Advertise Contact About This Web Site Donate To oreilly-sucks.com
Get started with the top online bitcoin casino and win real cash playing casino games.



As you already know by now that Oreilly sucks and is the biggest loser. Oreilly facts apart, many people spend their time on computers playing online poker real money games as a hobby including slots



If you are looking to buy prescription medications from Canada, then buy from a licensed Canadian pharmacy.



RealMoneyAction.com is quickly becoming the #1 source for playing online casino games for real money. Check them out



Some of the most comprehensive mobile bingo reviews can be found here. Definitely no spin just honest reliable site reviews.



The number one place for mobile slots is this site, they offer lots of info and exclusive free spins.





O'Reilly Sucks
Blog Archives

January - 2016
February - 2016
March - 2016
April - 2016
May - 2016

January - 2015
February - 2015
March - 2015
April - 2015
May - 2015
June - 2015
July - 2015
August - 2015
September - 2015
October - 2015
November - 2015
December - 2015

January - 2014
February - 2014
March - 2014
April - 2014
May - 2014
June - 2014
July - 2014
August - 2014
September - 2014
October - 2014
November - 2014
December - 2014

Website Links

O'Reilly Info

The O'Reilly Iraq Apology Countdown Clock

O'Reilly Spins

Cable News Ratings

Read The Letter O'Reilly Had His Attorney Send me

O'Reilly Wins 2004 Misinformer of The Year Award

O'Reilly Death Penalty Lies

O'Reilly on Top 10 Conservative Idiot List 49 Times Since 2001

O'Reilly Calls Mexicans Wetbacks

Mail-to-Bill

Hate-Mail

O'Reilly #5 On Top 25 Right-Wing Journalist List

O'Reilly Factor Year In Review 2009

Factor Pollster Caught Writing GOP Policy Memo

What a Fair & Balanced O'Reilly Factor Would Look Like

Transcript: Bill O'Reilly v Jeremy Glick

Peabody Award Facts

Bill Clinton Enron News

Buzzflash Names O'Reilly Media Putz of The Week

Conclusive Proof O'Reilly & The Republican Party Are Both Corrupt

The Right-Wing Liberal Killer Story O'Reilly Ignored

The Facts About O'Reilly And GE Doing Business With Iran

How to Deal With an O'Reilly Factor Ambush Interview

Why FOX News Loves Juan Williams: The Strings And The Puppet

Blogroll

ultimatetop10s.com/
AmericaBlog
Progressive Eruptions
Rude Pundit
Moveon.org
Prison Planet
Apocalypse Cafe
Fox News Boycott
Inebriated Discourse
Hannity Sucks
NewsCorpse.com
Glenn Beck Is An Idiot
Ranker.com
GlennBeckReport.com
lauraingrahamsucks.com

The Factor Guest List Count

May 2016 (20 Shows) Republicans - 143 | Democrats - 19

The Factor Guest List Count Archives

Ratings: The O'Reilly Factor - Total Viewers

Monday - 5-23-16 -- O'Reilly - 2.925
Tuesday - 5-24-16 -- O'Reilly - 2.869
Wednesday - 5-25-16 -- O'Reilly - 3.187
Thursday - 5-26-16 -- O'Reilly -
Friday - 5-27-16 -- O'Reilly - - Trump Infomercial/Propaganda Special

Weekly Factor Average -

The Cable News Ratings Archives

Oreilly is a polarizing figure and so is online gaming, especially at Begado Casino. There are advocates in Congress proposing a federal law, but Republican detractors. This, according to a supporter of Steve and Oreilly-sucks.com, who runs a Begado Fan Blog. The conservative approach is to stick to legitimate gaming certifications and says Zachary Gleason.


The O'Reilly Sucks Blog

Fox Host Brags About Doing Most Victoria Secret Model Interviews
By: Steve - May 28, 2016 - 10:00am

And this is coming from a person who claims to be a journalist who works for a news network.

Fox's Kilmeade: "I Really Believe We've Done More For Victoria's Secret Models Than Anyone Else"

BRIAN KILMEADE (CO-HOST): It's a sad day for women and men everywhere. Thanks to a huge change Victoria's Secret just made, this morning your mailbox just got a little less sexy.

STEVE DOOCY (CO-HOST): What, exactly has Victoria's Secret done to change everything?

KILMEADE: Well Steve, I can't give it away now. I will say this, as a show, unofficially, we have done more interviews with Victoria's Secret models than any other modern show.

DOOCY: Pound for pound.

KILMEADE: Pound for pound, maybe Merv Griffin in the 70s. Who knows?

DOOCY: I don't think Victoria's Secret was around back then.

KILMEADE: Joe Franklin, maybe? But I really believe we've done more for Victoria's Secret models than anyone else.

Fox & Friends Deceptively Edited A 2007 Video Of Hillary Clinton
By: Steve - May 28, 2016 - 9:00am

They edited the video to make it look like Clinton blamed homeowners for the housing market crash and that she is "flip flopping now" to blame Wall Street.

But the speech transcript shows Clinton blamed Wall Street and a host of other financial actors, saying Wall Street "helped create the foreclosure crisis" and bears "responsibility" for the crash.

They also downplayed Donald Trump's expressed hope for a financial crisis in 2006, instead blaming former President Bill Clinton for a market crash and historic recession that occurred during the waning days of the Bush administration.

Fox co-host Steve Doocy used the clip to claim Clinton was switching her position, saying, "Hillary Clinton actually, these days she's blaming Wall Street. However back in the day in 2007 she was blaming the homeowners." Co-host Ainsley Earhardt said Clinton was "flip flopping now."

The Full Transcript Of Clinton's 2007 Speech Shows That She Blamed The Financial Industry, Saying: "Wall Street Helped Create The Foreclosure Crisis And Bears Responsibility."

In the December 2007 speech cited by Fox, Clinton blamed Wall Street, mortgage lenders, and brokers for the housing crash, saying, "responsibility also belongs to Wall Street, which not only enabled but often encouraged reckless mortgage lending."

Clinton also said, "Responsibility belongs to mortgage lenders and brokers, to the Bush Administration and to regulators, and to the rating agencies."

Clinton heavily criticized Wall Street throughout the speech, saying, "Some people might say Wall Street only helped to distribute risk. I believe Wall Street shifted risk away from people who knew what was going on onto the people who did not."

PolitiFact even rated Clinton's claim that "she called for addressing risks of derivatives, cracking down on subprime mortgages and improving financial oversight early on in the financial crisis" as True.

PolitiFact linked to several speeches, which showed "Clinton began addressing the subprime mortgage issue in her appearances in March 2007. Later that year, she took on derivatives. She also proposed specific plans for solving these problems and increasing oversight of financial institutions."

Insane O'Reilly Claims Conservatives Are Oppressed By Bathroom Bills
By: Steve - May 27, 2016 - 10:00am

Now this is crazy talk, and I can not prove it but I think O'Reilly is losing his mind. Because nobody is being oppressed by giving equal rights to transgender Americans, it is not oppression, it's enforcing equal rights for all.

