Jon Stewart Slams Fox For Criticizing President While At War
By: Steve - October 2, 2014 - 10:00am

Remember back to the terrible days when George W. Bush and Dick Cheney were running the country, the economy crashed, the stock market crashed, jobs were going away at a rate of 750,000 a month, and we were in a useless and un-needed war in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Almost every night O'Reilly and everyone at Fox News said it was not only un-American to criticize the President while we were at war, it was borderline treason. At one point O'Reilly even called people who simply disagreed with the President traitors, then after taking some massive heat for it he changed it to calling them bad Americans.

He even called for some of the dissenters to be tried for sedition. As in Professor Ward Churchill, here is a partial transcript with Grege Noone, Former. Judge Advocate General, from April of 2005 when Bush was still in office:
O'REILLY: OK, would you -- the last treason case was brought in 1949 in the USA. Do you think that Churchill runs the risk of being tried for treason here?

NOONE: In my opinion, Bill, no. There have been only been 30 prosecutions in the history of the United States. The last eight or so related to World War II, what you're talking about.

O'REILLY: All right, he's not there yet. All right, let's go to sedition, a federal crime supporting revolution against the government. Certainly he's doing that, or supporting an enemy of the nation in time of war through speeches, publications, and organizations. Certainly he's doing that.

The problem is we're not in a time of war because Congress hasn't declared war.

NOONE: Right.

O'REILLY: Can you get him on sedition anyway?

NOONE: No, I don't think we can. I mean, you know, this guy -- I think the only thing we can charge him with at this point is exceeding his 15 minutes of fame and give him a one-way ticket back to obscurity. This is guy is not someone who's going to rise to the level of treason or sedition.
Now think about that, if we use O'Reilly's own argument today from 2005 he is guilty of sedition. Because O'Reilly is slamming the President every day, while we are at war, O'Reilly himself even says we are at war with ISIS and slams Obama for not declaring we are at war.

So using O'Reilly own position on the issue of criticizing the President during a time of war, he is guilty of sedition.

Jon Stewart even slammed the morons at Fox for that very thing a few days ago.

Stewart: " and all your false patriotism. When Bush took us to war, any criticism was shouted down as treasonous. But a president you don't like has the country poised on the same precipice (and) no transgression -- no matter how immaterial and ridiculous -- is too small to cite as evidence that this president isn't as American as you are."

That was Jon Stewart pummeling the people at Fox and finally doing what's needed to be done for months into years now.

As Bob Cesca has documented so well, Fox News's flexible stance on criticizing the president while troops are in harm's way has always amounted to the worst and most indefensible kind of hypocrisy. And yet to the best of my knowledge no one with any real authority in the media has ever called them to the carpet on this.

No one with the clout of a Jon Stewart -- and certainly no one who's ever appeared on Fox News -- has been able to force guys like Hannity and O'Reilly and the rest of the self-righteous bloviators who circled the wagons around the office of "The President of the United States" for eight years to explain their behavior over the last six.

In other words, it proves their right-wing bias and their double standards, to them it's wrong to criticize the President during a time of war, but only when a Republican is in the White House, when a Democrat is there suddenly it's not only ok, it's encouraged daily by O'Reilly and Fox.

The explanation for why it's suddenly okay to disregard their past articles of faith and tear down this president for everything from latte salutes, to teleprompters, to his affinity for spicy mustard and gherkins, to mom jeans and tan suits is nothing more than cheap partisan politics.

But rarely has there been an example of their own naked hypocrisy that's so easy to throw back in their faces. Hannity would have nowhere to run if someone forced him to try to explain why he once said it was almost treasonous to attack the president during war-time but now apparently thinks it's perfectly alright.

Watching him attempt to weasel out of his past remarks or jump through semantic hoops to get himself off the hook now would be entertaining as hell. But you'll never get him in that position.

As for Eric Bolling, who has a history of letting Stewart get under his skin, he'll probably just say that he wasn't at Fox News during most of the Bush years and therefore can't be held accountable for what the rest of the bellicose white guys at the network were saying back then.

But Stewart's smackdown of Fox News overall double-standard remains -- and it's going to go unanswered for the simple reason that Fox News has no answer to it, because other than patent dishonesty, there is none.

It's flat out bias and dishonesty, to O'Reilly you are a traitor if you criticize the President during a time of war when we have a Republican President. But it's fine to do it when a Democrat is in the White House.

And if O'Reilly and Fox had to go by their rules on it under Bush, for Obama, they would be off the air, because all the do is criticize President Obama while we are at war.

To read the O'Reilly Sucks blog, and get more information about
Bill O'Reilly make sure to visit the home page: