams Geraldo For His Missing Plane Speculation
By: Steve - March 22, 2014 - 10:00am

O'Reilly has established himself as the biggest critic of the cable news MH370 coverage on TV right now, and on Friday night he had Geraldo on to confront him about his lunacy on the missing Malaysian Airlines plane. On Fox & Friends Friday morning, Geraldo speculated that it was likely the plane was hijacked and then landed somewhere in order to pick up a secret passenger.

O'Reilly wasted no time in laughing at him, saying that he "put forth some lunacy" and asking why in the hell he would do that. Rivera insisted, "It's not a theory about aliens and black holes, it's true!"

And O'Reilly has also speculated on it, he said the plane is most likely at the bottom of the Indian ocean. So he is just as bad as Geraldo, they are both idiots for speculating at all.

When Geraldo said he knows what likely happened to the plane, O'Reilly asked, "Did you go to the psychic? Did she tell you?"

Geraldo said that there was likely a maintenance issue, "smoldering fire in the tire, and when they were in the air it ignited a fire and as they were trying to land they were overcome by smoke inhalation."

After listening to Geraldo, O'Reilly told his viewers, "You'll never get those two minutes back, ladies and gentlemen."

And we will also never get back the 100 minutes of wasted time we got from you on it, reporting and speculating on a story you complain the media is over-reporting. They you do the very same thing, over-report it and speculate about it. And O'Reilly is even worse, because he is slamming the rest of the media while doing exactly the same thing they are.

The Thursday 3-20-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 21, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: A Clue in the Missing Airliner Case? The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: A satellite has picked up floating debris in the Indian Ocean, and some believe it might be part of the missing Malaysia Airlines jetliner. We can expect to hear massive speculation about the debris because the media is running wild with the story. The reason is money! The nation's newspapers are in trouble and need headlines, and the network news doesn't want to cover important stories like the IRS and Benghazi.

Cable news, which dominates America's prime time, is in a brutal war for ratings. Fox News was the top rated cable channel in the country last week - not just news, but all cable channels! Our main competitor, CNN, understands there is an appetite for the airline story, so it's going wall-to-wall trying to generate interest and get some viewers.

MSNBC has stayed the liberal course, they're not really hyped up about the story. But if they can find a way to blame Chris Christie, things may change. The problem with all this is that the press is not what the Founding Fathers envisioned. We receive special constitutional privileges because the founders wanted independent eyes on the government. That concept has been severely eroded, and the combination of cash and politics makes it exceedingly difficult for you to get the truth.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to follow the jetliner story, but when the media begins to pander to the audience and fabricate things there's a problem. We're living in a dangerous age when thugs like Putin and the mullahs of Iran could ignite a world war. We need honest and courageous media. Do we have that? You make the call.
Then Admiral James Loy, former head of the U.S. Coast Guard, and aviation expert Ken Christensen were on to discuss it.

Loy said this: "The most important word in any search is data, to know what is the last known position or an extrapolated version of that. When you're talking about the south Indian Ocean, the vastness and depth make it an extremely difficult search pattern to put into place. This is also an ocean that is already filled with debris."

Christensen laid out the difficulty of searching while piloting a large plane, saying this: "You want to get low so you can see any floating debris, but then when you turn you have 75 feet of wing hanging out there that you don't want to scrape on the water."

So let me get this straight, O'Reilly says the media is over-reporting the missing plane story because they do not want to report on the IRS and Benghazi. Which is a load of right-wing garbage, because there is no IRS or Benghazi story, and O'Reilly is reporting on the plane story as much as anyone else. He reports on it every night with 2 or 3 segments, including this show where he had 3 segments on it, with speculation he has also complained about, what a hypocrite.

O'Reilly has also said in the past that ratings drive cable news shows, including his, and said there is nothing wrong with that. Now he is crying about the media, when he is doing the very same thing, I think he has lost his mind and it's time to pin a note on him and send him to the dog track.

Then Ed Henry, who will be in Europe next week.

Henry said this: "Our key European allies are going to hash this out, because the first round of sanctions by the U.S. and the EU were seen as being weak. The U.S. feels it has some leverage because Putin has been trying to get into the club. He doesn't want to be seen as a thug, he wants to be a player on the world stage."

Henry also said this: "The administration says 5-million people have enrolled, but a bunch of people have not paid. If you don't pay, you don't have insurance and you're not really enrolled."

Then Democratic strategist James Carville was on to evaluate the effectiveness of President Obama's sanctions against Russia.

Carville said this: "The Russians have never cared what we thought, and I don't think they're going to be swayed by our sanctions, which are pretty tepid. The Europeans have much more at stake than we do, so the G7 meeting in the Netherlands is a good thing. I would like to see a big push to help the Ukrainians."

Then Heather Nauert responded to emails from mad viewers, among them Marion von Gease of Colorado, who is ticked off by the round-the-clock jetliner coverage. "CNN has pretty much been wall-to-wall," Nauert observed. "I just watched for four hours and there was one report, which lasted about one minute, that was not related to the missing airplane. I watched four hours just so you wouldn't have to."

Another viewer, Della Shafer of Kansas, is annoyed because 100-watt incandescent bulbs are no longer available. "This was an effort that started during the Bush administration," Nauert said, "to get our light bulbs to be more energy efficient. U.S. businesses can no longer manufacture or import incandescent bulbs."

Then O'Reilly asked this: If it turns out that 227 passengers died on Malaysia Airlines Flight 370, how will their families be compensated?

Kelly said this: "The families are in a better position when it's an international flight, because the international treaty is very good to families. It requires the airline to pay $175,000, and the passengers' families can also sue on top of that if they claim the airline was reckless. These families are almost certainly going to get $175,000 each and then will almost certainly try to sue Malaysia Airlines. They'll probably sue Boeing as well."

Which is a ridiculous question, and a waste of time. Let's find out if they are found alive first before we talk about compensation.

Then Laura Ingraham was on to talk about a rapper named Kid Cudi who recently denounced his peers for demeaning women and promoting violence, saying this: "It's holding us back as a culture, as black people."

Ingraham said this: "Kid Cudi was brought up on the industry by Kanye West, and he worked with Snoop Dogg. But when you go after their bread and butter, which is the gutter approach to subjects and language, I think he's going to find out that he kicked a hornet's nest. You're probably going to see some retaliation."

O'Reilly praised Kid Cudi for taking on the powers that be in the hip-hop world, saying this: "He should be respected for doing this, he's telling the truth and few other people will. I guarantee you that Kid Cudi will be attacked because there's a lot of money in this."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Read With Caution. Billy said this: "When you come across one of those magazine articles listing the "most powerful" or "most influential" people in some field, always remember that every list has an agenda."

Republican Thinks Businesses Should Be Able To Deny Black & Gays Service
By: Steve - March 21, 2014 - 10:00am

And they wonder why they never get any votes from blacks and gays, I mean c'mon are you serious. It's called discrimination pal, and it's against the law, jerk.

A Republican lawmaker in South Dakota believes that businesses should be able to deny services to African Americans, gay people, or anyone else who offends their religious beliefs.

Phil Jensen, who the Rapid City Journal describes as the state's most conservative senator, argues that the government should get out of the way and allow the free market to shut down discriminatory businesses. Last session, he introduced a measure that would have allowed employers to turn away undesirable clients without any legal repercussions:
"It's a bill that protects the constitutional right to free association, the right to free speech and private property rights," he said.

Jensen goes so far as to say that businesses should have the right to deny service based on a customer's race or religion - whether that's right or wrong, he says, can be fairly addressed by the free market, not the government.

“If someone was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, and they were running a little bakery for instance, the majority of us would find it detestable that they refuse to serve blacks, and guess what? In a matter of weeks or so that business would shut down because no one is going to patronize them," he said.
Which is just laughable, what it would be is a bill that makes discrimination legal, and even if it passed it would be ruled unconstitutional under the equal rights and equal protection claus, and yet these far-right loons keep trying pass these pro-racist and pro-discrimination bills like the one that passed in Arizona.

It's Republican racists trying to pass laws to let businesses be racist and discriminate against blacks and gays, and it's shameful that these un-American racist right-wing idiots keep trying to pass these ridiculous laws.

The Wednesday 3-19-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 20, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Missing Malaysian Plane. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The whole world wants to know what happened to the Malaysian jetliner that disappeared 12 days ago. I can tell you what we know for sure, which will negate about 90% of what you have heard in the media. On March 8th the flight departed from Kuala Lumpur at 12:41 AM, and at 1:19 AM the co-pilot said good night to Malaysian air traffic control.

NBC News is reporting that was 12 minutes after the jet turned west, but NBC used an anonymous source and there is no way to confirm that. Six hours later, the last signal from the plane was received by a satellite. However, nobody knows where the plane was when that final signal came in. Using this factual data, the jet is either on land in south Asia or at the bottom of the Indian Ocean.

South Asia is a densely populated region full of spy satellite monitoring and radar, so it is almost impossible that a huge jet could have snuck into an airport. The data points to a crash in the Indian Ocean. The factual content of the memo is now complete; enter the lunacy! Singer Courtney Love claims she has discovered the jet somewhere in the Indian Ocean, but there is no truth to the rumor that CNN immediately hired Ms. Love to anchor one of its broadcasts.

To say this whole media situation is out of control is the understatement of the century. One more note: The Malaysian government has been disgraceful in reaction to this tragedy and its citizens know it. Once again, the odds are that one or both of the pilots crashed this plane into the ocean.
Then O'Reilly had James Hall, former head of the National Transportation Safety Board on to discuss it.

Hall said this: "Your facts seem correct, but my concern here is with the lives of the flight crew and passengers. I think we have to be very careful, and I don't think we have been able to identify who was in control of the aircraft. The plane certainly made some strange movements, so was anyone in control of the aircraft other than the flight crew? Also, with the cyber warfare that exists, was the aircraft being remotely controlled? I've never seen a mystery like this in aviation."

O'Reilly then challenged his own expert about the notion that Flight 370 could have been taken over by remote control, saying this: "That seems to be something out of science fiction, I've never heard of any airliner being hijacked remotely. Everything points to the pilot."

So O'Reilly is mad at the rest of the media for reporting so much on the missing plane, why, who knows, it makes no sense. Especially when even he has justified reporting on something a lot by citing the ratings. So what does he do, write a 4 minute talking points memo and then do another segment on the story, after reporting on it every night with multiple segments, what a fool. Listen up O'Reilly, stop crying about what the rest of the media is doing and do your job. If you do not like what they are doing change the channel, as in the free market you claim to believe in, turn the channel idiot.

Then Carl Cameron & James Rosen were on to talk about Obama and Putin, and of course no Democratic guests were on for balance.

Rosen reported the latest on the administration's response to Vladimir Putin's hostile actions in Ukraine, saying this: "We've learned that the U.S. and Great Britain will conduct joint military exercises with Ukrainian forces. Vice President Biden was in Lithuania today and he said that NATO will respond to any act of aggression against any NATO member. He also said President Obama will use the upcoming NATO summit to rally other countries to take collective action. The only problem is that that summit isn't until September. It shows the administration is preparing for a long crisis."

Cameron looked at the political ramifications of Putin's aggression, saying this: "Republicans have been pounding on this, you hear them talking about a 'feckless' foreign policy. But both parties think the sanctions announced by the White House this week need to be tougher. Only seven Russian individuals actually face direct sanctions, and those individuals have responded with absolute mockery."

Then Dennis Kucinich was on to talk about Mississippi, who is the latest state that wants welfare recipients to be tested for drugs, which Republicans are trying to pass, even though it's a waste of time and money, an most likely unconstitutional.

Kucinich said this: "It is unconstitutional, a violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects against unreasonable search and seizure. If you're going to have this kind of a system, it should apply to bankers getting government bailouts and corporate executives whose companies are getting government handouts. Apply it across the board, don't just go after poor people."

O'Reilly of course disagreed, saying this: "Nobody forces anybody to apply for welfare, and Mississippi wants to ask people whether they are using drugs. I think that's a reasonable question for people getting something from the taxpayer."

Then Jamie Colby was on, who after watching coverage of the missing airplane, reported that CNN's Don Lemon may have asked the week's dumbest question when he brought up the possibility of a supernatural occurrence.

Colby said this: "He probably wouldn't have asked that question, if it wasn't a Sunday, a day of church and the supernatural. It wasn't the best fact-based question."

Colby also watched tape of two California anchors who dove under their desks when an earthquake hit, saying this: "They have these every day, that week alone there were 45 tremors in the area. But give them credit for doing the right thing - you're supposed to duck, cover, and hold on."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Penny-Pincher's Paradise. Billy said this: "After checking out a website called, which claims it can save you dough on almost everything, our Internet sleuths concluded that it is indeed a money-saving website. Also, a site called can direct you to a plethora of great deals."

Then again, you could just go to a flea market, a garage sale, or an auction, and save way more than going to

Republican Who Blamed Tornadoes On Gay Marriage Wins Primary
By: Steve - March 20, 2014 - 10:00am

On Tuesday, Illinois Republicans voted to nominate Susanne Atanus as their party's choice in the primary for that state's 9th district by a margin of almost five percentage points.

Earlier this year, Atanus drew attention by telling The Daily Herald newspaper that as a "God-first conservative Republican" she believes many of the plights of the last several decades, including droughts, tornadoes and diseases like autism and dementia are God's punishment for gay marriage and legalized abortions.

Which is simply ridiculous, and nothing but far-right extremism. This is the real Republican party, so remember this when you vote for what you think is a moderate Republican, you are really voting for a far-right extremist. Because they are not really moderate, they are pretending to be a moderate to win the election.

"God controls the weather," Atanus said definitively in January. "God is angry. We are provoking him with abortions. We are provoking him with same-sex marriage, gay rights, civil unions."

In November, Atanus will face Democratic Rep. Jan Schakowsky, who has been serving for the district that comprises Chicago's mostly liberal northern suburbs since 1999. The last time the district was in Republican control was all the way back in 1949.

And unless the voters are insane, it will stay in Democratic control, because Republicans keep running far-right loons that think God controls the weather, and that autism and tornadoes are happening because of gay marriage. And btw, here is a question for Atanus, if God created everything then he also created gay people, so why would he then punish everyone with tornadoes if he created the gay people?

Crazy O'Reilly Slams Media Coverage Of Missing Plane
By: Steve - March 19, 2014 - 11:30am

On last night's O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly took on TV news coverage, acknowledging the story is drawing high ratings, but damaging the news business at the same time. Which is just insane, because in the past O'Reilly has said that if it gets good ratings it should be reported.

"Watching some of this coverage is painful," O'Reilly said, criticizing one network for doing five minutes on a possible electrical fire on board, noting the pilots would have radioed about it. "It's now corrupting the news business, I think," O'Reilly told Charles Krauthammer.

As he did two segments on it, and is speculating that the plane is on the bottom of the Indian ocean, while all his guests speculate on it too. Not to mention, O'Reilly has no idea if the pilots would have radioed about an electrial fire or not, so he speculated about that too, as he complains about other people in the media speculating about it, and saying he does not speculate on the Factor, while he is speculating.

O'Reilly's colleague, Greta Van Susteren, has a different take on the coverage, blogging this morning that those complaining over the coverage should "get over it."

Have they forgotten that 239 people are missing or perhaps murdered? The possible murder of 239 is not a drive by report. 239 people missing or murdered is not inconsequential.

Yes, I know, it may be popular to say "I am not interested," but then why are you talking about it? And if you are truly not interested in it, stop talking about it. No one is tying TV critics up in the basement and forcing them to watch the coverage or talk about it.

Bingo, O'Reilly should just shut up about what other journalists are doing and do his own job, which is be a biased right-wing hack and lie to the American people. Who made him the God of journalism, nobody as far as I know. Especially when you are a hypocrite about it, like O'Reilly. He complains about the reporting and the speculation, as he is reporting on it, with his own speculation, that he says he never does.

The Tuesday 3-18-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 19, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: America in Danger. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: The blatant violation of international law by Russia puts all of us in jeopardy. Because Putin is getting away with seizing land that belongs to Ukraine, other bad people are taking notice. Putin is going to do exactly what he wants to do, and that includes taking over countries; he well understands that Western democracies are weak, debt-ridden, and selfish.

Therefore, we can expect the following unintended consequences: North Korea will most likely get more aggressive with South Korea; the Syrian butcher Assad will most likely regain control of that country; China will most likely seize a small island chain currently governed by Japan; and Iran will most likely ramp up its nuclear weapons activity.

President Obama has announced that the G7 will meet to discuss punishing Russia. If the G7 does impose harsh sanctions, Putin will align himself with Iran, thus knocking out the nuclear weapons negotiations. So you can see what a big mess this is, and you can also see that President Obama has little power to do much about it. The truth is that President Obama tried a 'soft power' policy and it has failed dismally.

We're living in a dangerous world where killers rule, intimidate, and inflict massive damage on innocent people. So while many Americans are obsessed with a missing jetliner, they are totally missing the danger that confronts this country. Make no mistake about it - Vladimir Putin is out to destroy Barack Obama and badly damage the USA.
Wow, O'Reilly is a fool. And all of this is nothing but his right-wing opinion. What Russia did does not put us Americans in jeopardy, that's ridiculous. The rest is right-wing propaganda and speculation, the very same speculation O'Reilly just said he does not do on the Factor. Not to mention, there is no proof Putin would not have invaded Crimea if Obama had a hard line policy, he might have done it anyway.

O'Reilly is just an old white Obama hating right-wing spin doctor. And if this stuff happened under Bush O'Reilly would be defending him, and calling anyone who spoke out against him an un-American traitor, because that is exactly what he did any time anyone said something negative about Bush. Hey O'Reilly, what happened to we must support the President? Oh yeah I forgot, that only counts in your world when he is a Republican, you biased un-American hack.

Then the far-right war-monger Charles Krauthammer was on to critique the Talking Points Memo. And of course no Democratic guest was on for balance, just the old fool Krauthammer who is another biased Obama hater.

Krauthammer said this: "You're giving too much credit to the supposed Russian help to us in negotiations with Syria and Iran. The Russians were never on our side, they have blocked real sanctions against Iran all the way through and they have been completely behind Syria's government that is killing its people."

Krauthammer also said this: "The real area where the Crimea invasion and annexation will have an effect is in Eastern Europe. This unsettles every country on the frontier of Ukraine, especially the Poles, Hungarians, Slovakians, and Romanians. Even more nervous are the Baltic states in the north, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. They were actually part of the Soviet Union, and Russia looks at Estonia the way it looks at Ukraine."

Now get this folks, O'Reilly has been complaining that the media is covering the missing jet story too much, as he does stories about it almost every night, including two segments on it Tuesday night, what a hypocrite. Not to mention, Fox has been all over it too, so it's not just CNN and MSNBC. And the big kicker is that in the past O'Reilly has justified the stories he reports on by saying it gets good ratings so that makes it worth reporting. Now he is crying about over-reporting when it's getting good ratings, proving O'Reilly is losing his mind.

Then Charles Krauthammer was back for a 2nd segment to talk about it.

Krauthammer said this: "This is a story with a lot of fantastic fiction elements. It's got Agatha Christie mystery, it's got David Copperfield magic, and it also has a James Bond feel because people are imagining that there's a secret island somewhere with a long runway. What annoys me in the coverage is the way it's become a game, when in fact it's a terrible event with people suffering."

O'Reilly ridiculed some of the more outrageous theories being put bandied about, saying this: "Watching some of this coverage is painful. Today somebody did five minutes on a possible electrical fire on the plane and another dopey pundit put forth the idea that a stowaway might have hijacked the plane."

Which is just laughable, because O'Reilly speculated that the plane is at the bottom of the Indian ocean, even though he said he never speculates, and complains about other people speculating about what happened.

Then O'Reilly had Dan Hampton on for another segment on the missing plane, as he complains that the media is reporting on it too much, what a joke.

Hampton said this: "The simplest explanation, is that the pilot or somebody who could fly the plane did this. A big clue nobody is talking about is that this plane carries emergency locator transmitters. There would have been a signal if the plane had crashed on land or in the water unless the transmitters were deliberately disabled. It would have to be one of the two pilots or someone else who showed up with the proper credentials and got in the jump seat."

O'Reilly said this: "I believe the plane is at the bottom of the Indian Ocean, which is an opinion based upon the facts we have covered. It looks like this pilot took the plane and crashed it."

Then Monica Crowley & Alan Colmes were on to talk about dozens of states that are encouraging stores to stop selling tobacco, even as other states are legalizing marijuana.

Colmes said this: "The government should not be telling a store that it shouldn't sell tobacco, when they're selling marijuana. It is a contradiction."

Crowley said this: "We know tobacco use can be deadly, I lost somebody close to me to lung cancer. And to be consistent, marijuana is usually smoked, so you are introducing toxins and doing damage to your lung system."

Earth to idiots, the government is not saying they can not sell tobacco, they are just advising them it would be the right thing to do, which is a big difference. They are not forcing them to stop selling tobacco.

Then Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on for is it legal, they scrutinized a case in Texas, where a man shot and killed his daughter's 17-year-old boyfriend, who was in the girl's bedroom at 2AM.

Wiehl said this: "He is not being charged, because of the 'castle doctrine' in Texas and other states. It says that if you are in your home, that is your castle, and if you feel an imminent threat or danger to you or someone else, you have the right to use lethal force."

Guilfoyle said this: "The daughter said she didn't know who the boy was, so the dad thought he was an intruder. The law gives the presumption to the defendant, meaning the father, if he reasonably believed that he or one of his family members was in imminent danger."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Lessons From a Truly Evil Man. Billy said this: "Fred Phelps, the loathsome "preacher" who founded the despicable Westboro Baptist Church, is reportedly near death. It's a reminder that true Christians are taught to love their neighbors, and that redemption is always possible, even for a hate-filled man like Phelps."

Why Rutgers Professors Don't Want Rice At Commencement
By: Steve - March 19, 2014 - 10:00am

And of course Fox News put a right-wing spin on it, saying it was just a bunch of liberal professors who do not like her, that want her banned simply because she is a black conservative. Which is not true, and all lies by the dishonest hacks at Fox News, like Eric Bolling, Greg Gutfeld, and Bernard McGuirk.

Here is the real truth:

The Rutgers University Faculty Council has approved a resolution calling upon the university's Board of Governors to rescind its invitation to Condoleezza Rice to speak at commencement.

Rice, who was George W. Bush's second Secretary of State, will also be paid $35,000 for her speech.

But the faculty council's resolution has thrown a sizable wrench into the university's graduation gears, plans and festivities. It has reminded us all of Rice's distasteful war record, including her misleading of the public about the ill-advised and costly Iraq war.

Recall her dire warnings against Saddam Hussein's soon-to-come "mushroom cloud" which would destroy us all?

"Condoleezza Rice played a prominent role in the Bush administration's effort to mislead the American people about the presence of weapons of mass destruction," according to the resolution. And she "at the very least condoned the Bush administration's policy of enhanced interrogation techniques such as water boarding," the resolution read.

"A Commencement speaker should embody moral authority and exemplary citizenship, and an honorary Doctor of Laws degree should not honor someone who participated in a political effort to circumvent the law."

As might be expected, the professors are not alone in their opposition to Rice's presence on campus. Several petitions are circulating among students as well.

"I'm a member of the faculty council and this seemed the right forum to raise the concern," said Robert Boikess, a Chemistry professor who actually introduced the resolution. "Many students are very concerned as well."

Rudolph Bell is a professor of history, and was willing to cut Rice at least a little slack: "Rice would be welcome to speak on campus at any event other than graduation, because the person invited for the graduation, which is supposed to inspire graduating seniors, that is a different kind of setting," he said.

"Academic freedom doesn’t guarantee the right to be a speaker or receive an honorary degree."

A spokeswoman for Rice declined to comment.

French professor Francois pointed to the political nature of this pick. "It seemed to me that this was a heavily political decision that had little to do with interest of our graduating students," he said. "She was intimately involved in a campaign that was a manipulation. Whether she was aware of it or not. Our students are being manipulated to deliver a political point."

Rutgers spokesman Greg Trevor (who is of course a Republican) said that Board of Governors selection of Rice was unanimously approved on Feb. 4, and that: "Dr. Rice is a highly accomplished and respected diplomat, scholar and author, and we are excited that she has agreed to address our graduates and guests at Commencement," Trevor said.

Rutgers student newspaper published a letter from Lawrence Michael Ladutke, an alumnus, who was critical of the school's choice as well: "Honoring such a dishonorable person is disgusting because doing so honors the inhumane and unconstitutional actions Rice carried out," Ladutke wrote.

Rice is no stranger to this kind of controversy. Back in 2006, while still in office, she gave the commencement address at Boston College. A large number of students and faculty stood and turned their backs to her throughout her address. And as recently as 2012, she gave the commencement address at Southern Methodist University, home to the George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum.

And now here is my advice. Yes, Rice is free to speak in the name of both free speech and academic freedom. But I would say do not simply follow Boston College's example by turning your backs on Rice. Actually get up and walk out of the ceremony, if she shows up.

Let's not forget this, there are rumored to be arrest warrants waiting for her, Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney (and the whole damn Bush administration) should they ever leave the borders of the USA.

The Monday 3-17-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 18, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Where is the Missing Malaysian Plane? The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Everywhere I went over the weekend people were asking me about the Malaysian jetliner that has disappeared into thin air. When David Letterman asked me that on his show Friday night, I said, 'It looks to me like pilot suicide.' That is speculation, and I don't like to do that here on The Factor, where we try to stay factual.

However, many Americans want to hear all kinds of theories about what might have happened to the plane. Based on the information we have now, I believe the jet is at the bottom of the Indian Ocean. Because most of us fly at some time in our lives, we identify with air disasters because the scenario is so horrible.

You're helpless in the sky, dependent on the pilots. And it is very frustrating to cover a story like the Malaysia Airlines jet in a responsible way. But the world is engaged, no question about it.
Two things here, first O'Reilly said he thinks it was pilot suicide, which is total speculation and the experts say the plane was hijacked and landed somewhere. O'Reilly says he likes to stay factual, which is just laughable, because the entire show is right-wing spin with very little actual facts. Second, O'Reilly has been hammering the other cable news networks for speculating about what happened, then he does the very same thing, and the idiots at Fox are doing it too.

Then the former FAA official Scott Brenner was on to talk about the latest information on the missing flight. In other words, he was on to speculate what might have happened, even though O'Reilly said he only reports on the facts.

Brenner said this: "One of the communications systems was shut off, prior to the pilot signing off with air traffic control. It's very telling that a pilot has the calmness to shut down one system, checks in with air traffic control, and then turns off the transponder. If this was not pilot suicide, it was an incredible attempt by someone on board that aircraft to take over that cockpit. That would be very difficult to do."

O'Reilly then reported that the pilot, Capt. Zaharie Ahmad Shah, was politically active in Malaysia, saying this: "The pilot was very upset that a political figure in Malaysia had been sentenced to prison, and in fact he attended the sentencing shortly before the flight. That tells me that this guy was upset, and I'm going to keep my theory of pilot suicide on the table."

Which is nothing but pure speculation, the very thing O'Reilly complains about the other cable networks doing, and not the facts he claims to only report. In the opening he said he was going to report on the plane, but only the facts, and he lied, because he speculated that is was pilot suicide, and had a guest on who did the very same thing.

Then the biased Obama hating right-wing stooge Col Ralph Peters was on to talk about the Citizens of Crimea who have overwhelmingly endorsed a plan to separate from Ukraine and join Vladimir Putin's Russian Federation. President Obama reacted by imposing sanctions on a some individuals in Russia and Ukraine, a move that did not impress Fox News analyst Col. Ralph Peters.

Peters said this: "The fact that a couple of dozen Russians and rogue Ukrainians can't vacation in Vegas this year, is not going to get Putin out of Crimea. It's appalling to me that these tepid measures introduced by the president are so timid that they only encourage Vladimir Putin."

Peters also said this: "I know the Russians and I understand Putin, unlike most people in this administration. Putin believes Ukraine is an integral part of Russia and he wants vengeance on Ukraine. I can tell you with 100% certainty that Putin is not satisfied and that he will take at least eastern and southeastern Ukraine when he's ready."

Now think about this, take what Peters says with a grain of slat. Because he hates Obama and does everything in his power to make Obama look bad. Even O'Reilly disagreed with most of what Peters said, saying he is not so sure Putin will take Ukraine. And of course no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Then O'Reilly had a ridiculous segment called: The End of ObamaCare?

Juan Williams & Mary K. Ham were on to discuss the Obama administration, that now says in many instances it will not enforce the individual mandate that is a lynchpin of the Affordable Care Act. Which is a right-wing lie, because what they said is that you can apply for a hardship exemption, they never said they will not enforce the individual mandate, O'Reilly and the right made that up.

Williams said this: "This is a fantasy being spread by the right-wing blogs, and it's meant to sabotage the law. You can apply for a 'hardship exemption' from the individual mandate, but that doesn't mean you're going to get it."

And of course the right-wing stooge Ham agreed with O'Reilly, saying this: "Juan is right that the hardship exemption used to be reserved for some very serious things, but it has been expanded after the apocalyptic rollout of this law. Now, if you believe that these new health care plans are unaffordable, you just sign a piece of paper. It doesn't require documentation."

O'Reilly then told Williams that in fact he is the one living a fantasy, saying this: "Juan, I know you're a big ObamaCare guy, but you have to wave the white flag. It's over! We need to go back to the drawing board."

Which is just laughable, O'Reilly is an idiot and a fool, and statements like that prove beyond a doubt that O'Reilly is a 100% right-wing spin doctor. He got this nonsense off some right-wing blog, the very same blogs he has said we should never listen to.

Then Karl Rove, who says it is likely that Republicans will capture control of the Senate in November, was on. And of course no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Rove said this: "There are four Democrats in red states running for re-election, and Republicans stand a good chance in those four seats. There are also three states that were carried by John McCain and Mitt Romney where the Democratic Senator is retiring. Those three states are likely to go Republican as well."

O'Reilly then asked Rove to scrutinize the Senate race in Minnesota, where Democratic incumbent Al Franken is running for a second term.

Rove said this: "Mike McFadden is thought to be the Republican front-runner. He is a former investment banker who started a charter school to serve some of the poorest kids in Minneapolis and St. Paul. He has an incredible record, but he has to get past a primary and a state convention."

O'Reilly, who hates Al Franken because he is a liberal who told the truth about him, said this: "It's a disgrace that Al Franken even got elected in Minnesota. He has voted 100% of the time with Barack Obama, he's a shill, and he's the worst."

Then Jesse Watters was on, he took his crew to Brighton Beach in Brooklyn, home to thousands of Russian immigrants. Here's what some of them said about Vladimir Putin: "Putin is very smart" ... "He is not a Nazi" ... "Putin is helping Ukraine" ... "He is schizophrenic and he is torturing two countries right now" ... "Putin has strategy, but Obama does not" ... "When he says something, he means it and he does it, not like Obama!"

When summarizing his own Brighton Beach memoirs, Watters reported that most of the locals seem to admire and support Vladimir Putin.

Which is just pathetic, because if these Russians said that while Bush was in office O'Reilly would hammer them and say if you do not support the President of America, go back to Russia. But when there is a Democratic President, O'Reilly not only does not hammer them, he has them on the Factor and lets them spew hate against the President of America, while praising and promoting Putin. It was a disgrace, and O'Reilly should be ashamed of himself for letting it happen on his show.

If those Russians had said that when Bush was in office, O'Reilly would want them deported and call them un-American traitors. But when they say it under Obama, he has them on his show and gives them air time on national tv, making O'Reilly un-American too. In fact, O'Reilly should be fined for letting those Russians put out propaganda on his show.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Honor Thy Ancestors. Billy said this: "On St. Patrick's Day, it's good to remember that everyone can take pride in their ethnic heritage. A website called will help you track down your forebears, wherever they may be from."

More Proof Republicans Lie To You All The Time
By: Steve - March 18, 2014 - 10:00am

Even Mitt Romney, when he ran for President he lied about an Ohio Jeep Plant being moved to China. The auto plant at center of a misleading TV ad run by Mitt Romney's campaign during the 2012 presidential election is booming, Bloomberg reported Friday.

In a last-ditch effort to swing Ohio into the Republican column in the waning days of the campaign, Romney's team aired an ad that gave the impression that Chrysler would ship jobs to China because of President Obama's auto rescue.

"Obama took GM and Chrysler into bankruptcy and sold Chrysler to some Italians who are going to build Jeeps in China," the ad's narrator claimed.

Not only is the factory in question still in Ohio, demand for Jeeps is so great that Chrysler is planning on hiring up to 1,000 part-time workers as a way to alleviate pressure on regular employees who work 60 hours per week.

"Our people have been working a tremendous amount of hours," Toledo Assembly Plant Manager Chuck Padden told the Toledo Blade. "To get them more time off is important to us, to make sure they're refreshed, and can work safely."

Chrysler has already hired 380 temporary part-time employees, 50 of which have been converted to regular full-time employees, according to the Blade. The company is also offering the part-time workers limited benefits, including health insurance.

Robert Duvall Leaving The Republican Party Calling It A Mess
By: Steve - March 18, 2014 - 9:00am

Acclaimed actor Robert Duvall - one of the few open conservatives in Hollywood - is leaving the Republican Party calling it "a mess."

Duvall, 83, a movie icon for his roles in The Godfather films, Tender Mercies and The Natural, among many others, said this:
"My wife's from Argentina, she's been here for a while, and she's very smart. She calls herself a 'tree-hugging Republican,' but she might even vote Democrat next time because the Republican Party is a mess. I'll probably vote Independent next time. Some of these very conservative Republicans. I don't know, man. I believe in a woman's choice."
Which is a big turnaround for Duvall, who narrated most of the videos for the 2008 Republican National Convention. In September 2008, he appeared on stage at a John McCain-Sarah Palin rally in New Mexico. In 2012, Duvall endorsed Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney. And back in 2001 was personally invited to President George W. Bush's inauguration.

Duvall has been nominated for six Academy Awards, winning for his performance in Tender Mercies, six Golden Globes, winning four, and has multiple nominations and one win each of the BAFTA, Screen Actors Guild Award, and Emmy Award.

And of course, O'Reilly has not said one word about it. But when a Hollywood liberal leaves the Democratic party he is all over it, reports on it multiple times, and has numerous segments on it.

Information O'Reilly Did Not Report About Overtime Changes
By: Steve - March 17, 2014 - 10:00am

President Obama plans to make changes to the overtime laws so that corporations can not screw employees out of thousands of hours of overtime, and of course the Republican O'Reilly is opposed to it. He put a right-wing spin on it last week, saying it was dumb and that it would raise prices and cost jobs.

O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama has signed an executive order raising the overtime pay level for working Americans to combat what he calls 'income inequality.' American companies are not required to pay overtime if a worker on salary makes more than $24,000 a year. That threshold could rise to $50,000 with the president's action.

So if you earn less than $50,000, your employer has to pay you time-and-a-half if you work more than 40 hours. Liberal Americans see this as a great thing, but the likely outcome will be a cutback of hours and a loss of jobs. Companies have three options if they want to sustain their current profits - hire fewer employers on salary, cut back their hours, or pass the costs on to consumers.

Talking Points supports a rise in the minimum wage, but on the overtime deal, the president is again trying to manage the private economy, which has failed for the past five years. President Obama is a theoretician, a man who looks at the world through the lens of what should be. The unintended consequences of his policies have held the American economy back big time.

Talking Points wants American workers to make as much money as possible, and the way to do that is job creation by the private sector. That's how you overcome income inequality.
And now the facts, that O'Reilly never talked about because he is a right-wing corporate shill.

In her years managing a small dollar store in Michigan, there were times when Dawn Hughey worked 60, 70, or even 80 hours a week just to keep the place running on a short staff. But no matter how many hours she logged, she was paid the same flat salary in the mid-$30,000s.

Painful as it was, Hughey often did the math. During the more crushing weeks, she earned a not-so-managerial $10 per hour, barely more than the people who worked for her. And she nonetheless found herself doing the same duties as them -- stocking shelves, manning the cash register and cleaning the floors.

"It was more like 60 or 70 hours a week than the 44 or 48 they told you when you got hired," Hughey, who no longer works for the company, said she used to laugh inside when her hourly workers said she got paid "the big bucks" for being a manager.

If Hughey felt she was overworked and underpaid, there was a simple reason for her predicament. As a manager earning more than $23,660, Hughey had been carved out of U.S. overtime protections, like thousands of other workers in supervisory roles in the retail sector. Her company therefore had an incentive to pile work onto Hughey, rather than onto her hourly employees, since they weren't paying anything extra for it.

That could soon change, due to reforms now being pursued by the White House. On Thursday, President Barack Obama signed a memo directing the Labor Department to rework the rules regarding overtime. The reforms are expected to raise the salary threshold that currently allows employers to exclude workers from overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. It hasn't been raised in more than a decade.

Although the White House hasn't yet said what the new standard will be, the change will make more workers like Hughey eligible for time-and-half pay on hours they work beyond 40.

"If you're making $24,000, typically you're not high in management," Obama said at a press conference Thursday. "If your salary is even a dollar above the current threshold, you may not be guaranteed overtime. It doesn't matter if its 50, 60 or 70 hours a week. Your employer doesn't have to pay you an extra dime."

Some retailers employ a labor model that is designed to exploit the overtime exemptions in U.S. labor law. Dollar stores in particular -- Dollar General, Dollar Tree and Family Dollar -- have been sued scores of times by employees claiming they've been shorted on pay. Many of those workers claim their employers have made them salaried managers in large part to avoid paying them overtime.

Heidi Burakiewicz is a lawyer who's represented workers in class-action lawsuits under the Fair Labor Standards Act. She said she once heard from a woman who managed a small kiosk at a shopping mall, often alone. The mall's rules required that the kiosk remain open any time the mall was open. Since her employer viewed her as exempt from overtime law, the woman worked two people's hours for the price of one.

"When you average it out, you're making a ridiculously small hourly wage," Burakiewicz said. "This is exactly who the Fair Labor Standards Act was meant to protect -- people who are low-paid and overworked."

As for the reforms expected from the Obama administration, "It could make a huge difference in many people's lives," Burakiewicz said.

The Fair Labor Standards Act was enacted in 1938 and established a minimum wage and overtime protections for U.S. workers. Employees who were part of management and paid on salary were exempted from overtime pay. As Jennifer Klein, a Yale history professor, previously explained, in a mid-century factory the line was pretty clear dividing the brass from the rank-and-file workers.

The modern economy -- particularly the service sector -- is a much different animal, Klein said.

"Employers obviously have a lot of incentive to exploit the ambiguities and continue to manipulate the meaning of 'employee,'" Klein said. The system "actually forces the management to squeeze people, to squeeze them and make them work hours off the clock, and for managers to pick up the slack."

The number of lawsuits alleging minimum wage and overtime violations has ballooned to record highs in recent years, more than quadrupling since the late 1990s. Because more employees are feeling overworked and underrewarded for their efforts, and they're growing more assertive of their rights under labor law.

The retail lobby is naturally worried about whatever tweaks Obama makes to overtime law, since many retail store managers could suddenly become eligible for overtime.

Extending overtime pay to more salaried managers will surely leave retailers with a choice to make: Either pay those workers more money for their time, or give them a greater life outside of their stores. And O'Reilly claims to be looking out for you, the little guy, but he is always opposed to things like this that help the little guy, taking the Republican position. Proving once again that the "I'm looking out for you" propaganda O'Reilly puts out is just a slogan he does not really believe in.

Letterman Slams "Old Man" O'Reilly For Beyonce Obsession
By: Steve - March 16, 2014 - 11:00am

Which is the same thing I have been saying, that O'Reilly sounds like the crazy old man in the neighborhood who yells at kids to get off his lawn. When I was a kid the old guys like O'Reilly all said if you listen to Black Sabbath you will grow up to worship the devil in prison, and none of that happened.

O'Reilly has spent way too much time talking about Beyonce over the last few weeks, and when he sat down on the Late Show Friday night David Letterman asked him what that was all about.

"It's very hard to criticize someone like that, she's very talented," O'Reilly admitted. "But her recording and video is pretty raunchy and a lot of young girls, who don't have responsible parents, idolize her."

And this is a free country so that is what you get, somehow the free market system O'Reilly so often promotes and defends does not apply here, which is just more hypocrisy from O'Reilly.

Letterman said the older generation's outrage of the younger people's music has been going on for decades, pointing to The Rolling Stones scandalous performance right where they were sitting at the Ed Sullivan Theater fifty years earlier. "The same kind of questions were raised about popular music of my day that are being raised about the music today," he said. "Beyonce is not the first one."

O'Reilly went on to directly connect the rate at which African-American babies are "born out of wedlock" to the message in the music of artists like Beyonce.

O'Reilly said this: "What we are seeing is a deleterious affect on American society."

Even though he has no proof that is true, no studies that show a link, nothing, it's just his opinion and pure speculation, and yet he says it like it is a fact.

"Beyonce in her way does as much uplifting activity as anybody in popular culture today," Letterman said, defending the singer.

Letterman also said this: "You just found something to whine about because you're getting to be an old guy like me."

GOP Rejects Racist Tea Party Candidate
By: Steve - March 16, 2014 - 10:00am

O'Reilly says there is no racism in the tea party, that it's all made up by the so-called liberal media. Well if that's true, then how is it the Republican party in Montana rejected a known racist from the tea party who tried to run (Operation Wetback) for Congress as a Republican.

And remember this, O'Reilly also used to say the tea party was not just a bunch of Republicans who hate Obama, and now we know that was a lie too. Because that is exactly what they are, they are an arm of the Republican party, full of mostly white people that hate Obama, and some of them are racists. A spokesman for the tea party patriots was even fired for making racist statements on his twitter account.

Days after officially filing to run for Congress, tea party candidate Drew Turiano (R-Mont.) has been turned away by a county unit of the Republican Party, on the grounds that he's spreading racist views.

The Missoulian reported Thursday that Turiano is being excluded from speaking at Saturday's Lincoln-Reagan Day Dinner. He is one of five Republicans vying for the seat vacated by Rep. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), who is running for U.S. Senate instead.

"We asked Mr. Turiano not to attend our event because we have no intention of allowing him a platform to spread hate and intolerance," Yellowstone County Republican Chairwoman Jennifer Owen said. "There is simply no place for racism in this party."

Turiano told the Billings Gazette that he was rejected from the dinner because of his affiliation with the tea party -- a claim Owen dismissed. Turiano also admitted that Owen may have taken issue with his past support for "Operation Wetback" -- a plan to deport all undocumented immigrants and their American-born children.

Montana GOP Executive Director Bowen Greenwood agreed with Owen's, telling the Associated Press that the Republican Party has a "long tradition of standing against racism."

He added that Turiano's decision to campaign on an "offensive racial epithet" has propelled many Republicans away from his candidacy.

In addition to "Operation Wetback," Turiano's website noted in February that he supports states rights to nullify or reject any federal law or judicial mandate, citing Roe v. Wade and Obamacare as prime examples. He also thinks President Barack Obama should be impeached.

"Would traditional and Christian America be so complacent if this dastardly transformation was being accomplished by an invading army like that of Stalin?" Turiano asked on his website.

And of course O'Reilly has never said a word about any of this, because then he would be proven wrong and he would have to admit there is racism in the tea party, which he will never do, that is why he ignores the story.