Here is what the crazy fool said:

"When You Have The Federal Government Ordering Schools To Allow Any Gender To Shower, I Mean, That's An Oppression"



Veterans Group Slams Donald Trump For Lying About Money He Raised
By: Steve - May 27, 2016 - 9:00am

Donald Trump has often tried to exploit veterans for his own political benefit. We all saw this a few months ago when he tried to cover up the fact that he was terrified to face Fox News Megyn Kelly during a debate when he skipped the event, instead choosing to hold a fundraiser to raise money for veterans.

Anyone with half a brain could tell that this stunt was nothing but Trump using veterans to try to shield himself from criticism for skipping a crucial GOP debate.

Since that event, Trump has frequently bragged about the $6 million he raised for veterans. Of course, it's all been a lie. While Trump did raise money for veterans, he only raised $4.5 million, or 75 percent of what he's been bragging about all this time.

Apparently, several of Trump's big-money friends who promised they were going to donate backed out, though the campaign is refusing to name those people or which groups have been the recipients of this money. Naturally, some veterans groups were not at all pleased with Trump's exaggerations.

And what kind of person promises to donate money to veterans, then backs out when it is time to pay. That just shows what kinds of friends Trump has, and how untrustworthy they are.

Chairman of VoteVets.org, and Iraq War Veteran, Jon Soltz said this in a press release:
Donald Trump is a cheap fraud. In a classic fraud move, made himself look good to the public, by lying to the American people, and veterans, about how much he raised for veterans' groups, when he hid behind them to get out of the GOP debate.

He said he raised $6 million. Now, when investigated by reporters, he finally admits that he overstated the amount by millions, and never raised what he told people he did. In fact, there may still be groups who are waiting for their check. We now need to presume that he is lying about how much he claims he has given to veterans over the years, and that's part of the reason he won't release his taxes.

Releasing them would likely show that he's not given as much to veterans' groups over the years as he claims -- if he's even given to them at all. Another lie and another fraud.
While some may dismiss this as, what's the big deal, the point is that he's knowingly been lying this entire time. And if he's actually worth $10 billion as he often brags about, why can't he just cut a check for $1.5 million to fulfill the promise he's been making to veterans all these months about the money he raised?

I also like the point Soltz brings up related to Trump's taxes. While there are many things in Trump's tax returns that I truly believe he wants to keep hidden, how much he's actually donated to veterans over the years is definitely something that's worth noting -- especially considering how often he's tried to use veterans as political props to boost his campaign.

As Soltz brought up, we really should wonder what he's hiding in his tax returns that he's obviously terrified to release. Again, I know it sounds like this is nitpicking over $1.5 million, but this is all part of a much larger issue with Donald Trump.

This is someone who constantly seems to lie or greatly exaggerate the truth -- almost all the time -- to make himself look better. That's a sign of a person who's incredibly egotistical, a narcissist and someone who's just not mentally sound enough to be this nation's president.

Elizabeth Warren Slams Insecure Money Grubber Donald Trump
By: Steve - May 26, 2016 - 11:00am

In a 2006 Trump University audiobook, Trump was asked about "gloomy predictions that the real estate market is heading for a spectacular crash." He responded by saying the prospect was actually something he was looking forward to.

Trump was glad the housing crisis happened, because then he could buy millions and millions of dollars of property for almost nothing, and make big profits off the backs of hard working Americans who lost their homes and other real estate.

"I sort of hope that happens because then people like me would go in and buy," Trump said. "If there is a bubble burst, as they call it, you know you can make a lot of money, If you're in a good cash position - which I'm in a good cash position today - then people like me would go in and buy like crazy."

Now that those comments have been reported, they're coming back to haunt the presumptive Republican presidential nominee. On Tuesday, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) slammed Trump for the remarks, saying they're reflective of "a small insecure money grubber who doesn't care who gets hurt so long as he makes money off it and cares about no one but himself."

"Sometimes Trump claims he is tough on Wall Street, but now he is singing a very different song, he is saying that the new Dodd-Frank regulations, and I'm going to quote here, 'made it impossible for bankers to function' and he will put out a new plan soon that will be close to dismantling it," Warren continued. "Donald Trump is worried about helping poor little Wall Street. Let me find the world's smallest violin to play a sad, sad song."

"He said 'I sort of hope that happens.' He actually said that," Clinton said during a campaign rally on Tuesday. "And now he says he wants to roll back the financial regulations that we have imposed on Wall Street to let them run wild again. Well I will tell you what - you and I together, we're not going to let him."

Trump's defense of his remarks is that he was a businessman at the time and was thinking in a very different way than he would if elected president.

"I am a businessman and I have made a lot of money in down markets, in some cases as much as I've made when markets are good," Trump said in a statement. "Frankly, this is the kind of thinking our country needs - understanding how to get a good result out of a very bad and sad situation."

The 2008 financial crash and the Great Recession that ensued may have presented investment opportunities for Trump, but for the typical American family, it led to less income and more debt. The only households to see income gains during that period were the highest earners, continuing a trend of widening income inequality that now spans four decades.

Trump has used populist economic rhetoric throughout his campaign - for instance, he recently criticized Clinton for allegedly being "totally controlled by Wall Street" - but his economic platform is the standard Republican trickle-down propaganda, featuring a budget-busting tax cut for the rich and very little for the poorest Americans.

Meanwhile, Sen. Warren and a group of other labor leaders and members of Congress rolled out a "Take On Wall Street" initiative on Tuesday meant to expand upon some of the things Dodd-Frank has already accomplished, such as the $10.1 billion in consumer relief brought about by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

Instead of rolling back regulations, Warren and her friend want to "use our democratic prerogative to make the high and mighty on Wall Street obey our interests."

O'Reilly Ignores Facebook Investigation That Found No Evidence Of Bias
By: Steve - May 26, 2016 - 10:00am

Does Facebook silence conservative voices?

Fox News host Bill O'Reilly says it does, even before the investigation was done. O'Reilly touched on the recent controversy surrounding Facebook's trending topics on his show recently.

His take? You're damn right Facebook is downplaying conservative voices.

"I have been saying this from the jump, you can't find conservative opinion on them," O'Reilly said during his show, "The O'Reilly Factor."

"I think that whole Internet is stacked against any kind of traditional conservative thought," O'Reilly said.

And now the facts, the facts O'Reilly ignored and did not report on, because he does not want you to know the truth, that he is wrong and he thinks everyone is biased against conservatives, even when they are not.

Facebook said its investigation showed that conservative and liberal topics were approved as trending topics at nearly identical rates. It said it was unable to substantiate any allegations of politically motivated suppression of particular subjects or sources.

The investigation was prompted by a letter from Republican Sen. John Thune earlier this month demanding that the company explain how it selects news articles for its "trending" list.

And with no evidence to back it up O'Reilly did a segment on it and slammed them for bias, even though he says he never speculates and only deals in the facts.

In his letter, Thune called on Facebook to respond to criticism that it suppressed conservative news and sought answers by May 24 to several questions about its internal practices.

"Any attempt by a neutral and inclusive social media platform to censor or manipulate political discussion is an abuse of trust and inconsistent with the values of an open Internet," Thune said. Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg last week met with more than a dozen conservative politicians and media personalities to discuss issues of trust in the social network.

Corporate Lobbyists Are Behind GOP Opposition To New Overtime Laws
By: Steve - May 26, 2016 - 9:00am

If you want to know who runs the Republicans party, other than the NRA, it's the corporate lobbyists.