The Friday 3-14-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 15, 2014 - 11:00am

Their was no TPM, instead O'Reilly had the Top Story called: Malaysian Airliner Update. Shepard Smith was on with the latest on Malaysia Airlines flight 370, which vanished nearly a week ago.

Smith said this: "U.S. officials now say it is more likely that whatever happened to this plane, was the result of human intervention, some sort of air piracy. A lot of facts have come together that lead officials to believe that. The New York Times is reporting that the plane went up to 45,000 feet, which is nearly a mile higher than it should have been, then went down to 23,000 feet. The plane made zig-zags, which indicates manual flying. They believe the plane flew somewhere in the Indian Ocean, so we have a mystery and a lot left to learn."

Then former Federal Aviation Administration official Scott Brenner was on, who laid out some basic facts about the flight.

Brenner said this: "What we know for certain, is that it took off on time and checked in with air traffic control about 40 minutes into the flight. Shortly thereafter, somebody aboard the aircraft turned off the transponder, and a few minutes later somebody turned off another communications system. Then the aircraft flew for another four to five hours in some direction, but other than that we have no idea what happened."

O'Reilly said that only an experienced pilot could have disabled the systems, saying this: "We have to assume that the only people aboard that plane who could do that were the pilot or co-pilot, or some terrorist who knew all about the aircraft. So we know bad things happened."

Brenner said this: "If you have a plan to turn off the transponder and the other communications system, I would assume you have a plan to take that aircraft somewhere. But there are a limited number of places where you can land a 777."

Which is funny, because O'Reilly slammed the other news networks for speculating about what happened to the plane, and then he does the very same thing, speculating that bad things have happened.

Then Geraldo was on to talk about the upcoming vote in Crimea, in which citizens of that peninsula will decide whether to split from Ukraine and join Russia.

Rivera said this: "It is a phony vote, but they could win it even without a single Russian troop in there. You could easily get a vote in Crimea to secede from the rest of Ukraine. The real peril will come after the vote when Putin and Russia say they are annexing Crimea to become part of Russia, which is an act of war and a violation of every protocol. German chancellor Merkel says this will be a catastrophe for Russia, economically and politically."

O'Reilly dismissed the validity of Sunday's vote in Crimea, saying this: "You could get a vote in 150 countries around the world to join the United States, but that doesn't mean anything. Borders are borders and Russia illegally invaded Crimea."

Then Lou Dobbs was on to talk about New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who is trying to recover from the "bridgegate" scandal, and has resumed holding town hall meetings across his state. Last week he shut down a heckler by telling him to "sit down and keep quite or get out!" Which is not exactly right, Christie told the heckler to sit down and shut up or get out.

Dobbs, who is a Republican, a Christie supporter, and a New Jersey resident, talked about the governor's presidential chances. And no Democratic guest was on for balance, not to mention neither O'Reilly or Dobbs reported that his approval rating is at a record low, or that polls show him losing to Hillary by 16 points.

Dobbs said this: "There's no doubt he will be formidable, but it is interesting to hear the number of money people who were fervently supporting him and are now discounting him. He's got a big hurdle to overcome with 'bridgegate' because Democrats and the national liberal media want to destroy him."

O'Reilly of course said he thinks that Christie can easily stage a comeback if no more shoes drop, saying this: "The press is trying to destroy Christie, but he could definitely rise because nobody else is dominating right now. There's room for Christie to re-establish himself."

Which is just laughable, because it;s not just part of the media and liberals who are slamming him, the far-right does not like him either, and there are rumors that the big money Republicans will not back him. And none of that information was reported by O'Reilly or Dobbs, because they are biased hacks who love Christie and want to see him beat Hillary in 2016.

In a new poll by Bloomberg News on March 10th, which is not a liberal news service btw, Hillary is beating Christie by 13 points, 52 to 39. And if more bad news gets reported on bridgegate Christie will drop even more.

Then Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders was on to talk politics, health care, and more.

Sanders said this: "We have a lot to learn from governments like Denmark, Sweden, Finland, and Norway, where all people have health care, where higher education is free, where they have strong child care programs, and where they don't have the massive wealth inequality that we have."

Sanders also said this about Puting and Russia: "We can't repeat what we did in Iraq and Afghanistan, where the United States virtually did it alone. We are a tight global community and the entire world has to deal with Putin. We should totally isolate him politically and economically by freezing assets that the Russian government has all over the world."

Then Bernard McGuirk was on to name the week's most ridiculous people. He roundly ridiculed the campaign to ban the word "bossy" because it supposedly damages little girls. And as usual no Democratic guest was on to name their pinhead of the week.

McGuirk said this: "The pinhead is Sheryl Sandberg, She's the COO of Facebook who started this 'Ban Bossy' campaign. I remember when there was a decisive and assertive woman running for president who was called the 'c-word' by a couple of men. Sandberg was silent when Sarah Palin was called that by Bill Maher and a couple of other guys. Plus, she recruited Beyonce to be in this video and Beyonce is married to Jay-Z, who uses the words 'bitches' and 'hos' in his songs."

O'Reilly named Lady Gaga and her "Born This Way Foundation" as the week's biggest pinheads, saying this: "The foundation's 2012 tax return shows that it took in $2-million and donated $5,000. Where did the money go? $300,000 went to 'strategic consulting,' $50,000 to 'social media,' and $800,000 to 'other.' This foundation allows Lady Gaga to travel and do promotions under this banner. It's a ruse, it's wrong, and you shouldn't be doing this."

And a lot of people do that with Foundations, not just Lady Gaga, they use them as a tax free way to spend their money. So O'Reilly should slam everyone who is doing it, not just Lady Gaga. A lot of rich Republicans are doing the very same thing, they set up Foundations, then put money into it and then they spend it tax free, it's wrong and should be stopped.

And finally, the Factor tip of the day that was not a tip, it was simply O'Reilly using the tip of the day to promote his spot on a tv show, so there was no tip.

Jon Stewart Slams Bolling & Fox For Food Stamp Hypocrisy
By: Steve - March 15, 2014 - 10:00am

Last week, Jon Stewart took Fox News Channel to task for their fixation with food stamp recipients being able to purchase sea food with their benefits. The Five co-host Eric Bolling shot back at dummy Stewart for those remarks and criticized him for minimizing the problem of welfare fraud. On Thursday night, the feud continued as Stewart responded to Bolling's "schooling."

Stewart said it was reasonable for Fox to be exposing government waste, but that was not why he was making fun of the network. "What we were ridiculing was the way you exaggerate the scope of public assistance abuse through random, often unprovable anecdotes," Stewart said.

Stewart hit Fox for creating the narrative that the poor are just sh**ty people and those food stamps are just making them sh**tier. He added that the network had found their food stamp abuse bigfoot in a surfer on welfare who has been featured on over six Fox programs. Stewart then admitted that there is an estimated $3 billion in welfare fraud.

The Daily Show Host then slammed Bolling for supporting what the Fox host called a $4 billion pittance in government subsidies directed to oil producers. "What I have learned today from my teacher is that $3 billion dollars of taxpayer money is greater than $4 billion dollars of taxpayer money," Stewart said.

Stewart then played a series of clips of Fox hosts and contributors defending "job creators" who are also recipients of government subsidies. "So, what I'm getting from Fox is this," Stewart concluded. "Exploiting government largess, while morally reprehensible and corrupting for an individual is a-ok for corporations."

Stewart shows how Bolling says $4 billion dollars is nothing, when it's corporations stealing from the taxpayers, after he said $3 billion is a lot, when talking about food stamp abuse by 3% of the people. And he also shows how Bolling claims the one surfer they found that buys lobster with food stamp money represents millions of people on food stamps, when that is clearly a lie, because 97% of the people on food stamps spend that money wisely to feed their family, or themselves.

O'Reilly Pulled A Bait & Switch On Russell Simmons
By: Steve - March 15, 2014 - 9:00am

And then he lied about it, and he wonders why people hate him and do not want to do his show, duh!

Russell Simmons appeared on the Factor this past Monday to discuss his new book on meditation, but O'Reilly was more interested in skewering Beyonce's latest music video for encouraging teen pregnancy.

"Russell Simmons," O'Reilly introduced his guest, "the author of the brand new book 'Success Through Stillness: Mediation Made Simple.' Mr. Simmons also the cofounder of the music label Def Jam."

Simmons, who founded Def Jam in 1983, appeared to realize where O'Reilly was headed.

"Alright, now, on other programs," O'Reilly continued, "you have largely apologized for some of the pernicious stuff-"

"No, no," interrupted Simmons.

"Explain this: Beyonce," O'Reilly said. "I saw her sing the Star Spangled Banner at the Super Bowl in Houston. Brilliant. Worth about $350 million. She puts out a new album with a video that glorifies having sex in the back of a limousine."

"Teenage girls look up to Beyonce, particularly girls of color. She's an idol to them," he continued. "I'm saying: Why on earth would this woman do that? Why would she do it when she knows the devastation that unwanted pregnancies and fractured families?"

Simmons shook his head and explained he wanted to talk about meditation and "getting it into school."

Note: That is what O'Reilly does folks, he is dishonest, he tricked Simmons into doing his show by saying he would have him on to promote his book and talk about meditation. So O'Reilly shows the book for 2 seconds and asked him one quick question about meditation, then spent the whole segment trying to get Simmons to defend and explain why Beyonce did the video. It was a bait and switch, and against the rules of journalism.

"I will say, I think the artist's job throughout history has been to say things that people are inspired by," Simmons added. "There's research that says a man thinks about sex every 12 seconds. And so when an artist expresses something that's sexual in music it is a reflection of our reality. If we want that reality changed, then we have to do things that affect the core."

Simmons brought the subject back to meditation, and O'Reilly said he was "dodging the question." Even though he was not there to answer that question, he was there to promote and talk about his book about meditation.

"I believe an entertainer like Beyonce and a mogul like you have an obligation to protect children. Not put out exploitive garbage that you know harms impressionable children," O'Reilly said. "What she has done here is inexplicable and I'm asking you, Russell Simmons, to explain it to me."

"Bill, if you think that art that comes out of a community is the cause of the struggle-"

"That's art?" O'Reilly interrupted.

"Yes, absolutely," Simmons responded.

So then Thursday night, O'Reilly dug the hole even deeper and ripped into Russell Simmons after he said that he felt "blindsided" following his O'Reilly Factor interview that became heated over the issue of a Beyonce music video O'Reilly thought glorifies having sex in the back of a limousine.

O'Reilly claimed that Simmons knew "we were going to talk about the music industry" and the claim that he felt blindsided was bull."

Even though Simmons said he was blindsided by O'Reilly, saying this: "I went on the show under the pretext that he was going to talk about my book and he blindsided me," Simmons recently said of his combative interview with O'Reilly.

This is what O'Reilly does, and he does it so the guest is not prepared to answer the question, because he does not know that question will be asked. O'Reilly lies to them to get them on his show, then blindsides them with a question they do not expect and it makes them look bad, even though it's O'Reilly who is the bad guy for tricking them on his show.

"Simmons knew we were going to talk about the music industry," O'Reilly said. "What did he think we would give him six minutes on his dopey book?"

O'Reilly also said this: "Simmons is just too frightened to answer the questions," O'Reilly added. "What, do you live on Mars?"

Then O'Reilly dug the hole even deeper, because later he invited the far-right conservative radio host Laura Ingraham on to discuss Simmons and what they said was the crude culture of the music industry.

Good job O'Reilly you dishonest jerk, you can now cross Russell Simmons off your guest list books, because he will never do your joke of a news show again.

Then O'Reilly ran outside and screamed at some kids to get off Fox News lawn, lol.

Fox News Helping Republican Scott Brown Run For Office
By: Steve - March 14, 2014 - 11:30am

Update - 1:30pm - Fox News finally fired Scott Brown. "Scott Brown's contributor agreement was officially terminated today once he notified Fox News of his intention to form an exploratory committee to run for U.S. Senate in New Hampshire," read a statement from Fox's Executive Vice President of Programming Bill Shine.


Update: Former Massachusetts Sen. Scott Brown has begun seeking campaign staff while aggressively courting New Hampshire's political elite, marking what local Republicans consider serious steps toward launching a Senate campaign against Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen.

The longtime Massachusetts resident, having recently relocated to his seacoast New Hampshire vacation home, is expected to launch an exploratory committee to enter the race as soon as Friday, according to several New Hampshire Republican officials who spoke directly to Brown about his plans.

The move officially allows him to begin raising money and hiring staff. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to publicly disclose his plans before an official announcement.

And he is still working for Fox News, and O'Reilly says nothing. Now imagine what O'Reilly would say if a Democrat (who was working for MSNBC) did the same thing, he would lose his mind and go crazy reporting it every night until he was fired.


The Associated Press is reporting that Fox News contributor Scott Brown's camp "has quietly begun offering paid positions to Republican operatives for a prospective New Hampshire campaign."

Fox News, which previously said it would suspend a contributor's contract if they show a "serious intention" to run for any political office, should suspend Brown's contract now.

The AP report added that "Several people involved in the discussions believe that Brown has decided to run, but there remains a healthy dose of skepticism given the former Republican senator's recent track record."

CNN also reported on March 9th that "a number of GOP sources in New Hampshire report receiving calls in recent days from Brown and his top allies, and there's word from GOP operatives that there are conversations about building a Senate campaign staff."

Fox News host Greta Van Susteren tweeted last month she was told it is "certain" that Brown is going to run.

Fox News hired Brown in 2013 after previously boosting his Massachusetts Senate campaign with fawning coverage (during one segment, Fox hosts played with a Scott Brown action figure). Fox re-signed him to a contract last month.

Brown's status as both a potential candidate and Fox News political analyst has led to embarrassing segments for the news channel. One recent appearance was devoted to a discussion of how Brown looked shirtless. In another, Brown attacked potential opponent Sen. Jeanne Shaheen and Senate Democrats over health care. He also touted his New Hampshire bona fides by boasting about how he's been a resident there for "a couple of months."

Brown's last Fox appearance was on the March 7th edition of Lou Dobbs Tonight, where he said "the first order of business is to take over the Senate in 2014 and retain the House in 2014."

He has also published columns that sound like stump speeches -- headlines include, "GOP can once again lead as the party of fiscal responsibility" and "Time to hold Democrats in Congress responsible for the mess they created."

Fox News host Howard Kurtz also noted the benefits of Republicans delaying their intention to announce campaign runs, saying this: "The longer candidates stay working for Fox, the longer they can utilize the platform of the country's top-rated cable news channel--and pad their bank accounts to boot."

The Thursday 3-13-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 14, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama and your Paycheck. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama has signed an executive order raising the overtime pay level for working Americans to combat what he calls 'income inequality.' American companies are not required to pay overtime if a worker on salary makes more than $24,000 a year. That threshold could rise to $50,000 with the president's action. So if you earn less than $50,000, your employer has to pay you time-and-a-half if you work more than 40 hours.

Liberal Americans see this as a great thing, but the likely outcome will be a cutback of hours and a loss of jobs. Companies have three options if they want to sustain their current profits - hire fewer employers on salary, cut back their hours, or pass the costs on to consumers. Talking Points supports a rise in the minimum wage, but on the overtime deal, the president is again trying to manage the private economy, which has failed for the past five years.

President Obama is a theoretician, a man who looks at the world through the lens of what should be. The unintended consequences of his policies have held the American economy back big time. Talking Points wants American workers to make as much money as possible, and the way to do that is job creation by the private sector. That's how you overcome income inequality.
And as usual O'Reilly is wrong, because those people deserve overtime. Most likely the companies will pass the costs on to consumers, and the majority of people are ok with that, something O'Reilly fails to mention. And Obama has not failed at managing the private economy, so O'Reilly is lying about that. O'Reilly knows nothing about the economy, and what he just said is all right-wing propaganda.

Remember this folks, Bush did exactly what O'Reilly wanted with the economy for 8 years and the economy almost went into a depression, so it was proven we do not want what O'Reilly wants, and that he knows nothing about how to run an economy.

Then O'Reilly had James Carville on to talk about HHS boss Kathleen Sebelius, who told Congress this week that she has no idea how many Americans have actually signed up and paid for ObamaCare. Because she does not have those numbers, and it is not part of her job to have them. But she could get it if you want it. So it was a stupid question from O'Reilly.

Carville said this: "She doesn't have the information. People enroll with insurance companies, who would have the information. You're confusing government insurance like Medicare with private insurance like the Affordable Care Act. The government is not the insurer and she doesn't have the information. This act is working."

But of course O'Reilly did not let it go, and said this: "Kathleen Sebelius doesn't know how many people have paid the premiums or how many people who signed up were previously uninsured? C'mon!"

It's clear that O'Reilly not only does not understand how the economy works, he does not know how the health care bill works either.

Then the far-right loon Laura Ingrahm as on to defend the crazy O'Reilly from the millions of people who have taken O'Reilly to task for claiming that Beyonce is harming young children with her salacious new video.

Ingraham said this: "Beyonce and Jay-Z are entertainment royalty, and the industry circles the wagons to protect their big money-makers. Showing Beyonce looking like a stripper throughout a lot of her video is probably not the best message to send to young girls. But maybe Beyonce feels this is the way to remain relevant in a culture that is continually becoming more hyper-sexualized."

O'Reilly said entertainers should use their great gifts to improve society, saying this: "Beyonce has $350-million in the bank and she's talented, she could be on Broadway. So why on earth would she choose to do this?"

Then he yelled at the kids on his lawn. Earth to O'Reilly, this is America and it's a free country, if she wants to do a sexy video she can. It's called the free market you claim to support, if the people do not like it they will not watch it or buy the CD. Get a life man, you sound like a crazy old man who shoots kids with a BB gun who go on his lawn.

Then the two Republicans Carl Cameron & James Rosen were on to talk politics, and of course no Democratic guests were on for balance. In fact, James Carville was the only Democrat on the entire show, while 6 Republicans were on to represent the right-wing point of view.

Rosen said this: "Secretary of State Kerry is heading to London, for last-ditch meetings with his Kremlin counterpart. The goal is to cut some kind of deal that would stave off the referendum that the Crimeans are scheduled to have on Monday. The vote will almost certainly result in having the Crimea formally annexed to Russia. But the odds of Kerry striking a deal seem remote."

Cameron turned to Congress, where the crazy Republicans are threatening to sue President Obama. Which will never happen and will never pass the Senate, and even if it did the President would veto it. So once again it was a massive waste of time and taxpayer money, and yet O'Reilly said nothing.

Cameron said this: "Conservatives say President Obama hasn't been enforcing a whole bunch of laws, so every House Republican voted for the 'Enforce the Law' Act, which will let Congress sue any president who doesn't enforce laws. The White House has already issued a veto threat and Harry Reid in the Senate says it's dead on arrival."

Then Heather Nauert was on for the waste of time angry emails segment. One viewer, Diane Arrington of Texas, feels ignored because she is a white heterosexual who pays her own way in life. "There are a lot of people out there who feel the same way," Nauert said. "If you're pulling your own weight and taking care of yourself, nobody is too worried about you. But people argue that there are babies who are born out of wedlock who need some extra help."

Another viewer, Kelliene Fisher of North Carolina, wrote to say that the actual "war on women" is being waged by movie producers and rappers who exploit women. "They are really appealing to the lowest common denominator," Nauert complained. "The lyrics today are about sexual violence and killing. Eminem talks about tying a woman to her bed and setting the house on fire! The companies are at fault for putting this garbage out there."

Which is pure insanity from Kelliene Fisher and Heather Nauert, because hiring women to be in movies and videos is not a war on women, it's helping them make a living. The war on women is from Republicans who vote against an equal pay bill, or vote to force them to not have an abortion, that's a war on women.

Then Megyn Kelly was on to talk about the case of New Jerseyan Rachel Canning, the 18-year-old who sued her parents for financial support. Which is not real news, it's tabloid news.

Kelly said this: "She has moved back in with her parents, probably because the judge indicated he was going to throw out her lawsuit. So she's back home, but she has not dropped the lawsuit. She claims they have been abusive to her and that, even though she moved out and refused to follow their rules, they need to pay for her private school and college tuition. She wants to not follow her parents' rules, but she wants their money."

Kelly also watched a TV spot that mocks people who are high on marijuana, saying this: "The state of Colorado put this out because driving while high on pot is now more than half the DWIs in Colorado. This isn't anti-pot, it's anti-driving-after-having-smoked-pot."

Oooook....So how is this news to anyone, especially when the ads are only running in Colorado. Who cares!

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day that was not a tip, so I am not reporting it. The so-called tip was nothing more than O'Reilly slamming a Democratic Congresswoman for saying something he did not agree with. There was no tip, just O'Reilly insulting a Democrat and telling her to shut up.

O'Reilly Previews 2014 Elections With Lies About The Economy
By: Steve - March 14, 2014 - 10:00am

Wednesday night Bill O'Reilly distorted the record of private and public sector contributions to the economy under current and past administrations, arguing that voters in 2014 have to choose between a return to a "robust private business climate" or a "big government philosophy."

On the March 12th O'Reilly Factor, O'Reilly opened the show with a Talking Points memo highlighting the importance of the economy as an electoral issue in 2014. O'Reilly took issue with efforts by Democrats and the president to make climate change a priority for American voters, calling on viewers to choose a more business friendly government going forward.

Which is pretty much saying he wants the people to vote for Republicans, even though he claims to be a non-partisan Independent, and he says he never endorses any candidate. It was basically an ad for the GOP.

And it's funny that O'Reilly never defines precisely what "robust private business climate" he wants to return to. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, private sector employment hit a bottom in February 2010. Since reaching that low, the economy has recovered to the tune of more than 8.6 million private sector jobs.

The Obama administration has overseen a net creation of 5 million private sector jobs since January 2009, despite inheriting the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression from the Republican George W. Bush. Somehow O'Reilly forgot that Bush almost took down the entire country and almost put us into a depression. O'Reilly surely remembers it, but he still calls for a return to Republican control anyway.

During the George W. Bush administration, private employment decreased by a total of about 600,000 jobs. You have to look all the way back to 1999 -- nearly 15 years ago -- during the Clinton administration to see private sector job creation as robust as current levels.

But O'Reilly never reports those stats, he just says Obama is a weak and bad President who is ruining the country, when the facts show Obama has been a decent President who kept us out of a depression, created millions of jobs, and was President while the stock market keeps hitting record highs. In O'Reillyworld the sky is falling and we need Republicans in power to fix it, which is the same group that got us in the trouble to begin with.

It is also unclear what O'Reilly means when warning viewers about the alleged current "big government philosophy." The Obama administration has experienced unprecedented levels of public sector job loss since 2009.

Meanwhile, past presidents -- including Ronald Reagan -- boosted public sector employment when faced with economic downturns. President George W. Bush added more than a million new government workers during his tenure.

O'Reilly has repeatedly denied that the private economy has improved under the Obama administration, and overall has no idea how basic economics works.

The Wednesday 3-12-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 13, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: U.S. Priorities. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: A new Gallup poll asks Americans what they worry about. 88% of Americans are worried 'a great deal' or a 'fair amount' about the economy, which is followed by federal spending, health care, and unemployment. At the bottom of the list are illegal immigration and climate change.

As usual, money issues dominate and theoretical situations like 'climate change' are way down. To be fair, every American should support a cleaner environment and U.S. industry should be given tax breaks to develop alternative fuels and more efficient cars. But liberal America wants to impose restrictions that hurt all Americans in the theoretical battle against 'global warming.'

President Obama buys into that. He should have approved the Keystone Pipeline a long time ago - it would help the U.S. economy, damage OPEC and Russia, and not hurt the environment. The poll again proves that the economy is the big dog.

America is getting weaker because we are not able to generate enough good jobs in the private sector so workers can move up. The next election is big, with the main issue being whether the country wants to return to a robust, private business climate or stay with the nanny state philosophy. That's what's at stake in November.
Dear Bill O'Reilly, remember back to the years of your hero George W. Bush, they were not good times, and Bush almost ruined the country with his Republican policies. They do not work, so think about that next time you promote the right-wing agenda, it was a disaster and almost put the country into a depression. We do not want another Republican President, ever, and Hillary is going to win in 2016 anyway, jerk.

Then the Republican Kate Obenshain and Democrat Kirsten Powers were on to talk about climate change poll results.

Powers said this: "It has never shown up in polls as a top concern, and in recent polls it has decreased. People are more concerned with the immediate, while climate change is a long-term problem. Also, it's become an ideological issue and you're seeing Republicans less concerned than Democrats."

Obenshain said this: "The public has not bought into the leftist myth, in large part because the myth has been debunked. Even the United Nations council on climate change said it has no idea whether the climate will change in the next 15 years, and no idea about the impact of man on the climate."

Then Ed Henry was on to talk about President Obama, who met Wednesday with the Prime Minister of Ukraine. And as usual, no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Henry said this: "It doesn't look like there's going to be much U.S. action, and it doesn't look like there is much the U.S. can do. Officials have told us privately that as long as Putin doesn't extend beyond Crimea, he's not escalating the situation. So the U.S. has already sent a tacit signal that Putin can have Crimea."

O'Reilly once again said it makes Obama look weak, saying this: "If President Obama does nothing, he looks very weak in the eyes of Americans."

Then Patrick Kennedy & Christopher Kennedy Lawford were on to talk about marijuana.

Kennedy said this: "Another drug is being commercialized, and it is one that actually has the for-profit motive of 'hooking' new consumers. They're going to target teenagers and they're going to target people like me. I don't think this is the kind of thing that makes our country or our families stronger. It jeopardizes the public health and it should frighten people."

Lawford said this: "The two most dangerous drugs on the planet - alcohol and nicotine - are legal. We don't need another legal drug, which will just increase prevalence. Studies show the addictive nature of marijuana and the difficulty of treating people who are addicted."

Then Eboni Williams was on to talk about Beyonce, who has a new video that portrays her having sex in the back seat of a limousine. But O'Reilly does not tell you that it does not show her having sex, she is dancing and stripping in the car, and the man with her is her husband.

Williams said this: "I believe Beyonce is releasing this type of hyper-sexual music and imagery, because she believes she's actually empowering young girls to own and take control of their sexuality. Where I think she's misguided is that she's not really giving any context to this. Adults can look at this and say she's a married woman talking about sex within her marriage, but to millions of young girls who idolize this woman, particularly young girls of color, I feel this is problematic."

Then Martha MacCallum was on to talk about all the Republicans who might run for President, with no mention of the stupid Sarah Palin.

MacCallum said this: "Rick Perry had a very powerful speech at CPAC, so he's testing the waters. But he's not high in the polling right now - Mike Huckabee is at the top of the Real Clear Politics average, Rand Paul won the straw poll at CPAC, and Chris Christie continues to rank number 2 or 3 in these polls despite what he's been going through. But nobody beats Hillary Clinton in these early polls."

MacCallum also watched footage of an Internet drinking "game" in which young people find inventive ways to consume vast quantities of alcohol, saying this: "Five people have died playing this game. This is the perfect lethal concoction of social media and the 'drink to get drunk' culture. It is a very dangerous trend."

And I am sure they will listen to you two right-wing idiots and stop it, haha, not! None of them probably even watch the Factor, most of the Factor viewers are over 70 years old.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: The Benefits of Sacrifice. Billy said this: "Whether or not you are a practicing Christian, whether or not you observe Lent, occasional sacrifice can purify the body and the soul."

Chris Christie Approval Rating Drops To A New Low
By: Steve - March 13, 2014 - 10:00am

And of course O'Reilly does not say a word about it, because he is a Republican and he does not want to make Christie look bad. While at the same time reporting on the low Obama approval ratings almost every night.

Fox News and the Republican Party are failing the revive the corpse of Chris Christie's political future as a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found that the New Jersey governor's national approval rating has hit a new low.

From The Wall Street Journal:
Overall, the potential 2016 contender Chris Christie was viewed positively by 17% and negatively by 32% in the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll.

That's a stark contrast from October, when the Republican governor was on the verge of a landslide re-election on Democratic turf and viewed positively by 33% and negatively by 17%.

Feelings about Mr. Christie have soured among independents too (12% positively/28% negatively), Republicans (23%/ 29%) and Northeasterners (28%/25%). In fact, not a single group of voters viewed Christie more positively than negatively in the poll.
I am not sure Christie is finished as a serious presidential contender because a lot can happen in a year, but these numbers are some of the worst in memory for a former frontrunner. And it wasn't just the scandals that did Christie in. It was also the fact that he courted the media attention. He badly wanted to be the frontrunner.

Christie got burned by setting up a scenario where he was the inevitable Republican nominee. However, with that presumption of frontrunner status came increased media scrutiny that turned what might have been a regional story into an national story.

In my opinion, Christie should give up on his presidential goal. He is going to have his hands full trying to finish his second term in New Jersey. The Republican establishment has no potentially electable candidate to back in the GOP field. They also have to fear that Rand Paul could swoop in and grab the nomination.

Without an electable Republican candidate for the mainstream, 2016 is looking more and more like a Hillary win that Republicans will have to live with. But at least it will give O'Reilly 4 to 8 more years of hating the President and good ratings, and he can double hate her, because she is not only a Democrat, she is a woman, two things that make O'Reilly sick just thinking about it.

Between Two Ferns Director Hammers O'Reilly
By: Steve - March 13, 2014 - 9:00am

Bill O'Reilly shocked no one by following in the footsteps of his Fox News colleagues and railing against President Obama's appearance on Funny or Die's Between Two Ferns with Zach Galifianakis. One big highlight of O'Reilly's right-wing rant came when he declared that you never would have seen Abraham Lincoln on Funny or Die. Even though a Lincoln historian says O'Reilly is wrong and Lincoln would have done it.

Now, Scott Aukerman, the long-time director of the Between Two Ferns and host of the podcast and television show Comedy Bang! Bang! has responded directly to O'Reilly's criticisms in an interview with Slate's Dave Weigel:
WEIGEL: Look, Bill O'Reilly is used to saying kind of stupid things to get attention. There's not much of a difference between the president appearing on Between Two Ferns and appearing on The O'Reilly Factor. The difference is that we admit we're a comedy show.
Ouch! What say you O'Reilly?

Lincoln Scholar Slams O'Reilly For Lincoln Speculation
By: Steve - March 12, 2014 - 11:30am

First let me say this, O'Reilly says he never speculates and that he does not allow any speculation on his show, he has even said he has a no speculation zone and has stopped people (liberals) from speculating. And then he speculates his ass off saying that Lincoln would never do a comedy show like President Obama did. When O'Reilly has no clue if Lincoln would have done a comedy show or not, making it 100% total speculation by O'Reilly.

Bill O'Reilly is being ridiculed for comments last night suggesting that unlike President Obama, President Lincoln would never have appeared on a web comedy show. In addition to the inherent silliness of the comparison, according to a prominent Lincoln scholar, O'Reilly is also dead wrong.

The comedy website Funny or Die released an episode of its Zach Galifianakis-hosted web series "Between Two Ferns" featuring President Obama, during which the president traded insults with the actor before encouraging people to visit the health care reform website.

Predictably, O'Reilly and his conservative friends freaked out about the appearance, culminating in O'Reilly telling his viewers that Lincoln would never have appeared on such a show.

But historian Harold Holzer, whose Lincoln scholarship has been recognized by presidents of both parties, said that the former president had a great sense of humor and used a wide variety of methods to spread his message.

"I will tell you Abraham Lincoln would go on 'Between Two Ferns' in a second," said Holzer. "He went in the reeds, he played whatever was the most modern, the most cunning, the most unthinkable, unprecedented way to get his message across in a day when there were no press conferences, no culture for press conferences."

Holzer has authored, coauthored, or edited 46 books on Lincoln and the Civil War over 40 years of scholarship and has a new one, Lincoln and the Power of the Press, scheduled to be published by Simon and Schuster in October. He has also written more than 500 articles and chapters of more than 50 books on the topic.

Holzer is chairman of the Lincoln Bicentennial Foundation, after being appointed to the leadership of its predecessor organization by President Clinton in 2000.

In 2008, President Bush awarded him the National Humanities Medal for bringing "new understanding of the many facets of Abraham Lincoln and his era."

According to Holzer, Obama's actions are in keeping with Lincoln's press tactics.

"How could you be angry with President Obama for taking his message to the widest audience, this is absolutely in the Lincoln tradition," said Holzer. "He used humor very well and was very tough, very manipulative with the press."

In a piece at Huffington Post responding to O'Reilly's claims, reporter Michael Calderone notes, "Lincoln was also a man who enjoyed telling off-color jokes, and his bawdy sense of humor attracted its share of press criticism."

The Tuesday 3-11-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 12, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Using Comedy to Promote Obamacare. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Two weeks ago, before Putin invaded Crimea, President Obama did an interview with comedian Zach Galifianakis on a website called 'Funny or Die.' The interview was a farce, and some believe it was demeaning. The president did the interview to encourage young people to sign up for ObamaCare, but for a president under intense scrutiny to do a comedy show raises some questions.

I don't really have a problem with it in general, but I think the timing hurts Mr. Obama. The economy continues to be problematic and Putin is clearly testing the president. If Putin believes the president is a lightweight, will a comedy video counter that? Here's the most important thing: The Affordable Care Act is dubious, to say the least, and using a comedic website to enroll people is a little desperate.

All I can tell you is that Abe Lincoln would not have done it. Serious times call for serious action. Mr. Obama is quick and has a good sense of humor, but he needs to be aware of how his enemies perceive him. Because I believe the testing of America is just getting started.
And here is the reality, Republicans hate it and Democrats love it. O'Reilly hated it so it is just more proof he is a Republican. I thought it was great and pretty funny, and I did not see anything wrong with Obama doing it. Not to mention, he did it before Putin invaded Crimea. Old white Republicans hated it, everyone else had no problems with it.

And btw, it was done to get young people to go to the health care website or call the phone number, young people were the target for this, and it worked, the video has 18 million hits on youtube, and a lot of people who watch it are going to the website. It was also done to counter the millions and millions of dollars the far-right is spending to lie about Obamacare and the website. It was funny and a good idea, O'Reilly and the right just do not like it because it worked.

Then Chris Kofinis and Chip Saltsman were on to discuss it.

Saltsman said this: "The video was kind of funny, but these are serious times with serious problems. Russian troops have strategic assets outside their borders and European leaders are looking to our president for leadership. But they get a comedic routine, which is not what they're looking for. This is beneath the office of the presidency."

Kofinis said this: "The American people have a good sense of humor and understand the purpose of this, which was to raise awareness about the health care deadline among young people. I'm not worried about Putin watching this - he's probably more offended by Zach Galifianakis' 'Hangover 3' movie than he is about this.'"

Then Charles Krauthammer was on to talk about President Obama's dealings with Vladimir Putin. And as usual, no Democratic guest was on for balance, during or after the Krauthammer segment.

Krauthammer said this: "I'm not sure that the Russians care about what Obama does on the Internet, what they care about is what he's done in geopolitics. What makes them have no respect for Obama is the fact that he came into office and appeased the Russians by canceling a missile defense agreement with the Poles and the Czechs. He then did a 'reset,' which the Russians understand was a complete giveaway. Then they watched his stunt in Syria, where he said there was a 'red line' before backing down."

Which is all right-wing propaganda, because there is no proof the Russians have no respect for Obama, Krauthammer just made that up and hopes someone will believe it, it's speculation, because Krauthammer has no idea if Putin respects Obama or not, and it's the same speculation O'Reilly claims to not allow.

Then John Stossel was on to talk about the mainstream media, who continue to push the notion that Republicans are waging a "war on women." And of course Stossel disagreed, because he is a right-wing loon. And of course no Democratic guest was on for balance, making the segment nothing but one sided right-wing propaganda.

Stossel said this: "The 'war on women' is nonsense. Men and women are different and so when there are differences there are good reasons. President Obama often says that women only make 77 cents for every dollar made by men, but he knows this is deceitful. It's based on choices - we men may be more workaholic, while women may be smarter and making better life decisions. This is not caused by discrimination. If it were, women could start all-women companies and get rich because the labor would be cheaper."

Then Lis Wiehl and Kimberly Guilfoyle were on to talk about the latest in the Chris Christie "bridgegate" scandal, reporting that former Christie aides are refusing to turn over emails. And as usual, no Democratic legal expert was on for balance.

Wiehl said this: "They're saying it's a Fifth Amendment issue, that emails and texts and personal communications are protected because they have the right not to incriminate themselves. They're not going to turn these over and they're probably right."

And as usual they ignore the other side of the argument, that the emails and texts and personal communications are public property because they sent them while working for the Government and being paid by the taxpayers. So Wiehl could be wrong on this one, and in the IRS Lois Lerner case O'Reilly said because she was working on taxpayer money she should be forced to talk. Now in the Christie case he takes a whole different position.

Guilfoyle turned to the lawsuit filed by Michael Skakel, a nephew of Ethel Kennedy, against television host Nancy Grace. Skakel, who is accused of murder and awaiting a trial, is claiming that he was slandered.

Guilfoyle said this: "Nancy Grace implied that Michael Skakel had left some DNA at the crime scene, but that is inaccurate information. Nancy Grace's defense is that the whole sum of what was said is 'substantially true,' but this defamation case will go forward."

In other words, Grace was lying, and O'Reilly even admitted she was toast. Grace will lose, because she clearly lied, and she will be found guilty or settle out of court. And I for one hope she loses her job over it, because what she does is pathetic. She makes money off the suffering of people and children, and low-life people like her do not deserve a tv show.

Then O'Reilly had Monica Crowley & Alan Colmes on to cry about liberals saying bad things about Sarah Palin, again.

After Sarah Palin spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference last weekend, some liberal pundits called her a "moron." So the Palin loving O'Reilly asked Alan Colmes and Monica Crowley why she continues to elicit such venom.

Colmes said this: "I don't favor calling her a 'moron,' but some of the criticism is justified. This is a woman who quit her job as governor, and if she were serious about running for office she would have studied the issues. She says things that are not true to rev up the crowd."

Crowley claimed that many on the left are deeply threatened by Sarah Palin, saying this: "From the moment she arrived on the national scene Sarah Palin was a smart, hip, gorgeous, funny conservative. The left realized that if she gained traction with women, the Democratic Party would be toast. Therefore, they had to destroy her. The fact that they continue to try and destroy her tells me that she's still incredibly influential."

Which is the funniest thing I have ever heard, the left is threatened by Sarah Palin? Hahaha, are you kidding me. What are they threatened by, she is not only a moron, she is a stupid far-right fool too. Palin is an idiot who makes Republicans look bad, and I pray every night that she runs for President against Hillary in 2016, because Hillary would wipe the floor with her dumb ass. Sarah Palin is the laughing stock of the Republican party, she is stupid, O'Reilly and Crowley just do not see that, or they choose to ignore it because they are also Republicans.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Your Tip of Tips. Billy said this: "If you get good service at a restaurant, a tip of 15% to 20% is the appropriate way to show your appreciation and the right thing to do."

C'mon O'Reilly, really? That is just stupid, because everyone already knows you should tip 15 to 20 percent when you get good service. And if you are wealthy you should tip even more than that, give them a 50 percent tip, cheapskate.

O'Reilly Speculates About Obama & The So-Called IRS Scandal
By: Steve - March 12, 2014 - 10:00am

Bernie Goldberg Agrees: "He Is Their Guy, He's Young, He's Cool, He's Black, And He's Liberal"

Here is the video:

Now think about this, O'Reilly said he never speculates and that he is fair to Obama. Then he spends 4 minutes speculating that the media is covering for Obama because he is a liberal african-american.

Not to mention, there is no IRS scandal, and no evidence what the IRS did was more than a mistake by someone at the IRS, and no evidence there is a link to the White House.

The reason most of the media is now ignoring it is because there is no scandal, they have had hearing after hearing and they have reported on it a hundred times. The story is dead, and there is no proof anybody broke any laws. O'Reilly and the right just try to keep it alive to make Obama look bad, when there is no proof he did anything wrong.

And this is the last time I will ever report on it, unless they get Lois Lerner to talk, then they might have something, but unless she talks they have nothing, just like in the Christie bridge story, unless one of the people that took the 5th talks, they most likely will never get anything on Christie.

The Monday 3-10-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 11, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: President Obama at a Crossroads. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Next Sunday there will be a vote in Crimea on whether Russia should take over that part of Ukraine. The fix is in, the vote will go Russia's way. Vladimir Putin now has troops inside Crimea controlling just about anything. The European Union is too scared to do anything about it, and therefore it's once again up to the USA to attempt to right the wrong.

So, what will President Obama do? The answer is unclear and anti-Obama forces are pounding the president. To be fair, President Obama should be given some time to formulate an effective plan against Putin. As I suggested last week, the way to hurt Russia is to diminish its currency. President Obama could impose banking sanctions, ordering U.S. financial institutions not to accept the ruble. There are other options, but that is the quickest and most devastating.

There's no question that we're living in a hyper-dangerous world where President Obama is being tested by bad people. He booted it in Syria, and now the world is paying a price for that. Putin knows the Western powers are weak and he has little to fear from them militarily. However, the Russian economy is also weak, and that is where President Obama should focus his efforts. If the president sits this out and does nothing, he will go down in history as a weak leader.
Then the right-wing Karl Rove was on to discuss it, and of course no Democratic guest was on during or after the Rove segment, so it was not a fair and balanced debate, it was one sided right-wing bias.

Rove said this: "President Obama has taken three steps that are important. He's given economic aid to Ukraine, he's sent U.S. Navy vessels into the Black Sea, and he has allowed air defense exercises with the Baltic nations. But we need to have a strategy that shows that there are prices to be paid for Putin's bad behavior."

Rove also said this: "First, we should reinstitute the missile defense facilities that we withdrew from the Czech Republic and Poland. We ought to re-energize NATO expansion and we should reconstitute the G8 without Russia. And you've hit on something important - we need to use access to the banking system so the oligarchs who support Putin do not have access to the American banking system."

Now remember this, that is all biased right-wing opinions, we have no idea what the other options are because the biased O'Reilly did not have anyone on from the Obama administration, or the left, to discuss it. Which is a violation of the rules of journalism, especially on such an important issue.

Then O'Reilly had the Republican Congressman Kevin Brady on to talk about the non-IRS scandal, which I will not report on, except to say this. No Democratic guest was on for balance, proving the bias from O'Reilly, because this is not a scandal with anyone but Republicans, nobody else cares and nobody else reports on it. Congressman Issa even said he was sorry to Congressman Cummings for cutting his mic off, and O'Reilly never even reported it.

Then Russell Simmons was on to talk about President Obama's initiative called My Brother's Keeper, which is primarily meant to help young black men. But according to the insane O'Reilly the cause may be hampered if the entertainment business continues to pump out violent and misogynist music.

Simmons, who disagreed, said this: "Artists throughout history have been criticized for sharing what's on people's minds, and I don't think it's any different now."

Scoffing at Simmons' history lesson, O'Reilly posed a very pointed question: "Beyonce has a new video that glorifies having sex in a limousine. Teenage girls look up to Beyonce, so why on earth would this woman do that when she knows the devastation caused by unwanted pregnancies and fractured families?"

Simmons said this: "The artist's job throughout history, has been to say things that things are inspired by. Research says that a man thinks about sex every 12 seconds, so when an artist expresses something sexual in music, it is a reflection of our reality."

Then the totally insane O'Reilly accused Simmons and the music business of damaging children, saying this: "An entertainer like Beyonce and a mogul like you have an obligation to protect children and not put out exploitive garbage that you know harms children. I think what Beyonce has done here is inexplicable."