The Conservative Opposition To Overtime Pay Is Brought To You By The National Retail Federation.

The NRF Claims Overtime Expansion Will Demote Working Americans "To Clock-Punchers."

Pretty much all of the right-wing media and Republican politicians are slamming the Labor Department's decision to update and expand overtime protections, and they are clearly taking their cues from the National Retail Federation (NRF) -- a business association known for spreading lies about worker rights.

The NRF and its allies are portraying overtime expansion as something that will hurt workers and the economy, ignoring their own report, which found that the change would result in new jobs and fewer unpaid hours for retail workers.

The Department of Labor released an update to overtime rules for salaried employees on May 17, raising the minimum annual salary threshold to qualify for guaranteed overtime pay from $23,660 to $47,476 -- an announcement that was denounced by the right-wing media.

Conservative outlets claimed the rule was interfering with businesses and would result in less flexibility and possibly lower pay, citing the NRF's 2016 report Rethinking Overtime as proof, but they failed to acknowledge that the NRF has consistently opposed better pay for workers, fair scheduling, and collective bargaining rights.

Contrary to claims that the expanded overtime will harm the economy, the NRF's own report found the overtime rule would lead to over 117,100 new part-time jobs.

The Wall Street Journal decried the updated overtime rule in a May 18 editorial, claiming employers will lower salaries as a result. The Journal cited the NRF study, which found that businesses will "shift about a third of salaried retail and restaurant workers to hourly status" and bizarrely pointed to the study's finding that one in 10 workers on salary will work fewer hours (which are already unpaid) as proof that the rule is not in the best interests of employers or workers.

The conservative Townhall.com also pushed the false narrative that salaried workers working fewer unpaid hours is a negative, citing the NRF's report.

During the NRF's campaign against overtime expansion, the lobbying group has claimed the new rule is outrageous and will force employers "to demote their middle management professionals to clock-punchers."

On the May 18th edition of Fox News Special Report, NRF senior vice president David French called the rule a massive overreach. Earlier that day on Fox's America's Newsroom, correspondent Kevin Corke said the rule will mean "more red tape and fewer advancement opportunities" and falsely claimed that "most of the people impacted by this change will not see any additional pay."

Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) echoed the NRF's statement on the May 19th edition of Fox Business Varney & Co., claiming the overtime rule imposes "more red tape on job creators, which translates into fewer opportunities for people."

In statements released May 18th, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) referred to the overtime rule as more red tape while House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) claimed it was an absolute disaster that will end up "hurting the very people it alleges to help."

Despite the coordinated attacks from conservative media outlets and politicians, overtime expansion is vitally important in a country where 50 percent of full-time workers already work more than 40 hours per week.

In an April op-ed, economist and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich argued that many Americans are unaware that overtime protections have eroded over generations, and he noted that working unpaid overtime limits worker productivity and hiring. Reich also pointed out that the proliferation of unpaid overtime contributes to soaring corporate profits.

The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) found that overtime expansion will "reduce excessive hours of unpaid work" while adding at least 120,000 jobs in the retail sector -- the very one the NRF claims to represent. The rule change is also expected to change employer behavior; some employers will hire more workers, while other employers will become more efficient.

Employees in many instances work unnecessary hours because company cultures value "how much people work (or seem to)" instead of "the quality of their output," according to an article by professors Erin Reid and Lakshmi Ramarajan in the June 2016 edition of the Harvard Business Review.

The NRF has a history of pushing a right-wing, anti-worker agenda. The group opposes collective bargaining and fair scheduling, and was an outspoken opponent of increasing the federal minimum wage to $10.10 per hour when the debate first gained prominence in 2014.

O'Reilly Is Clueless & He Has No Idea What Progressives Want
By: Steve - May 25, 2016 - 10:00am

First, I am a progressive and Bill O'Reilly is lying about what I want. He says the transgender bathroom policy from President Obama is designed to make Americans believe there is no difference in gender at all.

And that is ridiculous, it's nothing but lies and right-wing propaganda from O'Reilly. I believe there is a difference in gender, and I do not want anyone to think there is no difference in gender. The transgender bathroom policy is about equal rights for all and discrimination, and safety.

Bill O'Reilly is simply lying about the issue to make Republicans hate progressives even more.

Here is what the dishonest lying spin doctor O'Reilly said about it:

BILL O'REILLY (HOST): Factor follow-up segment tonight, the entire transgendered restroom issue is beyond crazy.

So according to this loony newspaper, if you have a young daughter, you should be accepting of the fact that a transgendered boy could shower next to her after an athletic exposition. That is insane. The solution to the problem is simple and has been going on for decades, private installations for people who are transgender. Joining us from Washington, Kirsten Powers. So do you understand how crazy The Charlotte Observer is?

KIRSTEN POWERS: No. I don't, actually.

O'REILLY: You don't.

POWERS: I read the editorial.

O'REILLY: Yes.

POWERS: Nothing about it seemed crazy to me.

POWERS: All I'm saying is I don't think it should bother you. I don't think this person is not preying on your daughter, this person is not a pervert, there is nothing is wrong with this person.

O'REILLY: It's not a matter of preying, it's a matter of being appropriate. You see, I'm glad you are coming on and I'm glad you said what you said. I had to interrupt because I wanted to steer you into the rights of the mass of people, which are being violated by this insane program.

POWERS: It's not insane.

O'REILLY: Yes, designed to make Americans believe there is no difference in gender at all.

POWERS: That's not what it's designed to do.

O'REILLY: Yes it is, of course it is. It's what the progressives want.

POWERS: No it's not and that's the way people who oppose this want to frame it because that's what they want to make it about that but it's not what it's about.

O'REILLY: To impose this kind of a situation to young children who don't understand transgendered or anything else - to impose it to the government impose it - is such a violation of parental rights, of children's rights, of everybody's rights.

GOP Benghazi Chairman Admits Investigation Was A Waste Of Time
By: Steve - May 25, 2016 - 9:00am

While we all agree that the attack on our embassy in Benghazi back in 2012 was a tragedy, I'm not sure if any rational person thought that, nearly four years later, there would still be ongoing investigations concerning what happened that evening.

Especially considering we've already had several investigations that have outlined to us what happened, all concluding that, while tragic, the attack itself was unlikely preventable.

We've known all of this for years. About a year and a half ago, a Republican-led investigation concluded that the absurd conspiracies and lies conservatives had been pushing about the attack for years were unfounded. Naturally, this meant that Republicans would simply order another investigation.

Well, a few days ago a story broke about a former three-star general specifically picked by Republicans to look into the investigation concluding that, like we've already known, there's likely nothing that could have been done to prevent the attack.

Now comes the news that Republican Benghazi Committee Chair Trey Gowdy essentially admitted that this whole investigation was a giant waste of time and money.

From USA Today:
There was nothing the military could have done on the night of Sept. 11, 2012, to stop the attacks in Benghazi, Libya, but the special House committee investigating the terrorist incident will continue to probe the Pentagon's actions that night, the committee's chairman said Tuesday.

"Whether or not they could have gotten there in time, I don't think there is any issue with respect to that. They couldn't," Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., told Fox News. That concurs with previous congressional investigations that concluded the military could not have responded quickly enough to stop the 2012 attack on U.S. facilities in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

As the article says, Gowdy's comment "concurs with previous congressional investigations." Meaning that all of these investigations, and literally millions of dollars of taxpayer money -- were wasted on absolutely nothing but a partisan witch hunt exploiting a tragedy.
This is why I've been saying for years that we need to hold hearings to investigate Republicans over this whole circus. When your party repeatedly orders investigations that continued to produce the same results, I think that party needs to be investigated for wasting that much time and money on pure nonsense.

We all know exactly what this has all been about: Keeping Benghazi around long enough, hoping they could use it against Hillary Clinton for this presidential election.

They sure didn't do a very good job of that last October. And it won't matter that, once again, they failed to produce any evidence to support any number of the asinine conspiracies the right has been pushing about this for years.

So I think once all of this is finally settled, we need some sort of committee established to investigate the Republican party so that we can look through their emails, memos and other forms of correspondence to find out what these folks were really saying behind closed doors -- and have them answer for the fact that they've wasted millions of dollars on exploiting a tragedy for partisan political gain.

Bill O'Reilly To Sue Ex-wife For $10 Million
By: Steve - May 24, 2016 - 11:00am

This shows exactly what a low-life a-hole Bill O'Reilly is, now the big jerk is going to sue his ex-wife. I normally do not wish bad on anyone, but if he were hit by a bus it would be a good thing, nothing he does helps anyone, he is just a lying right-wing hack who got rich off the backs of the suckers that believe his propaganda.

Bill O'Reilly is reportedly planning to sue his ex-wife for $10 million.

According to court documents obtained by Gawker, O'Reilly has accused Maureen McPhilmy of misleading him on the terms of their separation agreement.

In the same documents, O'Reilly claims McPhilmy used the money she obtained from their agreement "to finance an existing extra-marital relationship."

Gawker speculates that extramarital relationship is between McPhilmy and her now-husband Jeffrey Gross, who's a detective with the Nassau County Police Department on Long Island.

The outlet noted they started dating after O'Reilly and McPhilmy separated in 2010, but before their divorce was final. O'Reilly reportedly responded to news of their relationship by getting the police department to launch an internal investigation of Gross.

He also donated money to their police fund to try and get Jeffrey Gross in trouble, but it did not work. Sorry O'Reilly, money can not buy you everything.

Another filing reveals O'Reilly's attorneys have requested that all future filings related to this suit be kept under wraps. Neither he nor McPhilmy have yet to respond to requests for comment.

Fox News Liar Says Trump Would Never Back Down From A Debate
By: Steve - May 24, 2016 - 10:00am

Even though Trump has already backed out of two debates, and would have backed out of a third one if it had not been cancelled.

Fox's Eric Bolling: "You Want To Be President Of The United States? Donald Trump Wouldn't Back Down From A Debate"

Fox News co-hosts argued that unlike the GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton "would never" agree to a debate on Fox, forgetting that Trump has repeatedly backed out of debates during the GOP primaries -- including a debate on Fox News.

During a discussion on the possibility of conducting a Democratic debate hosted by Fox News on the May 18 edition of Fox's The Five, co-host Eric Bolling, argued that someone who wants to be president of the United States would not back down from a debate on Fox News, adding, "Donald Trump wouldn't back down from a debate like this."

But Donald Trump did back down from a Fox News debate in January.

Trump has also threatened to pull out of a CNN debate citing "one-sided and unfair reporting" from the network. Furthermore, a NBC debate was cancelled in March, after Trump said he would not attend because "I think we've had enough debates," and following critical editorials of Trump, ABC News dropped The New Hampshire Union Leader as a co-sponsor from a February Republican debate, which Trump took credit for.

And btw, when Trump says he got one-sided and unfair reporting, what that means is they reported actual bad news about him, it was not one-sided or unfair. Trump claims all the reporting in unfair to him, unless it's positive. If someone reports that the vast majority of women do not like him, based on actual polls that show it, Trump claims that is unfair reporting about him, when it is simply reporting the truth and the facts.

Additionally, The Five co-host Meghan McCain claimed that Clinton would never agree to a debate on Fox because she is scared to take questions from Fox host Bret Baier, claiming "she knows that Bret Baier ain't Rachel Maddow. She's going to have to answer some real questions and a lot of times she gets a lot of passes from the media."

Even though she has no clue if Hillary would do a debate on Fox or not, and she ignores the fact that Hillary Clinton did take questions from Bret Baier during a Fox News presidential town hall event in March in which Baier asked Clinton real questions.

Not to mention this, Hillary is asked as many tough questions by the media as Trump is, probably more. So Meghan McCain is clueless and a liar.

O'Reilly Says Only Trump Sycophants Can Cover Trump
By: Steve - May 24, 2016 - 9:00am

According to Bill O'Reilly, feminist journalists should not be allowed to report on Donald Trump because "Trump is the antithesis" of feminism.

By O'Reilly's standard, any journalist Trump may have offended would be disqualified from reporting on the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.

On the May 17th edition of The O'Reilly Factor, host Bill O'Reilly speculated on whether "the national media can cover Trump with any fairness," suggesting that editors should not let feminist journalists report on Trump because his past in the beauty pageant world would bias feminists against him.

Which ranks as one of the top 10 dumbest things O'Reilly has ever said. And goes back to my 16 year old question, how did this moron graduate from Harvard, did he cheat?

BILL O'REILLY: Trump is a beauty contestant purveyor. Do you let a feminist report on a beauty contestant person who is now turned politician?

O'REILLY: If I'm an editor and I know there is a feminist woman in my newsroom, I don't let her report on a guy like Trump because Trump is the antithesis of that. And so I don't want any margin of error here. There are plenty of reporters who can do the story.

Based on O'Reilly's warped and crazy logic, anyone who has reasons to find Trump's positions problematic is unfit to cover him. This standard disqualifies a lot of people:

-- Trump has referred to Mexican immigrants as rapists and drug dealers, so they're out.
-- Trump sent a culturally offensive tweet featuring a taco bowl on Cinco de Mayo, so Hispanics would be disqualified from covering him.
-- Trump's proposal to ban all Muslims from entering the U.S. means Muslims can't cover him fairly.
-- Trump derided John McCain's status as a war hero because Trump likes "people who weren't captured." So cross off all the journalists who have been captured in conflict zones.
-- Since Trump suggested that women who have had abortions deserved "some form of punishment," any journalist who has had an abortion would be eliminated.
-- Trump mocked a disabled reporter with a congenital joint condition, so any journalist with a disability is off the list.
-- Also disqualified? climate scientists.
-- And broadly, women would be excluded, since he once said, "Women, you have to treat 'em like crap."

Under this argument, the only people left to cover Donald Trump would likely be those who made softball interviews of him their specialty, like Sean Hannity, those amplifying Trump's conspiracy theories like Alex Jones, or people who share a personal friendship with the candidate, like Bill O'Reilly.

Following O'Reilly's logic, the media's role of vetting, fact-checking and challenging a candidate, would become a thing of the past.

The Actual Facts About The New Obama Overtime Law
By: Steve - May 23, 2016 - 11:00am

Here are the actual facts on the new Obama overtime law, this shows why it was done, and why it was long overdue. Republicans and the corporate lobbyists are lying to you when they say it's a bad thing, because it is a great thing for American workers.