Wow, is that ridiculous, it's a music videothat was on tv, no nudity or anything. Earth to Bill O'Reilly, it is not 1950 and Leave it to Beaver is not on the air, it's 2014 and nobody cares about music videos but you. Kids can watch porn on the internet, do you really think a music video is harming children? You are a fool, and an old out of touch right-wing idiot.

Then the right-wing Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about why the media is not reporting on the non-IRS scandal. Which I will not report on, because as usual it was a biased one sided segment with no Democratic guest on for balance, and nobody from the Obama administration on to discuss it. I will tell you why the media ignored it, because it's old news and it's a non-scandal.

Then Jesse Watters was on, he went to Columbia University, where he asked students about Vladimir Putin and Ukraine. Here are some of their replies: "I think it's not our place to get involved" ... "I don't think Obama's been tough enough with anybody" ..."I'm from Ukraine and I think we should enforce sanctions on Russia."

Back in the studio, Watters reported that he encountered some hostility from the Ivy Leaguers. "One guy called me a name and walked away. But I'm happy he watches, that's all I care about! And I was struck by the number of people who just left when they found out I wanted to talk about Ukraine. No one knows what they're talking about."

What they also failed to report is that some of the people refused to talk to him because he worked for Fox, and they edit the segment to show what they want you to see, they do not show you all of it. Even after O'Reilly has told people nothing on his show is ever edited, when it clearly is.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: "Admittedly, a Self-Serving Tip." That was not a tip, it was simply O'Reilly using the tip of the day segment to promote one of his lame books.

George Zimmerman Signs Autographs At Florida Gun Show
By: Steve - March 11, 2014 - 10:00am

George Zimmerman, who was acquitted last summer in the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, spent the weekend signing autographs as part of the New Orlando Gun Show. When a reporter from Orlando's Fox 35 asked him if he understands why this might make some people angry, he replied, "No, I don't."

Zimmerman said he decided to appear at the event to show his gratitude to everyone who stuck by him during the lengthy trial and meet his supporters in person.

"The concept of being able to pay them back for what they did for me and seeing my supporters face to face was something I just couldn't pass up," he said, adding that he has no plans to keep a low profile in the aftermath of the immense media coverage the trial received.

He went on to say he realizes that everything he does is "hyper-scrutinized" by the media and the public, including a speeding ticket he received last fall, and tries to stay aware of that as he conducts his life.

But the only thing Zimmerman is famous for is killing an unarmed black teenager. And he is, in many ways, the poster child for Florida's Stand Your Ground law. Organizers of the New Orlando Gun Show almost canceled the event because of backlash, but instead agreed to relocate Zimmerman's signing to a smaller venue.

Zimmerman was originally supposed to appear on the main grounds of the gun show, but was forced to relocate to a smaller venue off-site after the general manager of the Majestic Event Center where it was being held informed him that he would not be permitted on the property.

In a tweet directed at Fox News Megyn Kelly, Zimmerman called it "another company bowing to threats of being labeled racist." And btw, he sent it to Megyn Kelly because she supports him and the jury verdict, proving once again she is a biased partisan.

Since the trial, Zimmerman has remained in the headlines for two dropped charges of domestic violence and even agreeing to a later-canceled charity celebrity boxing match -- on what would have been Trayvon Martin's birthday.

Now even if you support Zimmerman and agree with the jury that there was not enough evidence to convict him of Murder, based on the Florida stand your ground law, it is wrong to promote him or help him make money from it.

What he did was wrong, he shot and killed an unarmed 17 year old kid for no reason, and the whole thing could have been avoided if Zimmerman had just listened to the 911 dispatcher who told him to back off and wait for the real police to get there. There was no need to confront the kid a 2nd time, then shoot and kill him.

Out Of Touch Republicans Vote For Rand Paul At CPAC
By: Steve - March 11, 2014 - 9:00am

Here is a great example of how out of touch from the mainstream the Republicans are, for the 2nd straight year Rand Paul won the CPAC straw poll for President.

For a second consecutive year, Senator Rand Paul won the Conservative Political Action Conference's straw poll for 2016 presidential candidates. And it wasn't even close.

Paul finished ahead of Texas Senator Ted Cruz by a 20% margin, winning 31% of the 2,459 votes cast. Retired neurosurgeon Dr Ben Carson finished third with 9%. The New Jersey governor, Chris Christie, came in fourth with 8%.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio, second with 23% last year, finished far back at 6% after a year in which his work on comprehensive immigration reform alienated many conservatives.

Paul, the junior senator from Kentucky, once again capitalized on a strong conference representation from student organizations and the libertarian faithful who in years past came to boost his father, former congressman and presidential candidate Ron Paul.

The conference featured several healthy debates about appropriating traditionally liberal ideas: criminal justice reform and the elimination of mandatory minimum prison sentences; marijuana legalization and a pullback on the 40-year-old war on drugs; and reform of the national security state's surveillance apparatus.

Even as recently as the George W Bush administration, Republicans who espoused these ideas would have been labeled soft on crime, stoners or enablers of terrorism, respectively. By this year, they had the backing of high-profile conservative figures like Texas Governor Rick Perry, anti-tax enforcer Grover Norquist and, of course, Senator Paul.

The reformers pushing for these ideas did so under the mantle of expanding personal liberty and shrinking the size of government. Expanding personal liberty, in all its forms, was at the heart of Paul’s standing-room-only speech on Friday afternoon.

And I hope they give Paul the nomination, because Hillary Clinton will crush him like a bug. In a recent 2016 Presidential poll Hillary beats Rand Paul by 20 points, which is a slaughter. Hillary gets 58% of the vote and Paul only gets 38% of the vote.

And in my opinion, if you are not over 40% in the polls you should not even waste your time running. Even if Hillary drops 5 points to 53%, and Paul goes up 5 points to 43%, he still loses by 10 points, which is not even close. And with Paul being so far right the odds are he will not go up more than 5 or 6 points, if that, because he is too far right to get a majority of mainstream votes.

Robert Gates Debunks GOP Spin On Obama And Putin
By: Steve - March 10, 2014 - 10:00am

And of course O'Reilly does not have Gates on the Factor to discuss it, because he kills the right-wing propaganda from O'Reilly and the GOP that Obama is weak and Puting is walking all over him. They even blame the problem in Russia on Obama, when Putin has done things just like this while Republicans were President.

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Fox News Sunday's Chris Wallace that he believed Russia had likely secured possession of the Crimean peninsula, but rejected the idea that President Barack Obama's foreign policy had emboldened Putin, and also defended Obama's golf playing in Florida.

GATES: "Putin invaded Georgia, but I didn't hear anybody accusing Bush of being weak or unwilling to use force. Putin is very opportunistic in these arenas. Even if we had launched attacks in Syria, even if we weren't cutting our defense budget -- Putin saw an opportunity here in Crimea, and he has seized it."

Wallace even asked the ridiculous and biased question, what Gates thought of Obama "taking the weekend off in the middle of a crisis." Which he would never ask if a Republican were President.

Gates said this: "I've seen this happen year after year, president after president. The president takes a day off, plays golf. Doesn't matter whether it's President Obama or President Bush, the first President Bush going fishing. I think you've gotta give these guys a little time off. Mostly they're working twenty hours a day."

And Gates is right, Putin went into Georgia and basically took territory that was less Russian than Crimea and George W. Bush did nothing. Not once did anyone at Fox or anyone on the right say a word, he was never called weak, and Bush was even praised by O'Reilly and the right until he almost destroyed the economy.

All this Russian propaganda by the Republicans is partisan nonsense aimed at their clueless base who believe that good foreign policy is invading every country that does something we do not like, or say we will turn their country into a parking lot. The Republicans love for Putin is borderline treason and just pathetic, to watch Rudy Guiliani talk about Putin's authoritarian style is enough to make me sick.

O'Reilly and his idiotic right-wing friends at Fox are bordering on treason as well, they spend all their on air time in condemning the president and praising Putin as a leader to admire.

One week, Obama is a Marxist dictator who rules the world and the next week he is a weak and timid mouse. They don't make any sense, and they are incoherent. It's right-wing propaganda to get ratings from their clueless old white Republican viewers, who just want to see people slam Obama, even if it's all lies and biased drivel.

O'Reilly Bias & Hypocrisy On Taking The Fifth
By: Steve - March 10, 2014 - 9:00am

Here are two perfect examples of right-wing bias and hypocrisy from Bill O'Reilly. In both cases it involves a person in Government taking the fifth, one is a Democrat and the other is a Republican. But O'Reilly takes two different positions on it, depending on whether they are a Republican or a Democrat.

The first case is about the Democrat Lois Lerner, who resigned from the IRS. She took the fifth at a hearing on the IRS story by the Republican Darrell Issa. So here is what O'Reilly said about it on March 5th:
O'REILLY: There are charges that the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative and Tea Party groups, trying to deny them tax exempt status. For almost a year, Congress has been trying to get to the bottom of the situation, but we still know very little. That's because the IRS people involved, such as Lois Lerner, are pleading the Fifth Amendment.

You may remember President Obama telling me there is not a 'smidgen' of corruption, but then why did Lerner take the Fifth today? Why not just explain what happened?

Talking Points does not know who in the IRS violated the law, but I do believe someone did. There is also evidence pointing to White House people - the former IRS commissioner visited the White House more than 100 times. It does not seem that the House Oversight Committee is getting anywhere. So the IRS chaos continues and we the people still don't know what really happened.
So when a Democrat takes the fifth O'Reilly reports it a hundred times, has only Republicans on to discuss it, and calls for the Democrat to talk and explain what happened. In another segment on it, O'Reilly said she should be forced to talk because she is a Government employee and the taxpayers paid her salary.

Now we get to the other story, that involves the Republican Chris Christie and his top level staffers who blocked off the bridge to Fort Lee as political payback to a Democratic mayor that refused to endorse Christie.

In that case the former top aide to Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, who had been a deputy chief of staff and a key cog in Mr. Christie's political operation, revealed Monday that she would not hand over documents in response to a subpoena from a legislative panel investigating the controversial closing of lanes at the George Washington Bridge last fall, citing her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination.

The former aide, Bridget Anne Kelly, informed the panel, through a letter from her lawyer, Michael Critchley, that in addition to the Fifth, she was also invoking the Fourth Amendment in defense of her privacy.

And that's not all, both Mr. Stepien and Mr. Wildstein, who were also top level staffers for Christie also took the fifth. They are all Government employees who are paid with taxpayer money, but they are Republicans.

So how did O'Reilly report on that, did he report on it a hundred times and demand they be forced to talk? Did he have only Democrats on to discuss it? Did he write numerous talking points memos about it with details of the story and say there has to be something corrupt and illegal there because they took the fifth?

Hahahahahahahaha, of course not. He never reported on it one time, O'Reilly did report on the Christie scandal 2 or 3 times over a month or so. But he never once talked about any of them taking the fifth, not once, not a word. In fact, he defended Christie and said if they have not found anything by now then Christie must have not done anything wrong, even though they are still at the very start of the investigation, and the main reason they have not found anything on Christie yet is because they are all taking the fifth, which O'Reilly refuses to even mention.

Not once has O'Reilly mentioned all the people in the Christie administration taking the fifth, he ignores it. Not once has he demanded they be forced to talk. Not once has he said they must be hiding something because they took the fifth. Because they are all Republicans and it involves a Republican scandal.

So 3 of them take the fifth and O'Reilly says nothing, while defending the Republican at the top Chris Christie. Even though it's impossible to believe Christie knew nothing, when his entire staff knew not to take calls from the Mayor of Fort Lee. Not to mention, the calls complaining about the traffic jams at the bridge, the media reports on it, and Christie knew nothing, give me a break.

Wildstein even resigned over it, and you are telling me Christie did not want to know why his childhood friend (that he created a special job for) then appointed him to it, resigned. Ask yourself this, if you created a special job for your childhood friend, then gave the job to him, and he suddenly resigned from a $100.000 a year job you would not want to know why?

It's beyond impossible, because of course you would want to know why he resigned. And yet O'Reilly has dismissed it all, declaring Christie innocent because they have not found any evidence yet to show he was involved or knew about the bridge closings.

In O'Reillyworld if a Democrat takes the fifth they are hiding something, the White House in involved, and they should be forced to talk. But if a Republican (or 3 of them) take the fifth, O'Reilly ignores it and says nothing about them, as he spins and defends the Republican at the top who is most likely involved in it.

This is what O'Reilly does, and it's a perfect example of his bias and hypocrisy.

Poll O'Reilly Ignored Showing 68% Think Republicans Out Of Touch
By: Steve - March 9, 2014 - 10:00am

Sixty-eight percent of all polled and 69% of registered voters think the Republican Party is out of touch with the concerns of most people, according to a new Washington Post/ABC poll. Only 28% think they are in touch.

Question: Do you think the Republican party is in touch with the concerns of most people in the United States today, or is it out of touch?

Only 12% of Democrats think Republicans are in touch, but only 27% of Independents think the GOP is in touch. Of course, 57% of Republicans think the party is in touch, but only 39% of conservatives agree.

Only 30% of whites think the GOP is in touch, and Hispanics lead with 32% thinking the GOP is in touch. More surprising, only 32% of young people think the GOP is in touch, while 26% of the age group of 40-64 think so, and only 28% of the GOP base, age 65+, think so.

In case you have ever wondered why Republicans cater so much to the far right religious crowd, it's because basically that's all they have now. White, evangelical protestants gave the GOP 35% who think the party is in touch, with white Catholics following at 31%. White non-evangelical Protestants only gave them 28% and the people who categorized themselves as having no religion only gave the GOP 23% who believe they are in touch.

What this poll suggests is that the GOP is not even hanging on to their base in terms of being seen as in touch. But of course you will never see O'Reilly report on this poll, because he wants you to believe the Republicans are loved and the majority of the American people support their agenda, because he is a biased Republican that is lying to you.

Eric Bolling Proves He Is A Right-Wing Idiot Once Again
By: Steve - March 9, 2014 - 9:00am

Last week Jon Stewart slammed Fox for complaining about what food stamps should be used on and the quality of the food they should have, including, for some reason, a particular focus on poor people eating seafood.

Stewart mocked Fox sharing all sorts of claims about food stamp abuse by suggesting they change their slogan to "we read the chain mails your grandma gets in her inbox out loud like they were true."

He noticed how Fox News rolls its eyes at everything poor people buy with food stamps, including seafood. It got so weirdly specific about seafood that Stewart cried, "What's with the f-ing fish?!"

But at least Fox News believes teaching a man to fish is a great life lesson, so in theory "they don't mind poor people eating seafood, as long as poor people catch the seafood themselves." So Stewart could only conclude, "They really do not want lower-income individuals eating any seafood!"

So the moron Eric Bolling from Fox slammed Stewart. During a segment on government dependency Saturday, Eric Bolling took a moment to hit back at Jon Stewart mocking Fox for seemingly harboring an obsession against food stamps, calling Stewart a "dummy" and offering him a chance to go one-on-one.

Bolling said this: "Well, let me school you, Mr. Stewart." He said that people are withdrawing cash with their EBT cards then using the money for things like "booze, weed, and lap dances."

He added this: "By the way, Jon, you're welcome to come on the show any time to debate it. Dummy."

And now let me school the DUMMY Eric Bolling. To begin with, Jon Stewart was not talking about the cash you can get from EBT. Stewart was talking about FOOD STAMPS, that you can only buy food with.

Bolling is an idiot, because the cash you get from EBT is different from food stamps. When you get a LINK card or a SNAP card it has food money on it and cash for some people who are also getting cash assistance, but some people like myself only get the food stamp money that can only be used to buy food.

Jon Stewart was not talking about the cash you can get from EBT, he was talking about the FOOD STAMP money you get from EBT, that can only be used to buy food with. I know because I have tried to buy other things with my FOOD STAMP money, like paper plates and paper towels, and they will not let you, the cash register computer automatically rejects any purchase of things that are not food.

You can only buy food with food stamp money, that is a fact and Bolling is a fool. To get cash from EBT you have to also be approved for cash assistance, and that cash is not part of the food stamp money. When you swipe your card it has two options, cash from EBT of food from EBT, if you do not get cash assistance you can not get any cash from it, only food.

The right-wing moron Eric Bolling does not know that because he did not do his homework, and he has most likely never been on food stamps. So the DUMMY is Eric Bolling, and Jon Stewart was exactly right. Not to mention this, if someone is approved for the cash assistance they have a right to buy anything they want with it. It's called freedom.

The Friday 3-7-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 8, 2014 - 11:00am

Note: The far-right stooge Laura Ingraham filled in for O'Reilly. And btw folks, what does it say about O'Reilly that he picks the dishonest far-right spin doctor Laura Ingraham to fill in for him. He claims to be a non-partisan Independent with a no spin zone, but no real non-partisan Independent would ever have Laura Ingraham fill in for them. A real Independent would find someone who is non-partisan to do it, not use a paid Republican spin doctor to do it.

The TPM was called: Republicans Jockey for Position. The dishonest far-right stooge Laura Ingraham said this:
INGRAHAM: There have been lots of interesting speakers at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, including a few Republicans who may need to so some reputation rehab with the base. New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, whose star has fallen since 'bridgegate,' gave a terrific speech on the economy and was well-received.

Florida Senator Marco Rubio, considered a darling of the Tea Party before he fronted the Senate's immigration reform bill, chose to focus on foreign policy. He believes Republicans will forget their irritation with him because of his muscular stance on foreign policy, but I think this is a serious miscalculation.

According to a recent poll, only 34% of Republicans say the United States should take the leading role in trying to solve international conflicts. Americans overwhelmingly respect and support our military, but they also want our attention and our money focused on the home front.

If Rubio isn't careful, he'll follow in the footsteps of John McCain, who also staked his candidacy on a neo-conservative and muscular foreign policy. Most of us want what George W. Bush initially promised - a more humble foreign policy that focuses strictly on America's national interest.
Then Ingraham had two Republicans, strategist Chris Begala and pollster Kellyanne Conway, to talk about whether 2016 GOP hopefuls should focus on foreign matters such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine. And of course no Democratic guests were on for balance.

Begala said this: "There's no doubt that jobs and the economy are the number one issue, and ObamaCare is 1B. But I differ with the approach that we shouldn't be the world's police force. I'm not for dropping the SEALS into Kiev, but we do have to stand up against what is wrong, we have to place sanctions and maybe stop buying some Russian oil. We're talking about standing up to what is wrong!"

Conway argued that Americans do want intervention, but only in certain places, saying this: "Americans have been trying to distinguish between the hot spots across the globe. They want to keep the nukes out of Iran and North Korea, as opposed to getting involved in a dispute over a warm water port in Russia. They distinguish between supporting Israel and getting involved in every skirmish across the globe."

Those are lies, most Americans want us to mind our own business and work on problems in America. The majority do not want us to be the police for the world, so the two Republican guests lied to the viewers.

Then the former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, who spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington Friday was on. He optimistically predicted that the nation will be eager for a Republican president in 2016. Which is just laughable, and of course no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Huckabee said this: "After eight years of Obama, we will have greatly increased the debt, we will be exhausted militarily, and we will have lost the respect we had in the world. There is not one country on the planet where we are respected more than when Barack Obama took office. If we can communicate to working class people and explain how a Republican conservative leadership empowers them to do better for their families than they are doing right now, then we're going to win the election."

Wow! Huckabee is living in dreamland. Almost nothing he said is true. The debt did go up, but it had to so we would not fall into a depression after Bush almost destroyed the country. And now the debt is going down, which Huckabee failed to mention. And the working class people are not going to vote Republican, so that is a joke.

And as far as the nation being eager for a Republican president in 2016, that is a flat out lie. Remember the last Republican President, George W. Bush, who almost destroyed the country. I do not know anyone who is eager for more of that. Not to mention this, if you look at the 2016 polls, Hillary Clinton is crushing every Republican she could possible face, including Huckabee.

A recent in February of 2014 shows that Hillary is beating Christie by 16 points, she has an 18 point lead over Rand Paul, a 17 point lead over Mike Huckabee and a 15 point lead over Paul Ryan. In each of these matchups, Clinton earns at least 55 percent of the vote. So Huckabee is a fool to say the country is eager for a Republican President, because it's a lie.

Then Ingraham talked about a Cross Controversy, that only Republicans care about. A group called American Atheists is fighting to remove a cross that will be on display at the 9/11 Memorial Museum. The group claims the mere sight of the cross can cause "mental anguish" and "dyspepsia" among atheists. So the Republican Gretchen Carlson was on to discuss it, with no Atheist guest for balance.

Carlson said this: "The beams shaped like a cross were found two days after the 9/11 attacks, and it was a huge deal because so many people found hope and a reason to continue going on when this symbol emerged from the rubble. This is a historical symbol now, which is why it will be in the museum. When I look at it, because I'm a Christian, I think of the cross in a religious way. But if other people want to just say it's a piece of history, so be it. I don't see how it can be offensive to anybody."

Ingraham added that the atheists complaint has already been rejected by one court, saying this: "A district court ruled that the cross does not create an 'undue entanglement' of religion with the state. This complaint is preposterous, but it's par for the course for the atheists."

And finally, Bernard McGuirk was on to name the week's most ridiculous people. And as usual no Democratic guests were in this segment to name their pinheads.

McGuirk cited the New Jersey residents who took offense when a deodorant commercial referred to their state as the armpit of America, saying this: "I would say this to the people of New Jersey. This was an ad for an armpit deodorant, but just be glad it wasn't an ad for toilet paper. But New Jersey does have an image problem - you had The Sopranos, the Jersey Shore miscreants, and the Real Housewives of New Jersey. New Jersey is to New York what I am to Tom Brady. If Brady and I go to a club, nobody's looking at me."