Here is what corporations have been doing for years, they hire someone who works for them a while and then they pay them more than the $455.00 a week minimum and call them a manager. Then they can make them work 50, 60, even 70 hours a week, and they do not get paid for overtime.

This is not only unfair, it's un-American. If you make $500.00 a week for 40 hours and you work 50 hours you still get $500.00 a week, if you work 60 hours you still get $500.00 a week, if you work 70 hours you still get $500.00 a week, it's ridiculous and something you expect in a communist country, not America.

Currently workers covered by the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 must be paid at least time-and-a-half for each hour they work beyond 40 hours a week.

But the salary threshold under which workers are automatically eligible to receive overtime pay is a mere $23,660 a year (or $455 a week). Workers who make more than the threshold can be excluded from overtime pay if their jobs are determined to be executive, administrative, or professional. This easily allows employers to avoid paying overtime by simply giving workers manager titles and paying them just above the $23,660 annual threshold.

That will change on December 1st. The White House on Wednesday announced the final version of a new Department of Labor rule that would more than double the income threshold for overtime eligibility for salaried workers to $47,476 (or $913 a week), the first major increase to account for inflation that's happened in decades.

"This rule is necessary because, over the past four decades, updates to the so-called 'white collar exemption rules' have been infrequent and inadequate," Christine L. Owens, executive director of National Employment Law Project, a workers' rights advocacy organization, said during a press conference Wednesday.

As a result, she said, a mere 7% of salaried employees currently have guaranteed overtime pay protections, compared to more than 60% of salaried employees in 1979.

Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy Institute, said the new overtime rule would bring that coverage closer to 23%, which is still far lower than it was in 1979.

While the Obama administration said the proposal will extend overtime pay to nearly 5 million workers within the first year of its implementation, Eisenbrey believes this number is a conservative estimate, and he puts the number of affected workers closer to 12.5 million, which is how many workers earn salaries between the old threshold of $23,606 and the new threshold of $47,476.

"All of them will have their rights improved," he said.

"They'll either be newly entitled to overtime pay when they never were before, or they will have their rights strengthened and clarified, because, frankly, most people think that, if you're paid a salary, you're not entitled to overtime," Eisenbrey said.

Because the salary threshold has been so low, Eisenbrey explains, employers have been able to render people exempt who shouldn't be by, for example, treating low-level assistant store managers or frontline store managers as executives.

These 12.5 million workers will benefit from the new rule, either by receiving time-and-a-half pay for any hours worked over 40 in a week, having their hours scaled back to 40 hours a week while still taking home the same pay, or getting a raise to put them above the threshold.

He also predicts that 100,000 more workers will benefit, as the overtime work will likely be shifted to either new employees or part-time employees who would not be working overtime. In fact, a study by Oxford Economics found that if the salary threshold were raised even to $808 a week, 76,000 part-time workers would be hired to fill the labor needs of businesses.

The new overtime rule would also automatically increase the threshold every three years, something Eisenbrey considers incredibly important. "The salary threshold will never erode again. We won't go through what we did -- a 29-year period at one point where the salary threshold was not improved. It won't take an act of political courage in the future," he said.

While the new rule has drawn criticism from business groups and Republicans, it has also been met with support.

"The system is rigged and people know it," said Bill Samuel, legislative director of the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations. "Taking this step to restore overtime is one of the many ways we're beginning to change the rules of our economy that are rigged in favor of Wall Street."

Insane OReilly Blames Freddie Gray's Death On His Lifestyle
By: Steve - May 22, 2016 - 11:00am

Not Police abuse, which is what it was. Here are some facts for O'Reilly, the facts he ignored.

Six Baltimore police officers pleaded not guilty in Freddie Gray's death, even though the autopsy says it was a homicide. O'Reilly ignores that to claim his lifestyle caused his death, instead of bad cops who roughed him up and he died from it.

The State Medical Examiner's Office declared Gray's death a homicide because officers failed to follow safety guidelines "through acts of omission," according to a copy of the report obtained by the newspaper.

The report provides a better picture of what happened to Gray, whom police put on his belly in the back of the van. Gray wasn't belted down, and he may have risen to his feet and then was slammed against an interior panel during an abrupt change in direction, according to the newspaper's account of the autopsy report.

With his ankles and wrists shackled, Gray was "at risk for an unsupported fall during acceleration or deceleration of the van," according to the newspaper's summary of the report.

The police even have a name for it, in Baltimore, they call it a rough ride. In Philadelphia, they had another name for it that hints at the age of the practice - a nickel ride, a reference to old-time amusement park rides that cost five cents. Other cities called them joy rides.

The slang terms mask a dark tradition of police misconduct in which suspects, seated or lying face down and in handcuffs in the back of a police wagon, are jolted and battered by an intentionally rough and bumpy ride that can do as much damage as a police baton without an officer having to administer a blow.

He died from a spinal injury, sustained while in police custody in Baltimore. The police even admitted that he was not strapped into a seatbelt, which is a violation of department policy.

O'Reilly never mentions any of this, and claims he only deals in the facts, in the so-called no spin zone. Then he speculates his ass off saying his lifestyle caused his death, which is just insane. The police gave him a rough ride and they went too far, then he died, that has nothing to do with his lifestyle, it's about Police abusing their power and going too far, that led to his death.

Partial transcript:

BILL O'REILLY (HOST): It might be that the system is overwhelmed which it sounds like it is in Baltimore.

CLARENCE MITCHELL: No, it was not the system, it's a bad arrest.

O'REILLY: I think all Americans, no matter when a citizen dies like Freddie Gray did, it's never the citizen's fault in the sense that Freddie Gray didn't get up in the morning and say I'm going to do something and I'm going to die. But Freddie Gray's lifestyle for many years, led him to this terrible thing which is not only impacted him and his family but all the police officers and that lifestyle should be condemned. I mean, this narcotics trafficking is awful. It is devastating.

Hypocrite Trump Profits From The Companies He Slams In Public
By: Steve - May 21, 2016 - 11:00am

This is typical Donald Trump, say one thing in public, while in private making millions in investments from the very same companies he is slamming in public.

In public, Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump rails against U.S. companies that outsource jobs overseas, like Nabisco, Carrier and Ford. He has called for a boycott of Apple and accused Disney of abusing the H1-B visa program to staff its resorts.

But in private, Trump is profiting from investments in the very same corporations he trashes on the campaign trail.

According to Trump's personal disclosure forms, released Wednesday, he earned about $1.1 million in the past year from investments in companies that he has publicly attacked.

Trump's most frequent targets include Nabisco, the Carrier Corporation, and Ford. The parent companies of Nabisco and Carrier have both outsourced hundreds of jobs to Mexico in recent months. Ford plans to build a new plant in Mexico's San Luis Potosí state, a plan Trump has called "a disgrace."

"Carrier and Ford and Nabisco need to know that there are consequences to leaving and firing people," Trump told a crowd in Indiana last month. "You can't just go to another country and make products to sell across our weak borders, because our borders will be so strong."

Trump's stake in Ford is worth between $500,000 and $1 million, according to his disclosure. He also pocketed as much as $20,000 in interest from his holdings in United Technologies and Mondelez International, the parent companies of Carrier and Nabisco, respectively.