Speaking of New Jersey, McGuirk smacked the Rutgers professors and students who are protesting because former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will deliver the school's commencement address, saying this: "These people are a disgrace, they are the armpit hair of America. It's awful what they're doing to her and what they really resent is that she's a black Republican."

O'Reilly's America In Decline Is Right-Wing Propaganda
By: Steve - March 8, 2014 - 10:00am

Thursday night O'Reilly said this in his ridiculous TPM called America in Decline:
O'REILLY: The stark truth is that America is getting weaker. Let's start with economics. During President Obama's five years in office, median income for Americans has dropped by about 7%. We have elected politicians who favor 'social justice' over a robust marketplace, and the Democratic Party has imposed a huge tax burden on private business and affluent consumers.

Millions of Americans are now looking for handouts, as the explosion of disability applications and entitlements prove. On the military front, the nation is exhausted and therefore weaker. Iraq and Afghanistan sapped money and manpower and have left the public with no appetite to right international wrongs.

The Obama administration is even seeking to downsize the Army, a mistake in a dangerous world. On the social front, we're heading for disaster. 41% of American babies are born out of wedlock, many to poor and uneducated women who cannot support them. The educational system is corrupt, with powerful teacher unions refusing to impose responsible discipline in the schools.

Children at risk are beset with corruptive influences as the cynical entertainment industry peddles garbage to young people with little opposition from an apathetic media. Intoxicating agents like marijuana are now celebrated as 'freedom-giving instruments,' and drug pushers are defined as non-violent criminals who just need a little rehab.

I could give you scores of other examples to back up the steep decline in the economy, civility, and education. We are in trouble and American leadership is sadly lacking in almost every area.
And now the facts, almost all of that is right-wing propaganda. I can not go through all of it, but I will show you that most of it is a lie.

To hear O'Reilly and conservatives tell it, President Obama is a serial tax-raiser who has increased taxes on millions of Americans. But according to the latest data from the Congressional Budget Office, tax rates under Obama hit a 30-year low in 2009, in part because of the tax cuts he implemented in response to the country's economic downturn.

Americans paid the lowest tax rates in 30 years to the federal government in 2009, in part because of tax cuts President Obama sought to combat the Great Recession.

During Obama's first year in office, the average tax rate paid by all households fell to 17.4 percent, down from 19.9 percent in 2007, according to the CBO. The 2009 rate was significantly lower than the previous low of 19.4 percent in 2003 and well below the 30-year average of 21 percent.

President Obama cut your taxes, he cut the payroll tax as part of his $787 billion dollar stimulus bill, so you made more money on your checks. There was no tax increase, it is all made up by O'Reilly and his Republican friends. And btw, that payroll tax cut gave an average family an extra $65 a month.

The reason disability applications are on the rise is because baby boomers are getting older and they are disabled, so they can not work. These are the baby boomers from the soldiers who came home from WWII and had kids. Now they are in their 50's and 60's and they are too disabled to work.

And most of them are people who worked their whole life and paid into social security, so they earned that disability money. It's not like they were just bums their whole life who did not work or pay into the system, they did work and they did pay into the system, and that money is supposed to be there for them if they need it.

O'Reilly implies that all these new disability applications are all frauds, which is just not true, and the facts show that 97% of them are really disabled, only 3% turn out to be frauds.

The big lie from O'Reilly is the economy, he says it is in trouble and in decline, when the facts show the opposite. We hear a lot about this fictional liberal land under President Obama, where job creation was killed by Obamacare and liberal ideas have destroyed the country.

The reality, of course is quite different. In fact, reality is almost the exact opposite. For Bush’s entire 8 years, job growth was just 1.1 million. Yet under Obama, the private sector has had 48 straight months of job growth, with businesses adding 8.7 million jobs.

February's job numbers are a good example of the lies. "Nonfarm payroll employment rose by 175,000 in February, and the unemployment rate, at 6.7 percent, changed little," per Erica L. Groshen, the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

And this was done with almost the whole country suffering through below zero record low temps, and record snowfall amounts.

Jason Furman, Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, put these numbers in perspective in a statement in which he explained that February was the 48th straight month of private sector job growth, "February 2014 was the 48th straight month of private-sector job growth, with businesses adding 8.7 million jobs over that time."

This matters because we hear a lot from O'Reilly and his Republican friends about how Obama is killing jobs. However, Rick Newman pointed out in January of 2013 for US News that in Bush's first term, he created zero job growth, even before the Bush recession. "When Bush began his first term in January 2001, total nonfarm employment was 132.47 million. When his second term began four years later, it was 132.45 million, or effectively zero job growth."

In Bush's entire 8 year term, the total job growth was just 1.1 million. Obama created more jobs in his first term than Bush did in his entire 2 terms. While things are far from great, Republicans really shouldn't be pointing fingers and screaming about job numbers that are much better than their party created.

Job numbers are typically impacted by bad weather but the job growth rate still picked up. Jason Furman explained, "Despite a major snowstorm that hit the East Coast during the reference week for the labor market surveys, the rate of job growth picked up from the December and January pace."

Furman elaborated, "This week, the President put out a budget that can make progress on these issues by investing in education, job training, and innovation, by expanding tax credits for working Americans, and by extending the emergency unemployment benefits that has expired for 2 million Americans. And while the President encourages Congress to act on his proposals, he will also continue to take action on his own wherever possible to support job growth and expand economic opportunity."

But Republicans already said they would not consider the President's budget, so Obama is already working with governors in a regional effort to raise the minimum wage. The Republicans in Congress not only don't want to raise the minimum wage, but are now making noise about killing it all together. They just threw 2 million off of emergency unemployment benefits in addition to blocking a bill for veterans benefits as well.

So O'Reilly blames it all on Obama, while the Republicans block every jobs bill Obama tries to pass. He never mentions Bush, or the fact that the Republican party is blocking every jobs bill the Democrats try to pass, and doing everything they can to hurt the economy, like refusing to vote to extend the unemployment benefits.

When it comes to which party we can trust with the economy and with jobs, it is the Democratic Party that paid for programs as they went, balanced the budget, got a surplus, added more jobs, and stayed a steady course instead of the Republican corrupt style of totally unregulated industry.

This is not to claim that things are great. We have a lot of work to do, especially for the middle and working classes. But Democrats will have to do that work alone, as Republicans have made it clear that they will do nothing but obstruct any efforts to make things better.And O'Reilly spins it all to blame Obama, when it's the Republicans who are blocking every bill that would create jobs and help the economy and the working men and women.

Jon Stewart Slams GOP Senators For Blocking Veterans Bill
By: Steve - March 7, 2014 - 11:30am

And btw, Bill O'Reilly has still not said one word about this story, even though he claims to care about the veterans.

With a shot at O'Reilly for reporting about Travolta and not reporting the GOP blocked the veterans bill, Instead of giving John Travolta grief on Twitter over mispronouncing Idina Menzel's name during the Academy Awards, Daily Show host Jon Stewart suggested on Wednesday, Americans should be angry with Senate Republicans for derailing bills benefitting both veterans and military sexual assault survivors.

STEWART: "I guess my question is, why do these senators get to stay in office? Maybe if we frame their actions in ways that we know generate real outrage in America -- by prioritizing sanctions on Iran over the health and safety of our existing veterans, I think these senators may have just tweeted out a picture of their enormous b-lls. Now can we kick them out?"

The national "shame-o-meter," Stewart argued, was broken, since Americans put "d-ck pic tweets" at the top of the scale and stiffing veterans out of $21 billion in benefits at the bottom. Instead, he suggested inverting their positions, since GOP senators like Jeff Sessions (R-AL) and Richard Burr (R-NC) were guilty of making hypocritical arguments against the bill and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

"So the VA is wasteful, often, and ineffective. This is true, and adds to the debt for this bill," Stewart conceded. "But apparently those were things that these senators didn't worry about in 2008, when they voted to continue funding the Iraq war despite the Pentagon being unable to account for a missing $15 billion worth of sh-t that we bought."

Stewart then ripped Sen. Marco Rubio's (R-FL) explanation for attaching sanctions against Iran to the benefits bill, in which he said that the country would need to rely on veterans "to take care of the problem" of Iran's nuclear capabilities.

"See that? We can't afford to properly take care of our existing veterans when we know how many more veterans we're about to create with our inevitable war with Iran," Stewart said sarcastically. "It's just bad economics."

And I would add this, dear voters, remember this and do not vote for any Republicans, especially Senators. Remember they blocked a veterans bill by putting a poison pill amendment in it to put sanctions on Iran, which had nothing to do with the bill. Then they refused to remove the amendment, and voted the bill down.

They did this while claiming to support the veterans 100 percent, so they are liars, and you should not vote them into office and the people who are there should be voted out of office. They could have voted on the Iran sanctions in it's own bill, instead they put it in the veterans benefits bill, where it did not belong, and it did not work, instead of getting the Iran sanctions they ended up killing the veterans benefits bill.

The Thursday 3-6-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 7, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: America in Decline. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Russia's violation of international law raises an unpleasant question: Is the USA now incapable of confronting dangerous behavior? The short answer is no, we can still right wrongs if we have the will. But the stark truth is that America is getting weaker.

Let's start with economics. During President Obama's five years in office, median income for Americans has dropped by about 7%. We have elected politicians who favor 'social justice' over a robust marketplace, and the Democratic Party has imposed a huge tax burden on private business and affluent consumers.

Millions of Americans are now looking for handouts, as the explosion of disability applications and entitlements prove. On the military front, the nation is exhausted and therefore weaker. Iraq and Afghanistan sapped money and manpower and have left the public with no appetite to right international wrongs.

The Obama administration is even seeking to downsize the Army, a mistake in a dangerous world. On the social front, we're heading for disaster. 41% of American babies are born out of wedlock, many to poor and uneducated women who cannot support them.

The educational system is corrupt, with powerful teacher unions refusing to impose responsible discipline in the schools. Children at risk are beset with corruptive influences as the cynical entertainment industry peddles garbage to young people with little opposition from an apathetic media. Intoxicating agents like marijuana are now celebrated as 'freedom-giving instruments,' and drug pushers are defined as non-violent criminals who just need a little rehab.

I could give you scores of other examples to back up the steep decline in the economy, civility, and education. We are in trouble and American leadership is sadly lacking in almost every area.
And now the facts, most of that is right-wing spin and not true. Since Obama took office the economy has improved, jobs are coming back, the stock market is hitting record highs, and people are getting health care at a good price now. O'Reilly ignores all that and never mentions the fact that most of what he said were problems in America were cause by George W. Bush and the Republicans.

And what's really funny is that during the Bush years when a liberal wrote that America was in decline under Bush O'Reilly slammed them for it, called them Un-American traitors, and even said they were America haters. Now he is doing the very same thing he called liberals un-American traitors for.

When Bush was in office O'Reilly also said that you should not speak out against the President, that you should support him because he is the President. Now he id doing the very same thing he said you should not do. He slams Obama pretty much every day and calls him a weak leader. But when liberals called Bush a stupid man and said he should not be President, O'Reilly called them out and said they are America haters. It's hypocrisy gone wild.

Then O'Reilly had the far-right stooge Laura Ingraham on to discuss it, who of course agreed with his idiotic talking points, and there was no Democratic guest on for balance, with her or after her. So the whole thing was all right-wing spin by O'Reilly and then Ingraham, making it nothing but 8 non-stop minutes of right-wing propaganda with no opposing view for balance.

Ingraham said this: "I sadly agree with you. On my radio show I've been doing a segment called 'America in Decline,' tracking cultural decline, religious decline, economic decline, and our decline in influence in foreign policy. You mapped it out and people are nodding their heads in agreement. The question for America is how we turn this around."

Ingraham even said that some very patriotic Americans are bearing the brunt of the burden, saying this: "There are a lot of traditionalists who feel like the system is rigged against them. There are special interest groups and politically protected classes that are catered to, but Christian conservatives feel like there is a target on their backs. It's going to take incredibly deft leadership for this to turn around."

Which is just insane, it's like Ingraham and O'Reilly live on a different planet, because they are not living in reality. Everything they say is right-wing spin and 99% untrue. Things are not great, but they are pretty good, if we just raise the minimum wage to $10.00 an hour, add more jobs, and get everyone health care the country would be doing pretty good. But if you ask O'Reilly and Ingraham we are on the brink of disaster, which is just laughable.

Then the Republican Ed Henry was on to talk about a new poll that shows only 38% of Americans approve of President Obama's job performance. O'Reilly asked Henry how the administration is reacting to the poll.

Henry said this: "Presidents in their second term get into a bubble, and they hear the criticism from all sides. It's not only coming from the right for President Obama, he's got the left coming at him for NSA surveillance. The poll numbers boil down to one thing, and that's a lack of credibility."

O'Reilly theorized that President Obama may not be overly concerned with poll numbers, saying this: "The president firmly believes, and so do his acolytes, that he'll go down in history as a pioneer, a visionary, and a good president."

And what's funny is that under Bush O'Reilly never reported his poll numbers when they dropped under 50%, he never even talked about it, unless someone on the show mentioned it, then he said the poll numbers for Bush do not matter, he said what matters is that Bush is doing what he thinks is right for the country. Now he slams Obama for the same thing he defended Bush over, proving his right-wing bias once again.

Poll numbers go up and down, and I would bet they go back up to around 50% before Obama leaves office. In a year or so when the health care system is working great and the economy gets better the approval rating for Obama will go up. O'Reilly never talked about it when it was over 50%, but now that it's dropped below 50% he talks about it all the time. When under Bush he ignored it and said it does not matter.

Then Heather Nauert was on for mad as hell, she responded to mail from viewers who are teed off for various reasons. One of them, Michael Doyle of Connecticut, is irate because welfare payments have subsidized illegitimacy.

Nauert said this: "When the 'war on poverty' began back in the 1960's, just 6% of children were born out wedlock, but now it's about 40%. There is a financial incentive - you get more money if you have these children out of wedlock. Welfare pays more than a minimum wage job in 35 states."

Which is pretty sad, when welfare pays more than minimum wage you have a problem, it means the minimum wage is too low. It's a big reason why people do not want to work, and it should be corrected. But of course most Republicans oppose that, while crying about all the people on welfare.

New Yorker Sandy Todd is ticked off because New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio is intent on closing charter schools, even those that have been effective. "Many on the left fundamentally do not agree with charter schools," Nauert said, "they believe it takes money away from traditional public schools. The schools he's closing down are good schools and the parents want their kids in these schools."

What O'Reilly and Nauert failed to mention is that the Charter schools want free space in public schools paid for with taxpayer money, as they get rich teaching the classes.

Then the Republican Megyn Kelly was on to explain the latest changes in the Affordable Care Act. With no Democratic guest on for balance, making it a one sided biased segment with 2 people that do not like Obama or the health care bill he passed.

Kelly said this: "This is the 31st delay, but the president says the law is working just as it should. This one is blatantly political. When everybody started losing their health insurance, President Obama told people they could keep their plans for a year. And now he's adding two years to that. Coincidentally, this will move the extension of those 'crappy' plans from one month before the midterm elections to two years later."

Kelly also looked at the case against Teresa and Joe Giudice, stars of "The Real Housewives of New Jersey."

Kelly said this: "They've pleaded guilty to mail and wire fraud conspiracy. They were basically applying for mortgages and saying they had income that they didn't have. It looks like Joe could go to jail for up to four years and Teresa could be going to jail for up to two years."

O'Reilly made fun of the couple, and said he never watches the show. He laughed all through the segment, and basically said it was a joke. But then he did half a segment on it, making him a fool. This is not news, it's tabloid garbage for TMZ or Geraldo to report. And O'Reilly proves he is not a real journalist every time he reports that garbage.

Then Jesse Watters was on who took in a recent "Bolder & Fresher" show in San Diego and spoke with some of the folks who showed up to see O'Reilly and Miller. "I can't wait to see what it's going to be like tonight," one fan told Watters. Another seemed to be in the wrong arena, asking, "Who's Bill O'Reilly, we came for the Watters show!"

After his head-swelling subsided, Watters reported one thing he found surprising: "A few people took their significant other to see Bolder & Fresher on their 30th wedding anniversary. If I had done that I'd be sleeping on the couch."

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Room at the Inn. Billy said this: "If you're planning a trip, a website called can help you find lodging at a price you're willing to pay."

Economists Ryan Cited Say He Misrepresented What They Wrote
By: Steve - March 7, 2014 - 10:00am

Paul Ryan turned out to be something of a drag on the 2012 Republican presidential ticket, but he never lost his Beltway-specific status as the GOP's Head Wonk.

This image is greatly helped, as Jonathan Chait points out, by the fact that Ryan "ventures outside the world of right-wing pseudo-scholarship and actually attempts to engage with mainstream economic analysis" -- as in his just-released report on anti-poverty programs, which cites scores of scholarly papers.

The problem: "The mainstream economic analysis" and Ryan's policy goals (gutting the social safety net and redistributing funds to the wealthy via tax cuts) are often at odds, as the authors of those papers were all too eager to point out this week.

The Fiscal Times rounded up a half-dozen scholars who called Ryan out for misrepresenting their research, by distorting their conclusions, eliding the mitigating factors of the findings, or flat out screwing with their data. In one case, Ryan simply ignored a portion of the war on poverty:
One of the study's authors, Jane Waldfogel, a professor at Columbia University and a visiting scholar at the Russell Sage Foundation, said she was surprised when she read the paper, because it arbitrarily chopped off data from two of the most successful years of the war on poverty.

The Columbia researchers found that, using their model of the SPM, the poverty rate fell from 26 percent in 1967 to 15 percent in 2012. Ryan only cites data from 1969 onward, ignoring a full 36 percent of the decline.

'It's an odd way to cite the research,' said Waldfogel. 'In my experience, usually you use all of the available data. There's no justification given. It's unfortunate because it really understates the progress we've made in reducing poverty.'
Others were not so generous. One economist criticized Ryan for using his research to marry a decline in child poverty to welfare reform, when the actual paper credited a confluence of policy and economic factors.

Another said Ryan flat out misstated her research on the relationship of housing vouchers to the labor market, by a statistically significant degree, and then articulated a reductive version of her conclusion. And so on.

As Chait argues, massaging the research isn't an accident or a result of sloppy scholarship, but structurally necessitated by Ryan's far-right ideological mandates. If Ryan wants to balance the budget in the next decade while cutting taxes without touching defense spending or current retirees’ benefits, the cuts must come from social programs.

Therefore, the data he spins out must support the cuts.

When asked for a comment, Ryan's office responded with this nonsense: "We're glad to hear the report is encouraging a debate on the performance record of federal anti-poverty programs."

Which is just laughable, because the report shows that Ryan does not deserve to be taken seriously at all. He is a dishonest right-wing hack who lies to the people and cherry picks data from economic reports to confirm his lies, and that kind of man does not deserve to be in Congress, or listened to about anything.

He reminds me of O'Reilly, once you are caught lying to promote a partisan right-wing ideology you have lost any trust you had with the American people, and you can never be trusted to tell the truth again.

The Wednesday 3-5-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 6, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: The IRS Investigation. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: There are charges that the Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative and Tea Party groups, trying to deny them tax exempt status. For almost a year, Congress has been trying to get to the bottom of the situation, but we still know very little. That's because the IRS people involved, such as Lois Lerner, are pleading the Fifth Amendment.

You may remember President Obama telling me there is not a 'smidgen' of corruption, but then why did Lerner take the Fifth today? Why not just explain what happened? Talking Points does not know who in the IRS violated the law, but I do believe someone did. There is also evidence pointing to White House people - the former IRS commissioner visited the White House more than 100 times.

It does not seem that the House Oversight Committee is getting anywhere; in fact, they are fighting among themselves. So the IRS chaos continues and we the people still don't know what really happened.
Earth to Bill O'Reilly, this is right-wing nonsense, there is no IRS scandal and the story has been over for 6 months. Except for right-wing idiots who keep it going because the corrupt Congressman Issa keeps having bogus hearings about it. There is no scandal and everything you said about it is a lie, we know what happened, and it is over.

Then O'Reilly had the conservative author Hans Von Spakovsky on to say what he thinks happened at the IRS. And he is a biased right-winger from the Heritage Foundation, so he can not be trusted to tell the truth. He gets paid to spin out right-wing propaganda, and O'Reilly had him on to do that with no Democratic guest. So there was no balance, just 2 Republicans spinning out right-wing propaganda.

Von Spakovsky said this: "For almost two years, they held out from granting tax exemptions to almost 300 conservative organizations. The same thing didn't happen to liberal organizations. Tax exemptions were routinely granted within a month or two of applications coming in, but they didn't want that. They wanted the applications held up before the 2012 election and it's very clear that this was coming out of the Washington office of the IRS. They were very unhappy over the fact that the Supreme Court had ruled that non-profit organizations can engage in political speech."

That is all lies folks, none of that is true and liberal groups were also looked at. The tax exemptions were held up because of the Citizens United ruling, that O'Reilly and the Republicans supported. Tea Party and patriot groups were flagged for extra scrutiny by IRS agents simply because of the names of their groups, which was clearly inappropriate.

According to an analysis by the publication Tax Analysts, 46 of the approved groups on the list had Tea Party or patriot in their names, 76 were otherwise conservative-leaning groups and 48 were progressive. So right there you have proof Von Spakovsky was lying.

Then O'Reilly talked about some pundits on the far left who have accused Republicans of rooting for Vladimir Putin because it would damage President Obama. Republican Kate Obenshain and Democrat Kirsten Powers were on to discuss it.

Powers said this: "I don't know if I'd go so far as to say Republicans are cheering for Putin, but they seem to be blaming Obama for Putin's behavior. They claim President Obama is so naive that he doesn't understand evil dictators, but this is something Putin would have done regardless of who was President of the United States. Obama is not weak, he is bombing the crap out of a couple of countries with drones and he invaded Libya."