In February, Trump called for a boycott of Apple after the company refused to break into the iPhone of the San Bernardino shooter. "What I think you ought to do is boycott Apple until such a time as they give that security number," Trump told a crowd in South Carolina. "How do you like that? I just thought of it. Boycott Apple."

But of course Trump's proposed boycott did not apply to his own business with Apple, however -- or his use of their products. Trump's investments in the software and device giant have netted him between $100,000 and a million dollars in dividends and capital gains over the past year.

The earnings were part of an overall income that Trump claimed was $557 million, for a net worth that his campaign team claimed was more than $10 billion. The forms require candidates to list the value of their holdings as a range, with the top category being $50 million or more.

The financial disclosure came as Trump faces increased scrutiny over his refusal to release his tax returns. While not required by law, the tradition of presidential nominees releasing their tax returns dates back to the 1970's.

Trump says he will release his tax returns when the IRS completes a routine audit of his annual returns, but he won't say whether that will be before or after the November election. Trump claims that the current audit covers a whole decade's worth of returns, even those that are no longer being audited. The IRS has said that nothing the agency does prevents an individual from releasing his or her own tax returns.

Clinton Forces Scarborough To Correct Trump Lie About Libya
By: Steve - May 21, 2016 - 10:30am

And if she had not made them correct the Trump lie, Scarborough would have just let Trump lie and get away with it. Only after Clinton slammed Scarborough for letting Trump lie did they issue a correction.

The Hillary Clinton campaign stopped a Trump lie and a Trump enabler dead in their tracks by forcing Joe Scarborough to correct a lie that Trump said during a Morning Joe interview on the air.

Scarborough asked Trump if he would have stayed out of Libya. Trump answered, "I would have stayed out of Libya. I would have stayed out of Iraq too." At the time, Trump's lie generated no pushback from Joe Scarborough.

The Hillary Clinton campaign was listening and they forced Scarborough to correct Trump's lie on the air.

andrew kaczynski:

Trump lies about opposing Iraq, Libya. Gets zero pushback from MSNBC host.

andrew kaczynski:

Kudos, to @Morning_Joe for doing later correction of Trump on Libya. Took a response from Clinton campaign.

In the 2011 interview Trump says it is nuts that we do not go after Qaddafi in Libya, and he says he supports a Libya invasion. He also called it a horrible carnage and said we have soldiers all over the middle east that we should use to invade Libya. Scarborough did a correction and quoted Trump on it, proving he lied about opposing it.

If the Clinton campaign had not corrected the lie, Joe Scarborough would have happily allowed Trump to ignore the truth.

Matthews Highlights Trump's Libya Flip Flop On Morning Joe
By: Steve - May 21, 2016 - 9:30am

CHRIS MATTHEWS (HOST): During a phone interview this morning on MSNBC's Morning Joe, presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump said he would have stayed out of Libya back in 2011.

MATTHEWS: Well, but what Trump told Morning Joe this morning is the opposite of something he said in his own video blog back in February of 2011 itself. Right about the time the Obama administration was debating whether to intervene in that country. At that time, Trump said that the United States should go in and stop Muammar Gaddafi.

MATTHEWS: Well, here he is now in the present time, a man that is the new Donald Trump, the new model this year, anyway, at the campaign trail he called for less intervention in the world but he also calls himself the most militaristic, catch this, even more militaristic than George W. Bush. So, another angle to the man.

Elizabeth Warren To Donald Trump: I'm Right You're Wrong
By: Steve - May 20, 2016 - 11:30am

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) on Thursday night resumed her stream of tweets directed at presumptive GOP presidential nominee Donald Trump.

Warren, a fierce defender of the middle class, sent several tweets attacking Trump's meandering statements surrounding the federal minimum wage, and linked to a new PolitiFact article that calls a Trump claim "mostly false." The article examines Trump's back-and-forth opinions on the minimum wage and his assertion that Warren lied when she said he wanted to abolish it.

@realDonaldTrump got destroyed on his min wage position. I was right when I called him out.

-- Elizabeth Warren (@elizabethforma) May 20, 2016

@realDonaldTrump made clear he would abolish the federal minimum wage. One of a million reasons why working ppl can't make him the boss.

-- Elizabeth Warren (@elizabethforma) May 20, 2016

@RealDonaldTrump trolls for votes & wants working ppl to believe he's for them. News flash, Donald: working ppl are smarter than you think.

-- Elizabeth Warren (@elizabethforma) May 20, 2016

Warren took to Twitter several times last week, seemingly unprompted, to chastise Trump's "dangerous" and "reckless" policy proposals, and his sexist treatment of women. She called out Trump's stances on student loan debt, financial industry regulation and Trump University.

Trump, in true Trump fashion, proceeded to mock Warren. He called her "Goofy Elizabeth Warren" and "one of the least effective senators" in history.

Warren's comments have drawn the attention of the Hillary Clinton campaign, including some who advocate Warren as a potential vice presidential running mate, according to a report from HuffPost's Sam Stein and Ryan Grim. Clinton and her aides were "thrilled to see Warren get under his skin," according to the report.

Warren ended her latest tweetstorm assuring Trump that his tirades wouldn't escape the notice of America's working class.

"News flash, Donald: working people are smarter than you think."

O'Reilly Solution To Transgender Issue Is Watch The Animal House Movie
By: Steve - May 20, 2016 - 11:00am

Here is more proof Bill O'Reilly is nothing but a right-wing loon, he says the solution to the transgender issue is for Obama, the Supreme Court, and Congress to watch the John Belushi movie Animal House, which is just stupid, and only something a moron would say.

And he said it during a total waste of time segment with the has-been un-funny former comedian Dennis Miller. Who is the same guy who said we should test a nuke to show the world we still have them, when asked about the radioactive fallout, he said just blow it up when the wind is blowing in the right direction.

They are both clowns, O'Reilly said this: "They really believe that equality means there shouldn't be any difference in gender."

No they don't, that is a lie. What they believe is that transgender people have equal rights, and they believe that if someone lives their entire life as a woman, even if they were born a man, they should be able to use the womens bathroom, because they live as a woman and they dress as a woman. That is what they believe you right-wing jerks.

Between O'Reilly and Miller they barely have one working brain, they are both clueless right-wing fools that have no business telling anyone what to do about anything.

O'Reilly Suggests The Movie Animal House Should Dictate Policy On Transgender Rights

Bill O'Reilly: Obama, SCOTUS, And Congress Should Watch Animal House, "And Then Afterward We'll Have A Big Discussion"

Partial transcript:

BILL O'REILLY: The Family Policy Institute of Washington State asked some students at Seattle University about gender.

O'REILLY: Again, that was a legitimate survey, not "Watters World." Joining us from Santa Barbara, the sage of Southern California, Dennis Miller. You know, things are different since we attended college, Miller?

DENNIS MILLER: I couldn't see anything else but the difference in college for four years.

O'REILLY: Me too.

MILLER: These kids can't see the forest for the lack of a tree, for God's sake. What, are they kidding me? You know what I see in that video, Billy? I see fear, honest to God. People will say, oh they're stupid. They're not stupid. Kids aren't stupid. Are they brainwashed a little? Yeah, sure they are. But mostly I see fear. If you say anything on a college campus now, you're going to be ostracized. They can't even listen to "Smoking in the Boy's Room" by Brownsville Station. It's got to be "Smoking in the Transroom." Nobody can do anything over there.

O'REILLY: But it is -- what I think is happening, and I think that's a pretty good analysis, is that they're scared. Alright, they don't want to say anything politically correct. They don't want to say, you know what? There is a pretty big difference between men and women. There's a difference in the way --

MILLER: You hope it's a big difference. You hope it's a big difference.

O'REILLY: Well, look, the difference is in the way they dress, the way they conduct themselves in the marketplace. Men are usually savages, where women are kind and gentle.

O'REILLY: But what I'm trying to get at here is, you're right, they're afraid. And you're right, they're not all as dumb as they look. But they really believe that equality means there shouldn't be any difference in gender. That's what it should be, Miller. That's what the rainbow pot is.

MILLER: Maybe I'm not smart enough to follow all of this, but I remember when I was in high school. And if you are going to give high school guys -- and I remember three or four lunatics in my high school -- a reason to show up at school one day and say they feel like women that day and they want to go into the girl's locker room, I can't exactly express specifically what's going to happen, but it ain't going to be pretty. It ain't going to be pretty.

O'REILLY: Well, here is my solution to this whole problem, that President Obama, the Supreme Court, and Congress should all gather in the nation's capital and be shown the movie Animal House. Alright? They should all have to watch the movie with your pal John Belushi, and then afterward we'll have a big discussion. Because there are differences between men and women, and people on both sides, there can be extremes.

Barron's Jack Hough Schools Fox Business Idiots On Obama Overtime Bill
By: Steve - May 20, 2016 - 10:00am

Millions Of Workers Will Be Guaranteed Overtime Pay Thanks To Updated Overtime Rule, thanks to President Obama. But of course all the propaganda stooges at Fox are saying it is a bad thing that will hurt corporations. But they ran into a truth teller, who schooled them with the facts and stopped their propaganda in it's tracks.

A Fox Business panel discussion about the Department of Labor releasing new rules on federal overtime pay regulations was caught off guard when one guest correctly pointed out that low-wage employers currently enjoy unfair "corporate welfare," which subsidizes their business model.

The new DOL stipulations mandate that employers pay overtime to qualifying salaried workers who make up to $913 per week, or $47,476 per year, which Fox Business contributor Elizabeth MacDonald and Host Stuart Varney predictably claimed would cost business and destroy jobs.

Varney quickly lost control of the conversation to Barron's editor Jack Hough who praised the new rule while arguing that a lack of overtime protections amounts to letting low-wage employers "reach both hands into my pockets" to pay employees whose poverty wages force them to seek government assistance.

From the May 18th edition of Fox Business Varney & Co.

STUART VARNEY (HOST): President Obama's new overtime pay rules, actually, do you know that they go into effect today? What's this going to cost business?

ELIZABETH MACDONALD: So, $12 billion over the next decade, that's what the Labor Department says. The overtime kicks in if you make about 47,500 bucks and you work more than 40 hours a week, you will get overtime now, according to these new rules.

Who does it hit? Retail, restaurant businesses, they make a lot -- create a lot of the jobs in this country. So what could happen? Will the guys who run these businesses say, "you know what, I'm going to keep my overtime the same?" Could it cost jobs?

VARNEY: Jack Hough is still here. He is making all kinds of noises because I know -- I know -- he believes in a much higher minimum wage, and more overtime pay.

JACK HOUGH: Somewhat higher. Here is where I turn into a pinko commie, as you say --

ASHLEY WEBSTER: A bed wetter.

HOUGH: A bed wetter, of course.This is not -- you are talking about this as a cost to business. Really, it's a transfer of money from business to workers, right? The issue is, this should be a conservative cause, right?

When we have all these companies that are paying workers below a living wage. What happens? The workers go and they apply for federal benefits. They get tax credits. In effect, McDonald's is reaching both hands into my pockets and taking part of its payroll cost -- that shouldn't happen.

We shouldn't have so much corporate welfare in the form of low-wage workers who have to go and collect an Earned Income Tax Credit that I pay for. Profits are at an all-time high, worker wages are low, it's time for companies to pay their own payroll costs instead of coming to me.

MACDONALD: Interesting take.

WEBSTER: Interesting point, it's --

VARNEY: I'll give him that.

HOUGH: The reality is that the 20th Century, in America, the greatest sustained period of wealth creation the world has ever seen -- we had a high minimum wage, we had overtime pay.

VARNEY: That's a very good point you raised.

Clinton: It's Time For People To Stop Listening To Republican Propaganda
By: Steve - May 20, 2016 - 9:00am

HOPKINSVILLE, Ky. -- Hillary Clinton fired back at a woman who stood during a rally Monday to disagree with a line in Clinton's stump speech about Kentucky’s Republican Gov. Matt Bevin.

The exchange unfolded as Clinton discussed improvements that had occurred in the state on issues such as education, implementing the Affordable Care Act and lowering the unemployment rate -- all of which she attributed to Bevin's predecessor, Democratic Gov. Steve Beshear.

"Your governor did such a great job and your current governor is trying to undo it all," Clinton said, referring to Bevin and Beshear.

But the woman, who had been sitting quietly in the audience, stood and shouted toward Clinton: "That is not true."

"Oh yes it is, yes it is," Clinton responded before adding hotly: "You are entitled to your opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts!"

The crowed roared, some people leaving their chairs to cheer and hold up their Clinton signs.

Suddenly, the woman's outburst had become a referendum on voters who disregard the truth in making their political decisions.

Clinton invited the woman to come up to the rope line after the event to explain what was on her mind, because very little could be heard over the boom of Clinton's amplified voice and the applause and cheering from the crowd.

But Clinton wasn't finished.

"I'll tell you what the truth is, and it's time that people stop listening to Republican propaganda!" she added.

As Beshear stood watching from the sidelines, Clinton noted that "hundreds of thousands" of working Kentuckians have health care because of the Medicaid expansion during his governorship.

"And I'll tell you something else," she said. "If the current governor has his way and Medicaid is cut back or eliminated as it was expanded, it's going to cost you rural hospitals, rural health clinics -- a lot of people who have insurance are going to find their access less than it is, because of the way that your governor in the past expanded affordable health care."

"We can't have the kind of debate that we need when people don't learn the facts," she added.

Factor Guest Makes A Great Point To O'Reilly
By: Steve - May 19, 2016 - 11:50am

During a discussion about Hillary Clinton slamming Trump for his treatment of women, O'Reilly showed once again what a biased right-wing hypocrite he is. In the past O'Reilly has said you must not attack the family, only the candidate, he said that after some Democrats went after the Bush kids, and other family members of candidates.

O'Reilly used to say the family of a candidate is off limits.

But now that Hillary is running for President O'Reilly has changed the rules, and even compared her attacks on Trump about women to Trump going after Bill Clinton.

O'Reilly said if Hillary slams Trump over women, then Trump has a right to go after Bill Clinton. Even though Bill Clinton is not the candidate, he is part of the family. And the comparison is bogus, because she is slamming the candidate Trump, he can go after Bill, who is not the candidate.