He also killed Bin Laden, which is something Bush could not do even after promising he would, and he has deported more illegal immigrants than Bush did.

Obenshain said this: "This is an overall criticism, and a very legitimate one, over Barack Obama's weak foreign policy. Since day one, with the 'world apology tour,' he has bent over backwards to the world's dictators and our enemies. There was also Syria and the 'red line.' If you say it, you have to do something."

Think about this, nobody thinks President Obama is a weak leader, except O'Reilly and his right-wing friends, they are the only people who make those ridiculous claims.

Then the Fox News stooge Carl Cameron was on to talk about how the USA can deal with Vladimir Putin's aggression in Ukraine. And of course there was no Democratic guest on for balance, just 2 Republicans that made it a biased and one sided segment.

Cameron said this: "John Kerry is meeting with his allies and counterparts from the United Kingdom, as well as the new Ukrainian foreign minister. He's also going to meet with the Russian foreign minister, but no one expects anything to be accomplished. The Obama administration is considering a visa ban and freezing the assets of some senior Russian officials, and there is also a Republican bill in the Senate calling for Russia to be expelled from the G8 and to close its consulates in the U.S. But Harry Reid says he thinks the U.S. should let things play out a bit."

O'Reilly said this: "Right now there is isn't anything effective going on in the USA. Congress could slap banking restrictions and sanctions on Russia."

Then Col. David Hunt was on to talk about Russia and Putin. Monday Col. Hunt implied that the United States should not interfere with Vladimir Putin's ambitions. So O'Reilly had him back to talk about it some more, and no Democratic guest was on for balance.

Hunt said this: "Let's start out with the Crimea, which is 80% Russian. They're not too upset in Crimea that the Russians are there. I'm not defending what Putin did, he crossed international borders with troops. My point is that we have no dog in this fight and there is no simple solution that will do anything to affect this."

O'Reilly said this: "China is watching this and if Barack Obama does nothing China might seize those Japanese islands that it wants. And North Korea is nuts, they'll fire missiles wherever they want to fire them. There's a sophisticated chain reaction when the big dog is perceived to be weak and ineffective."

Then Martha MacCallum was on for did you see that. During Sunday's Academy Awards, John Travolta butchered the name of singer Idina Menzel, calling her "Adele Dazeem." Which is not news and nobody cares but O'Reilly.

MacCallum said this: "He said it perfectly on Saturday during the rehearsal, so I don't know what these folks were doing before the production. Harrison Ford had a similar problem, he could barely get his words out. John Travolta said he felt terrible about this, he said he just goofed. Idina Menzel is a big star and she was very gracious about this."

Maybe he was a little drunk, who cares, n-o-b-o-d-y. This is not news, it's tabloid garbage.

MacCallum also advised the 60-year-old Travolta to stop trying to look younger than his years, saying this: "Men in Hollywood need to learn to age gracefully. Give me Cary Grant or Jimmy Stewart with that beautiful white hair and black glasses."

Now I have some advice for Martha MacCallum, nobody cares what you think, especially people in Hollywood. You are just a nobody blonde bimbo airhead right-wing moron who works at Fox News because you are a good looking woman.

And btw folks, only 1 Democratic guest was on the entire show, and she was on with a Republican to counter everything she said. The 5 other Republicans guests were all on alone, except for the segment with the Democrat Kirsten Powers. But O'Reilly was there so it was a 2 on 1 with 2 Republicans against the 1 Democrat in that segment. Which means all the Republicans got to speak with nobody to challenge anything they said, except in 1 segment. But the 1 Democrat that was on had to deal with 2 Republicans who told her she was wrong.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: The Lowdown on Getting High. Billy said this: "Even liberal California Governor Jerry Brown questions the wisdom of legalizing marijuana, asking, "How many people can get stoned and still have a great state or a great nation?" Inebriation of any kind is going to hurt you, no doubt about it."

Dem Rep Calls Issa Un-American Over Bogus IRS Hearing
By: Steve - March 6, 2014 - 10:00am

During a hearing of the House Oversight Committee into allegations that the Internal Revenue Service scrutinized conservative groups tax-exempt status filings unduly, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) exploded at Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa (D-CA). Cummings charged that the way in which the proceedings were being conducted were "Un-American."

Because it is, and Republicans said the same thing when a Democrat once cut the mic of a Republican and would not let him ask a question. Not to mention, these hearings are worthless and a waste of time and money. Because they already found Issa lied and both Republican and Democratic groups were investigated by the IRS, not just the Republican groups Issa claims were targeted.

In apparent protest, Issa then walked out of the committee hearing. While making a statement before the committee, Issa stood up and asked Cummings to yield.

"If you will sit down and allow me to ask a question," Cummings insisted. "I am a member of the Congress of the United States of America."

"I am tired of this. You cannot just have a one-sided investigation. There is absolutely something wrong with that, and it is absolutely un-American."

"We had a hearing. It was adjourned," Issa replied. "I gave you an opportunity to ask your questions. You had no questions." "I do have questions," Elijah replied. "Chairman, what are you hiding?"

At this stage, Issa walked out of the hearing. Because he is a dishonest right-wing fool, who does not want Democrats to speak, so he ends the hearing before they can say anything. And of course O'Reilly defended it, but if a Democrat did the same thing O'Reilly would be outraged and cry about free speech, especially for Congressman.

And btw, that was the first time in the history of Congress that a chairman of a hearing asked questions of a witness, then shut down the hearing without letting anyone else speak, it had never been done before.

Fox News Helping Congressman Issa Lie To The American People
By: Steve - March 6, 2014 - 9:00am

Katie Pavlich of the conservative was shocked today to learn that Darrell Issa got it wrong again. On Sunday, Darrell Issa got the conservative juices flowing by promising that Lois Lerner would be testifying on Wednesday, when her attorney had already said she would not. He reiterated that stance for the dim witted, to no avail.

Fox News then published her outrage over Lois Lerner pleading the Fifth today in Issa's ongoing IRS Fictional Drama. And another Fox News article has been trending on the Internet, bemoaning the fact that Lois Lerner wouldn't testify after her agency improperly targeted conservatives (the truth is that the agency targeted both conservatives and liberals, and the only group denied status was a liberal one).

Fox News should not have been surprised, after all, no one but Darrell Issa ever suggested that Lois Lerner would do anything but plead the Fifth. Her own attorney said he had no idea where Issa got this idea that she would testify:
Lerner's attorney, William W. Taylor, told Politico, "As of now, she intends to continue to assert her Fifth Amendment rights. I do not know why Issa said what he said."
As Jason Easley pointed out on Sunday, "Fox News plastered the story everywhere. This was the Republicans big break. They were going to revive the widely debunked IRS scandal. Lerner's testimony was going to give the Republicans the smoking gun that they thought they could use to impeach President Obama. Fox News is scrambling to adjust the content of their story, but in typical Fox fashion, they haven't changed the headline."

So it looks like Darrell Issa lied to the public again, and Fox News helped him do it. Now they are assisting in creating the narrative that she suddenly ducked out of testifying, when in fact, Issa knew all along that she wouldn't be testifying. Which is why he did not let Congressman Cummings speak at the bogus hearing, because he was going to expose the fact that Issa lied and knew all along lerner was not going to testify.

So, someone here lied knowingly to the public. Darrell Issa, who has already been busted many times lying to the public in order to service his agenda of turning the IRS doing their job into a scandal. Fox News, who sued for the right to lie and call it news, so anything goes over there.

The Darrell Issa IRS witch hunt has cost taxpayers $14 million dollars and counting thus far.

Let this be a lesson to Lois Lerners everywhere. If you're still confused, see the wheels of the Chris Christie bus. These people do not care about you, and you will be thrown under their bus in order to service a lie. So now Republicans are busy acting shocked that Lois Lerner won't testify because she doesn't want to incriminate herself.

In what way could she incriminate herself or someone/something else? Darrell Issa says he wants the truth, but then he refuses to allow any testimony that doesn't fit his narrative, he redacted information from the beginning that would have proven Lois Lerner's claim to be false, and he only allows the testimony that fits the Republican agenda to be televised.

Helping Issa in this right-wing farce is the Republican Party's full time PR firm, Fox News.

At Fox Equal Time Is 7 To 1 For The Republican
By: Steve - March 5, 2014 - 11:30am

Fox News host Martha MacCallum on Wednesday said that the network was trying to give Democrats and Republicans "equal time" when it aired 7 minutes of Rep. Darrell Issa's (R-CA) press conference, but cut Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) off after only 1 minute.

At the conclusion of House Oversight Committee hearing on what Republicans say was the Internal Revenue Service's improper targeting of groups that were applying for tax-exempt status, Chairman Issa cut the microphones and walked out of the hearing, enraging Cummings, who was still trying to ask questions.

While Cummings continued to shout into the dead microphones, Fox News cut away to Issa's press conference outside the hearing room.

For 7 minutes, the chairman complained about former IRS official Lois Lerner's decision to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights, Cummings reaction to abrupt adjournment, and he vowed that the investigation would continue.

And then it was Cummings turn to speak to the press.

"We're up against a break here, but let's listen to some of it," host Martha MacCallum said.

But 40 seconds later, Cummings had his microphone cut again, this time by Fox News.

"We're trying to give equal time to both of these gentlemen here," MacCallum explained before going to commercial.

But of course she was lying, because they gave 7 minutes to Issa and 1 minute to Cummings. And Fox could have given Cummings more time after the commercial break, but they did not. Proving their bias once again, and proving they are not a news network, they are an arm of the Republican party.

The Tuesday 3-4-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 5, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Dealing with Russia. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: So far it's been all talk, no action. Politicians in the USA and Western Europe are condemning Russia's invasion of Ukraine but doing little else. Putin is smirking at the world and testing the will of the Western powers; he clearly believes Europe will back down, isolating the USA. And he could be right - the British media reports that the UK government will not curb trade with Russia, while France wants to have 'mediation.' That will frighten old Vlad, won't it?

Germany says Putin is living in another world, but since Russia is Germany's biggest supplier of energy, Putin can live in any world he wants. So Putin is having a grand old time violating international law and watching the Western powers kneel. He knows the West is weak, he knows Mr. Obama will not be likely to rally European nations against him.

NATO is supposed to be the bulwark against Russian oppression, but NATO is powerless as European governments time after time back away from confronting illegal international behavior. I hate to use the cliché, but the Ukraine situation is the same old, same old. And Putin knows it.
Then the far-right stooge Charles Krauthammer was on to discuss it.

Krauthammer said this: "I don't blame NATO, which exists to defend its own countries against Soviet and Russian aggression. The Bush administration wanted to bring Ukraine into NATO, which would have triggered a NATO response to the invasion now. But the Europeans did not want to get involved with Ukraine because they thought it was dangerous."

Krauthammer also said this: "He came into office and announced the famous 'reset' with Russia. Then he canceled the missile defense agreement the Poles and the Czechs had agreed to because the Russians opposed it. Obama wanted to show the Russians that he was willing to bury the hatchet, but Putin looked at this guy and said, I'm dealing with an adolescent. He's a community organizer, he doesn't understand how the world works."

Then after 2 days of nothing but Republicans on to discuss the problem with Russia, O'Reilly finally had a Democrat on to talk about it. Leslie Marshall was on. Marshall said this: "This is not the United States' fault, this is Putin's fault. He is a thug and a bully, and we need to isolate him. I believe President Obama has begun to do that with our allies."

Then Ezekiel Emanuel, one of the Obama health care law's architects was on to talk about doctors and Obamacare. O'Reilly and the right claim some doctors will opt out, Emanuel disagreed.

Emanuel said this: "Doctors will not opt out, because it's not doctors who participate in the exchanges, it's insurance companies who participate. Doctors will take ObamaCare insurance - very few can just take people who pay cash because 98% of Americans can't pay cash for their health care. When you poll young doctors, 60% of them actually support ObamaCare."

O'Reilly said this: "I'm seeing walk-in health care clinics opening that are staffed by physician assistants and nurse practitioners. I think that's where this is going. But they aren't doctors!" Emanuel used the segment to repeatedly accuse Fox News of "sowing fear" among Americans.

And Emanuel is right, Fox is lying to you, because most people have health insurance and the doctors will work with them. Almost nobody pays for health care with cash. O'Reilly is an idiot who just can not accept that Obamacare is the law and it is working pretty good now.

Then John Stossel was on to talk about President Obama's latest budget proposal that calls for a much smaller military presence. Stossel endorsed the cutbacks, even in light of the Ukraine situation.

Stossel said this: "I don't see what we could do there. We couldn't solve the problems in Somalia and we got out of Iraq and Afghanistan, as we should have after we retaliated. It's our job to fight back when we're attacked, not to police the world. We already spend as much on the military as the rest of the world combined. We can't afford that."

Stossel also denounced the president's plan to boost spending on pre-school, saying this: "We spend more than any other country in the world on K - 12 education and we do a lousy job. We have already spent $200-million on Head Start, but Obama's own Education Department said it doesn't work."

And for once I agree with Stossel 100%, shocking but true.

Then Monica Crowley & Alan Colmes were on to talk about some right-wing editorial writers who are using the word "feckless," and have compared President Obama to Jimmy Carter. Which is just ridiculous, but O'Reilly had a segment on it anyway.

O'Reilly asked Monica Crowley and Alan Colmes whether the comparison is fair. And of course the idiot Crowley said yes, while the liberal Colmes said no.

Crowley said this: "Obama and Carter espoused a left-wing philosophy, which is basically that the United States is a force for ill in the world. Bad guys feel emboldened when the United States is perceived as weak."

Colmes, not surprisingly, disagreed, saying this: "The nonsense that Obama is weak is being put out by the right-wing, but the fact is that this is the guy who killed bin Laden and went into Libya, this is the guy who killed more Al Qaeda leaders than any other president. Strength can be just waiting for the right moment."

And now the facts, in Republicanland (where O'Reilly also lives) if a Democratic President does not invade every foreign country that does something we do not want them to do, the right-wingers call them weak and compare them to Jimmy Carter. It's ridiculous and insane right-wing propaganda, we can not afford to do it, and we should not do it. We are not the police to the world, and if we get involved in this stuff we just invite more terrorism.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Remembering the Vets. Billy said this: "A great way to honor our wounded veterans is to help organizations such as The Fisher House and The Wounded Warrior Project, which do an enormous amount of good work on behalf of vets and their families."

As Usual O'Reilly Wrong About The Gender Pay Gap
By: Steve - March 5, 2014 - 10:00am

Last week O'Reilly said this about President Obama saying the pay gap between men and women was 77 percent:
O'REILLY: Alright, we analyzed the 77 cents business, or 77 percent, whatever it is, and it's about 90 percent when you factor in all of the experience levels and all of that.
And now the facts, from the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau of Labor.

On September 17, 2013 the U.S. Census Bureau released the 2012 gender wage gap numbers. And guess what. The wage gap still stands at 23 cents. That means a woman working full time, year-round still typically takes home 77 cents for every dollar a man takes home. The gap is even worse for women of color. This isn't the first year the wage gap has refused to budge. Since 2002, the gap has stubbornly hovered right around 23 cents.

And it's even worse for women who live in Illinois, who make 29 cents less than a man does for doing the same job.

Here are some more facts O'Reilly got wrong, or just flat out never reported:

Women in every state experience the pay gap, but some states are worse than others.

The best place in the United States for pay equity is Washington, D.C., where women were paid 90 percent of what men were paid in 2012. At the other end of the spectrum is Wyoming, the worst state in the country for pay equity, where women were paid just 64 percent of what men were paid.

The pay gap is worse for women of color.

Compared with non-Hispanic white men, Pacific Islander/Native Hawaiian women were paid 66 percent, African American women were paid 64 percent, American Indian/Alaska Native women were paid 60 percent, and Hispanic women were paid just 53 percent.

Women face a pay gap in nearly every occupation.

From elementary and middle school teachers to computer programmers, women are paid less than men in female-dominated, gender-balanced, and male-dominated occupations.

The pay gap grows with age.

Among younger workers, women are paid about 90 percent of what men are paid. From around age 35 through retirement, women are typically paid 75 to 80 percent of what men are paid.

While more education is an effective tool for increasing earnings, it is not an effective tool against the gender pay gap.

At every level of academic achievement, women's median earnings are less than men's earnings, and in some cases, the gender pay gap is larger at higher levels of education.

Those are the facts, but if you ask O'Reilly they are not needed, because he says it's 90 percent. Even though it changes by the State you live in, and it's worse than 77 cents in some States. O'Reilly just makes it up and hopes someone believes him.

The Monday 3-3-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 4, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: How to Handle Putin. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: Taking a page out of the Hitler playbook, Russian President Putin has invaded Ukraine, saying Russian nationals are in danger in that country. Putin's invasion of the Crimea is a clear international violation. He is punishing Ukraine for wanting to move into the European Union because their economy is so bad. The incident is a huge embarrassment to the Obama administration, which some believe to be soft on international danger.

Secretary of State Kerry said Putin 'will lose on the international stage,' but the only way Russia will lose is if President Obama moves quickly to punish that nation. The way to do that is to move against Russian banks. The U.S. has the power to crush the Russian currency, which is already in trouble. Freezing Russian assets and boycotting Russian banks would badly damage the Russian currency.

Also, Russia should immediately be suspended from the G8 partnership. There are a number of smaller things that can be done, but the bank deal would hurt Putin deeply. It's long past time to deal with this thug - he is a menace to the world and a killer who could not care less about international law or human rights. We can't fight him militarily, but we can damage Russia economically. If the USA looks weak on this one, we'll pay a heavy price.
To begin with, how in the hell is it an embarrassment to the Obama administration, that's ridiculous and nothing but right-wing propaganda from the so-called non-partisan O'Reilly. To even say that proves O'Reilly is a right-wing stooge. Second, nobody is going to listen to O'Reilly about what to do, even his buddy Col. Hunt disagreed with him about the bank deal. Every time something happens in a foreign country O'Reilly says the USA looks weak, it's nonsense and just right-wing spin to make Obama look bad.

Then Christian Whiton, who advised George W. Bush on foreign policy issues, and the Obama hating Col. David Hunt were on to discuss it. Notice there are no Democrats on for balance, just 3 Republicans, O'Reilly, Whiton, and Hunt, who all hate Obama and are biased against him.

Whiton said this: "We can help central Europe get free of Russian energy, which has been used against Ukraine and our European allies. We should expedite the Keystone XL pipeline and there are other regulatory hurdles the Obama administration has erected to exporting natural gas. If we can get through those, it will go a long way toward taking resources away from Putin."

Which is just ridiculous, the XL pipeline would change nothing in Russia or anywhere else, and it would take a year or more just to get it up and operating.

Hunt dismissed the idea of freezing Russian bank assets and destroying the ruble, saying this: "You can't throw the switch to shut down the banking, it takes too much other cooperation and I don't think the United States can do that by ourselves. I don't see anything we can do to push this man out of the Crimea, and I don't think we have a dog in this fight."

Then the biased right-wing Brit Hume was on to talk about President Obama's reaction to the Russian crisis. With no Democratic guest on for balance. So O'Reilly had 4 Republicans on to discuss it, and 0 Democrats, where is the fairness and the balance in that O'Reilly?

Hume said this: "This does remind one of the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan, and the profession of astonishment from Jimmy Carter. President Obama doesn't seem to have seen this coming, and the question now is whether he can rally other nations to his leadership. With other nations on our side Russia could be kicked out of the G8 and maybe even the World Trade Organization. But a lot of European countries depend on energy supplies that flow from or through Russia, and they will be hesitant to be too aggressive."

O'Reilly said the Western nations should take a forceful stand, saying this: "Putin has to be punished, and if the other members of NATO aren't going to go along with us, we should pull out of NATO."

Then Bob Costas, who anchored NBC's Olympic coverage, was criticized for statements that seemed to praise Vladimir Putin's strength and diplomatic skill. What O'Reilly did not report is that it was only a few far-right Republicans who criticized Costas, nobody else really cared what he said because he is just a lame sports guy. O'Reilly acts like the entire country was outraged at what Costas said about Putin, which is just not true.

Costas said this: "This is a controversy only for those looking for the most flimsy pretext for a controversy. That was not a profile of Putin, it was a setup to a conversation in which Putin would be called an 'autocrat' who wants to make his nation much more influential and consequential. We were framing the backdrop against which these Olympics took place. I talked about corruption being endemic in Russia, I talked about the jailing of dissidents, I talked about their terrible human rights record, and I talked about their alliances with Syria and Iran. Putin is a former KGB operator and he's a villain!"

Then Bernie Goldberg was on to talk about an interview on the Today Show, where author David Remnick said that the United States can't denounce Vladimir Putin because America has also invaded sovereign nations. And as usual, no Democratic guest was on for balance. Just the biased right-wing stooge Goldberg who hates Obama and all Democrats. Goldberg slammed Remnick even though he is right.

Goldberg said this: "What Remnick should have said, is that when the United States invades a country it's to free people and not to build an American empire. When Putin invades a country, it is never to free people and it may very well be to build a new Russian empire. But I don't think Remnick was saying Putin was a good guy, he's saying it's harder to deal with him because Putin claims we don't have clean hands either."

O'Reilly said this about Remnick: "He believes the United States is a flawed country, he doesn't see that big of a difference between Putin and the USA. It steams me and it's an insult to the military."

Which is nonsense, and not what Remnick said. Remnick just pointed out the hypocrisy in the USA slamming Russia for invading another country when we have done it too. Remnick did not say we are a flawed country and he did not insult the military, O'Reilly just made that up and added his biased opinion to the debate.

Then Juan Williams and Mary K. Ham were on to say how they would deal with Putin. Like anybody cares what these 2 cable news idiot have to say about it. They are just Fox News stooges, and nobody cares what they would do.

Williams said this: "I would freeze all the assets the Russians have in international banks, and I would make it painful for the ruling class in Russia. I might also ban travel for all Russians who want to come to the United States. If you make it uncomfortable on the Russian people, they'll make it uncomfortable on Putin."

Ham said this: "The first thing I would do, if I were president, is to have a coherent foreign policy that allows you to be believed when you say things. But if I had dug myself a hole, as the president has done by not being credible, the best bet is to push Europe to get Russia out of the G8."

And thank God Ham is not the President, and never will be, because she is nothing but a 3rd rate almost unknown cable news (joker the clown looking) moron. And if O'Reilly did not put her on his lame pretend cable news show every week nobody would even know who she is, let alone care what she says or what she would do to Russia.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Stars Among the Stars. Billy said this: "Exuding classic beauty and grace, actresses Sandra Bullock, Amy Adams, and Jennifer Lawrence stood out at the Academy Awards and were reminiscent of the great stars of yore."

Earth to Bill O'Reilly, that is not a tip, it's just your opinion of a few women who were at the Academy Awards, so as usual the tip of the day was worthless and not even a tip.

O'Reilly Not Buying Inequality On Gender Wage Gap
By: Steve - March 4, 2014 - 10:00am

Last week Bill O'Reilly dismissed the significance of the gender wage gap, saying he isn't "buying this inequality business," and claiming that women can overcome wage inequality simply by working hard.

So he is basically admitting there is a gender wage gap, by saying they can overcome it by working hard. And btw, it's illegal to discriminate based on gender, so women should not have to work harder to overcome it. O'Reilly does not go after the employers who are paying women less for the same job as a man, instead he tells them to work harder to overcome it.

O'Reilly also ignores the true impact and scope of the gender wage gap, which plagues women at all stages of their careers regardless of education or experience level.

On the February 27th O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly criticized President Obama's 2014 State of the Union statements on the importance of closing the gender wage gap. Even though President Obama is right.

During a conversation with Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo, O'Reilly initially acknowledged that the wage gap exists even after accounting for career and life choices. However, soon after he resorted to mocking the gap, saying, "I'm not buying this inequality business," and dismissing pay inequality as a mere political maneuver, "not a reality."

O'Reilly concluded that Bartiromo's successful experience in the stock exchange was sufficient evidence that motivation and hard work can eliminate the gender wage gap, a message O'Reilly says he hopes "gets out to other women that, look, the gender pay gap is not perfect but it's good."

Which tells me O'Reilly is not playing with a full deck, and shows he may be getting senile. Because he admits there is a pay gap, that is against the law btw, then he slams Obama for talking about it, and then 5 minutes later says it is not a reality, then 2 minutes later says it is not perfect but it's good.

That's crazy talk, one minute he says it is not a reality, the next minute he says it is a reality, it's not perfect but it's good. Here is a partial transcript from the show:
O'REILLY: Alright, we analyzed the 77 cents business, or 77 percent, whatever it is, and it's about 90 percent when you factor in all of the experience levels and all of that. And you say?

BARTIROMO: Well I think it's very difficult to really know the truth, is it 77, 87, 90, but certainly I agree that if we're not talking about equal pay that's an embarrassment in 2014. I mean, pay should be based on performance whether it's a man or a woman.

O'REILLY: Okay but there are many factors such as union membership. In a union, you're guaranteed wages. Many more men than women and you've got to assume that drives the wages up. I'm not buying this inequality business, I'm not. And you know why? Because if you're not being treated equally in a work place you can sue the bajesus out of the business and there is an industry to do that and they do. So employers are fearful of doing anything that might be considered unfair to women. But here's the deal. The Democratic Party is embracing this whole women are not equal concept, and we, the Democrats, are going to fix that. To me it's a political deal, not a reality deal.

O'REILLY: Now you, Maria Bartiromo, everyone, you went into a male-dominated field a while back and were you ever discriminated against because you were down on the floor, the stock exchange floor, did you run into any of these problems?

BARTIROMO: When I first got down to the floor, and that's about 20 years ago, yes, when I first got down to the floor there was a small handful of people who did not want me there and only because it wasn't just because I was a woman but it was also I was the media, because I was the first person to bring a camera down on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. But, I've never played the woman card, you know, I've never had issues beyond that first week when I was on the floor of the New York Stock exchange and no one had ever done it before. For the most part, any time I would run into a challenge, I would say to myself 'okay I have to study, study, study, do my work, make sure I know my stuff, and kill it tomorrow.' And that served me very well actually, just working hard.

O'REILLY: Alright, Maria, and I hope that message gets out to other women that you know, 'look, come on, you compete and it's not perfect, but it's good.'
So what O'Reilly is saying is that it's ok to discriminate against women and pay them less for doing the same job as a man, and that since they make about 90% (his opinion) of what a man makes it's ok. And that even if an employer breaks the law and does it, the woman should just work harder to overcome it.

Which is just insane, and total right-wing garbage. They should pay women the same, if they dont they should be fined for the discrimination, and the women should not have to work harder than a man to overcome it. And Bartiromo is most likely lying, because I find it hard to believe that in a mans world of the stock exchange she was not discriminated against more than once in 20 years.

Many studies maintain that the gender pay gap narrows when "relevant factors are taken into consideration" -- The Daily Beast includes education, employment preferences, and work-family choices among these "relevant factors."

However, despite O'Reilly's dismissal, the gender wage gap is a serious issue that plagues women at all stages of their careers independent of education levels and career and life choices, and gets worse as women's careers progress.

In its 2013 Gender Pay Gap Report, the American Association of University Women (AAUW) found that women were paid 82 percent of what men were paid just one year out of college, and that lifetime gender wage disparities cannot be explained by personal choice.

The Institute for Women's Policy Research explained in a 2012 report that "Women's median earnings are lower than men's in nearly all occupations, whether they work in occupations predominantly done by women, occupations predominantly done by men, or occupations with a more even mix of men and women.

The National Women's Law Center (NWLC) reports that not only are education and work experience insufficient in explaining away the existence of the pay gap, but studies that control for these factors don't account for that fact.

Women are often excluded from higher-paying jobs; women are subtly and not-so-subtly pushed into lower-paying jobs that are often devalued precisely because they are done by women; and social expectations of women to do most of the unpaid caregiving work put together with the lack of paid family leave and other forms of workplace flexibility mean that women still face a wage penalty for not being a man.

Megyn Kelly Proves Her Right-Wing Bias Once Again
By: Steve - March 3, 2014 - 10:00am

Fox News Megyn Kelly dedicated her first segment on Gov. Brewer's veto of Arizona's anti-gay bill to an interview with one of America's most notorious anti-gay hate group leaders.

On February 26, Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer announced that she had vetoed Senate Bill 1062, which would have allowed businesses and individuals to engage in legal discrimination by denying services to gay people on religious grounds. Brewer said that the bill "does not address a specific or pressing concern," and that it "is broadly worded, and could result in unintended and negative consequences."

Kelly opened the February 26 edition of her show with a segment on Brewer's veto that featured Tony Perkins, president of the anti-gay Family Research Council. With no pro-gay rights guest on to provide the balance in the segment, and no pro-gay rights guest on after Perkins was gone. Even though she claims to be non-partisan and has even said she will have the same number of conservative to liberal guests on her show.

Kelly gave Perkins an open platform to slam the veto as an example of "how fundamental freedoms are trampled," while citing a New Mexico couple who were prosecuted for refusing service to a same-sex couple as proof that the law differs from discrimination against mixed-race couples in that it "addresses some very significant problems."

The fact that Perkins was the subject of Fox's first interview on the veto is problematic. Because Perkins is not just an opponent of same-sex marriage-- his organization, the FRC, is a designated hate group, and he's made a career of peddling false and degrading smears about LGBT people, including this:

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

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

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

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

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

Kelly has repeatedly relied on Perkins for commentary on issues affecting the gay community, even after assuring a GLAAD official that she would challenge the anti-gay hate group leader on his history of extreme rhetoric. She has never done it, and never challenges anything he says. In fact, it is wrong to even use the leader of a hate group to comment on the gay issue, especially with no guest to confront him and give the counter point, but Kelly and Fox use him all the time.

Kelly's decision to host Perkins to discuss the veto without questioning his rhetoric or providing another guest to counter his views marks an unfortunate reversal from her comments the day before, wherein she acknowledged that Arizona's anti-gay bill was "potentially dangerous."

Unfortunately, Perkins regular status as a Fox guest is in keeping with the network's ongoing attempt to suppress gay rights by suggesting that the religious views of business owners should allow them to discriminate against gay customers.

Most of Fox News hosts and guests have slammed the veto of the Arizona bill, proving they do not care about equal rights for all, the only thing they care about is the Republican party anti-gay agenda, which they support and promote. And then they wonder why they never get the gay vote, and gay groups are always protesting against them.

Not to mention the constitutional issue and equal rights, Republicans claim to support the constitution 100%, except for that little part about equal rights, somehow they think it does not apply to gay rights, when it clearly does, it applies to all Americans.

O'Reilly & Republicans Wrong As Obamacare Enrollment Hits 4 Million
By: Steve - March 2, 2014 - 10:00am

As Republicans continue to sputter and fight among themselves, the ACA continues to surge ahead as Obamacare enrollment has passed 4 million.

HHS posted the news on their blog:

As we head into the last five weeks of the open enrollment period, millions of Americans are taking advantage of the new choices they now have to access affordable, quality health care thanks to the Affordable Care Act. The most recent data indicate that approximately 4 million people have now signed up for a private health insurance plan through the Federal and State-based Marketplaces since October 1.

The Obama administration is on pace to either hit, or come close to their goal of 7 million enrollee.

Over in Republican land, Speaker of the House John Boehner tried to argue that premiums are rising, and he described the ACA as a sucker punch to the economy. Boehner said, "Another sucker punch to our economy. Another broken promise to hardworking Americans. And the only reason we even know about it is that the House demanded this transparency from the administration."

At the same time, Majority Leader Eric Cantor is having trouble with getting Republicans to agree on their Obamacare alternative. The plan that Cantor is proposing would raise taxes on 150 million workers who get their health insurance from their employer.

Republicans are in big trouble here. The ACA is surging ahead while the GOP can't agree on what their alternative should be. The only idea that they have would raise taxes on nearly half of the population.

By limiting their entire position to repealing Obamacare, Republicans painted themselves into a corner.

They have no alternative to offer the tens of millions of people who will have access to health insurance via the ACA. The GOP plan looks to be going nowhere fast as each day proves President Obama right. Americans do want access to affordable healthcare.

All Republicans can do is watch their hopes for 2014 and 2016 melt away as the people all across the country continue to flock to Obamacare.

The Friday 2-28-14 O'Reilly Factor Review
By: Steve - March 1, 2014 - 11:00am

The TPM was called: Harmful Entertainment. The biased and dishonest Bill O'Reilly said this:
O'REILLY: President Obama has launched a huge initiative to help children at risk, targeting young black men. 'My Brother's Keeper' is a good initiative, but what is missing is the entertainment factor. Dubious music and movies are affecting unsupervised children of all colors, and the hip-hop industry makes billions of dollars putting out foul music. If you can't see that unsupervised children might be harmed by that kind of stuff, then you are not a responsible person.

In order to help children at risk, society has to convince them to stop destructive behavior like using drugs, committing violence, and getting pregnant outside of marriage. The overall effect of base entertainment is a corruption of impressionable children, but you will never get the far left and many in the entertainment to admit that. I will be attacked for my stand on this because potentially I could disturb the money flow.

I have urged First Lady Michelle Obama to discuss this issue with me and I hope she does. If she would put energy into trying to persuade children at risk not to succumb to the corrupting culture, that would be enormous. The 'My Brother's Keeper' initiative is a very positive thing for this country, but unless it is coupled with a change in the entertainment culture, it will not reach nearly as many children as it should.
Earth to Bill O'Reilly, you are an idiot. Music, movies, and video games do not lead kids to do drugs and crime, poverty and low wage jobs that do not pay enough to live on do. If you do not understand that then you are not as smart as you think you are.

Then Juan Williams and political activist Kevin Powell were on. And this is where Juan Williams lost his mind, and sounded more like a far-right Republican than a Democrat. Williams agreed with O'Reilly and told Powell he does not know what he is talking about. Which is just ridiculous, because Juan Williams is a fraud and a Fox News fake Democrat.

Powell said this: "I've been in this hip hop culture for thirty years, and I have been saying some of the same things. But we're focusing on rappers and my question is why aren't we talking to the people who actually run these labels? None of the CEOs of the major labels that put out this music were at the White House yesterday, and they are the people who are signing the checks."

But while Powell denounced music executives, Williams unloaded on the rappers and singers, saying this: "This is a culture of failure that is dogging black America and you're correct to call it out. The critics say that if you come out and say that, you're not really black, you're not 'authentic.' The rappers are the sellouts, they're making pornography with black women, and they imitate criminals with tattoos and doo-rags. It's horrible!"

Which is just ridiculous, and most of the people that listen to rap are white, which O'Reilly fails to mention. Juan and O'Reilly are fools to blame rap for the problem, they sound like the crazy old men who yell at kids to get off their lawns. Do something about poverty and low wage jobs, and you will make things better, attacking rap does nothing for nobody, except to make you look stupid.

Then Lou Dobbs was on to talk about Arizona Governor Jan Brewer who vetoed a controversial bill that would have enabled businesses to refuse service to homosexuals on religious grounds.

Dobbs said this: "I talked with the governor this afternoon, and she made it very clear that for her this was about the faith-based community and religious rights. Her staff could not find a single violation of religious rights that this legislation would pertain to, it had no basis in reality."

O'Reilly theorized that the real reason for the veto was all about the money, saying this: "If she had signed this bill, the Super Bowl would have pulled out and they would have been boycotted by tons of people. The economic impact would have been Armageddon, there's no way she could have signed that bill."

Huh? O'Reilly said he never speculates, and Dobbs talked to her to find out why she signed the veto, so O'Reilly discounts all that to spin out his speculation on it. Once again O'Reilly thinks he is smarter than everyone else and breaks his own no speculation rules.

As reported previously, 47-year-old Gary Hegna, who raped a 7-year-old girl, was sentenced to probation by a Minnesota judge. O'Reilly asked Geraldo to discuss it. So O'Reilly reports on this story two times in two nights, while saying nothing about the Republicans in the Senate blocking the veterans benefits bill.

Geraldo said this: "We've tried contacting everyone from the prosecutor's office to the presiding judges, but no one will comment. They criticize you and say Fox News did shabby research, but they are absolutely clamped down and refusing to comment. I'm wrestling with why the judge would give such a light sentence to Gary Hegna, who was facing heavy time. Maybe the youngster would not travel back to Minnesota."

Haha, that's what you get morons. O'Reilly reports on the story with partial facts and right-wing spin, and they stop talking to you, what did you expect. I hope they never talk to anyone at Fox News again.

O'Reilly then denounced local officials and the justice system, saying this: "This is in Mower County, which is a corrupt county. The local newspaper is not investigating, so we may have to go out there."

Then Gretchen Carlson & Bernard McGuirk were on to name the week's most ridiculous people. McGuirk picked CNN anchor Carol Costello, who gushed over the "sexy" Jesus in the new "Son of God" movie.

McGuirk said this: "Jesus was young, he had long hair, and he worked with his hands. He wasn't a short, buck-toothed shrimp or people wouldn't have followed him around."

Carlson singled out New Mexico State basketball player KC Ross-Miller, who started a fight at the end of a game.

Carlson said this: "The team had just lost and he threw the ball at an opposing player. Then all the fans got into the action too, so they're also pinheads."

O'Reilly named Princeton professor Eddie Glaude, Jr., who says the crisis in the black family can be solved with more federal spending. "He wants the government to control things, and how well has that worked over the last 100 years?"

It's worked pretty good for Social Security, Medicare, Food Stamps, and the Military. O'Reilly and the Republicans act like the Government can not do anything right, which is just a lie, because there are a lot of Government programs that work great and have low fraud rates.

And finally, the lame Factor tip of the day called: Legal Advice for Vets. Billy said this: "Next Sunday, March 9th, there will be a free legal clinic for all veterans at Hofstra University on Long Island. Visit for more information."

Judge Calls Fox News Report By O'Reilly Slanted
By: Steve - March 1, 2014 - 10:00am

A Mower County prosecutor and judge are taking heat from Bill O'Reilly for their decisions in a criminal sex case.

But the judge, Donald Rysavy, is firing back.

O'Reilly blasted Rysavy and Mower County Attorney Kirsten Nelsen on "The O'Reilly Factor" Tuesday evening after Gary Russell Hegna, 47, of Austin, accepted a plea deal and was sentenced to probation and no prison time for sexually molesting a 7-year-old girl until she was 12 years old.

"Probation for raping a 7-year-old girl over and over and over again -- probation," O'Reilly said on the show.

O'Reilly criticized Rysavy for accepting the plea deal over a prison sentence. While Rysavy wouldn't comment on the case, he issued a statement calling out Fox News for slanting the story.

"Judges aren't in a position to comment on cases, but my own observation on the Fox treatment of this matter is that once you have decided how you want to slant a story, further investigation of the facts is apparently not that important," Rysavy wrote in a statement to the Herald.

Hegna was sentenced in Mower County District Court last month to 15 years of supervised probation for (third-degree) criminal sexual conduct for sexually molesting the girl in Mower County. But important information O'Reilly failed to report is that the charge for (first-degree) criminal sexual conduct was dismissed.

Assistant County Attorney Christa Daily spoke with producers from Fox News, as did Nelsen, and Daily admitted there are more details they will not discuss. "It's the policy of this office that we don't comment on pending sexual assault matters," Daily told the Herald. She added it took several years before someone reported this case to authorities.

Fox News lawyer Ebony Williams speculated on the show that the county attorney's office may have not had cooperation from a witness.

"If this was first-degree conviction, we'd see a different outcome here," Williams said. And she was right, if it had been a first-degree conviction the judge could have given him a lot more. It was a first offense and the guy had no criminal history.

But O'Reilly wasn't hearing it, and he called for people to voice their displeasure.

"It's disgraceful, and you Minnesotans out there should call that prosecutor and demand accountability for this," O'Reilly told his viewers.

What O'Reilly also failed to report is that the sentencing is based on the Minnesota sentencing guidelines. For first-degree criminal sexual conduct -- which was dismissed in this case -- the minimum sentence is a 12-year prison sentence, but there are exceptions where it can be less.

The maximum penalty is a 30-year prison sentence and a $40,000 fine. For third-degree criminal sexual conduct, there is no minimum penalty in a case like this, but the maximum penalty is 15 years in prison and a $30,000 fine, if set criteria are met, which they were not.

Maximum sentences only apply if there are aggravating factors in a case or if the suspect has a criminal history. According to Daily, Hegna does not have a criminal history, and there were no aggravating factors.

Hegna must also pay $2,960 in restitution and register as a predatory offender. The case is not closed, as Hegna still has the right to appeal.

Senate Republicans Block Veterans Bill Over Iran Sanctions
By: Steve - March 1, 2014 - 9:00am

And the Iran sanctions they wanted had nothing to do with the veterans bill, does not belong in this bill, and yet they tried to get it in anyway, when they were denied they refused to vote for the bill. And O'Reilly never said a word about it, not a word, as he claims to care about veterans so much.

Senate Republicans on Thursday blocked a bill that sought to provide veterans with greater access to health care and education over a Republican amendment aimed at increasing sanctions on Iran.

Democrats failed to reach the 60 votes necessary to overcome the GOP obstruction.

Republicans have been trying to get a vote on an Iran sanctions measure, which has stalled after experts and Obama administration officials convinced most members of the Democratic caucus that it would derail talks with Iran over its nuclear program and could lead to war.

After numerous attempts failed, the Senate Republicans used Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) veterans benefits bill to bring the issue up again but Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) refused to go along. "Republicans say they want to help veterans. They have a strange way of showing it. We introduced a bill that would do just that. Republicans immediately inject partisan politics into the mix, insisting on amendments that have nothing to do with helping veterans," Reid said on Wednesday.

One of the nation's largest veterans groups, the American Legion, agreed. "Iran is a serious issue that Congress needs to address, but it cannot be tied to S. 1982, which is extremely important as our nation prepares to welcome millions of U.S. military servicemen and women home from war," American Legion National Commander Daniel M. Dellinger said in a statement this week.

"This comprehensive bill aims to help veterans find good jobs, get the health care they need and make in-state tuition rates applicable to all who are using their GI Bill benefits."

"There was a right way to vote and a wrong way to vote today, and 41 Republican senators chose the wrong way," the American Legion tweeted on Thursday.

Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America also called on senators to take irrelevant issues like Iran out of the vets bill debate, and on Thursday called the GOP's obstruction "shameful."

"Veterans don't have time for this nonsense and veterans are tired of being used as political chew toys," said IAVA founder and CEO Paul Rieckhoff.

Sanders bill paid for the benefits by using some of the funds that would have otherwise been earmarked for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Senate Republicans like Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), who had no objections using those funds to pay for the wars, called it a "bogus gimmick."

"How can we afford $100 billion in tax breaks for the wealthiest three-tenths of Americans, but we can't pay for veterans benefits?" Sanders tweeted.

A bipartisan group said in a recent report that new Iran sanctions would undermine the Obama administration's diplomacy with Iran. James Clapper, the Director of National Intelligence, said last month that "right now the imposition of more sanctions would be counterproductive."

But the Republicans do not care, they want new Iran sanctions now, and they will do anything to get them, even though the President and most everyone else are against them, and that includes screwing veterans by trying to put an Iran sanction amendment into a veterans bill that has nothing to do with Iran.

And the so-called journalist Bill O'Reilly, who also claims to care about the troops and veterans, says nothing, he is silent as a mouse. But if Democrats did the same thing O'Reilly would lose his mind and scream bloody murder for holding up a veterans bill over Iran sanctions that most people oppose, including the President and most experts.