Wednesday night O'Reilly had the political reporter Emily Shire on to discuss it, and she said it was unfair for Trump to go after Bill Clinton because he is family, not the candidate. And O'Reilly just ignored her, then he said it was ok for Trump to go after Bill if Hillary plays the woman card.

Which is ridiculous, and just another example of the bias and hypocrisy from O'Reilly, he has two sets of rules, one for Republicans and one for Democrats. He is a massive hypocrite and a biased right-wing hack who is as biased as Limbaugh, Coulter, or Hannity.

Remember This When The November Presidential Election Is Over
By: Steve - May 19, 2016 - 11:30am

Wednesday night on May 18th, 2016 Bill O'Reilly said this:

"Trump only needs to gain 10% more of the womens vote to get into the White House."

I am not kidding, O'Reilly actually said that. Even though it is just laughable, because even if he did pull a miracle and gain 10% more of the womens vote by November, he would still lose the election.

Hillary Clinton is crushing Trump with Latinos, Blacks, Asians, and on and on. Trump is only winning white men, and that's it.

Trump is at 11% with Latinos, Romney got 27% of the Latino vote and he got killed by Obama 330 to 206. So Trump has no chance to win, zero. Remember this after the election when Hillary Clinton is thanking the voters for making her the next President.

And btw, as of right now www.270towin.com has Hillary Clinton with 320 electoral votes to 139 for Trump. It's not even close, Hillary is crushing Trump like a bug, and O'Reilly never reports any of this information.

Larry Sabato has it at 347 for Clinton to 191 for Trump.

And Nate Silver, the Presidential Election guru says Clinton has a 75% chance to beat Trump.

O'Reilly & MacCallum Once Again Promote Right-Wing Campus Reform
By: Steve - May 19, 2016 - 11:00am

This the 2nd time they have promoted the conservative group, without disclosing the fact that they are a known biased conservative group. They even stated that they look for bias on college campuses, and at least this time they said they sort of lean to the right.

Which is a lie, they do not just lean right, they are far-right and only look for liberal bias, they do not look for conservative bias. They even prove it on their website.

Here are two quotes from their resources page:

Activism Resources

Are you a conservative student activist looking to make a difference on your campus? If so then the Leadership Institute is here to help you.
Click here to see all the resources that the Leadership Institute's Campus Leadership Program has available for student activists.

And this:

Leftist Abuse and Bias Guide

Don't know where to start when identifying liberal bias on your campus? This guide contains a list of the most common biases that occur on college campuses to help inspire you.
Click here for the Leftist Abuses and Bias on Campus guidebook from the Leadership Institute's Campus Reform.

Campus Reform is a biased conservative group, and that is a fact. It's a group of conservative college kids who are trying to make colleges look bad by claiming there is massive liberal bias, while ignoring all the conservative bias, including groups like they have.

They are biased and anything they do is not objective, but O'Reilly never discloses any of this. He airs their biased reports as if they are a non-partisan group, when he knows that is not true. And it's just more proof O'Reilly is a dishonest and biased Republican by doing reports like this.

Media Figures Slam Megyn Kelly For Softball Trump Interview
By: Steve - May 19, 2016 - 10:00am

On May 17, Megyn Kelly interviewed presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump in a Fox Broadcast Network TV special called Megyn Kelly Presents. And boy was it ever a softball interview, almost everyone outside of Fox is slamming her for the fluff interview.

CNN's Bill Carter: "If It Had Been Any Softer, It Would Come On A Cone With A Swirl."

NY Times James Poniewozik: All Megyn Kelly "Threw Were Airballs."

NPR's Jessica Taylor: "Megyn Kelly Asking Donald Trump About His Twitter Habits As He Live Tweets This Pre-Recorded Interview. This. Election."

The Washington Free Beacon's David Rutz: "This Interview Is Useless Fluff. The Word 'Tweet' Has Been Uttered About 50 Times."'

Erik Wemple: "So Now Kelly Is Yukking It Up With Trump About His Hate-Tweeting? Am I Really Seeing This?" And "So This Is What Megyn Kelly Went To Trump Tower To Set Up?"

Washington Examiner's Jim Antle: "Pretty Cool To Be Able To Get Donald Trump To Star In A Commercial For Your Book."

Washington Examiner's T. Beckett Adams: "That Was It? This Was What They Hyped For Weeks?"

Allahpundit: "It Was Nice Of Trump To Help Kelly Monetize Those Months Of Nasty Attacks On Her."

Slate's Isacc Chotiner: “This Megyn Kelly Interview Of Trump Is So Bad And So Soft That If I Were Fox News I Would Worry About CNN Trying To Poach Her."

Republicans Own Investigator Debunks Entire Benghazi Witch Hunt On Hillary
By: Steve - May 19, 2016 - 9:00am

And of course Bill O'Reilly has not said one word about this story, because he is nothing but a right-wing hack who supports the Republican lies about Benghazi.

Did you know that the Republicans are still investigating the 2012 Benghazi attacks, four years after it happened. I could say I'm shocked, but I'm not, and I predicted they would go to great lengths to keep this nonsense going until 2016, hoping to use it against Hillary Clinton before the election.

Even a year and a half ago when a Republican-led investigation concluded that there was no wrongdoing - GOP leaders simply ordered another investigation.

This, of course, led to the now infamous 11-hour grilling Clinton withstood last October where all Republicans really did was make her look very presidential. Even many within the conservative media said Clinton walked away from that stunt looking stronger than ever.

Then I was stunned (Not!) when Republicans announced last year that they didn't expect to release their findings until sometime around the 2016 presidential election. I'm sure nobody saw that coming, except ummmm, everyone.

Every rational person in the country has known from the beginning that this Benghazi propaganda coming from Republicans has been nothing but their way to try to hurt Clinton's chances in 2016.

Well, another bombshell came out on Monday when it was reported that former three-star Lt. Gen. Dana K. Chipman, who was specifically picked by Republicans to investigate this, concluded that there was nothing that could have been done differently to have changed or altered the outcome of the attack.

As reported by Right Wing Watch:
While interviewing former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta in January, the then-chief counsel acknowledged, "I think you ordered exactly the right forces to move out and to head toward a position where they could reinforce what was occurring in Benghazi or in Tripoli or elsewhere in the region. And, sir, I don't disagree with the actions you took, the recommendations you made, and the decisions you directed."

Later in the interview he told Panetta, "And again, sir, I don't mean to suggest that anything could have been done differently to affect the outcome in Benghazi, and I think you would agree with that."
This should not really be news considering every single investigation that's been conducted on Benghazi has essentially concluded the same exact thing.

The question I have is when do we launch an investigation into the Republican party over this complete and total waste of taxpayer money?

They have literally wasted millions of dollars on what's been nothing more than a very elaborate political stunt aimed at trying to slander the person who most people believed is going to be the Democratic nominee for president in 2016.

Not only that, but Republicans have blatantly exploited and politicized this tragedy and the deaths of these people, all for political purposes.

While I'm sure it won't happen, I really do believe that once this circus is wrapped up there needs to be an investigation into the GOP and everything that went into wasting so much time and money exploiting a deadly tragedy all for the sake of a petty, partisan political witch hunt.



Hot Links

O'Reilly Loses Custody Of His Kids After Choking Wife

Conclusive Proof Bill O'Reilly Is Biased In Favor Of Republicans

O'Reilly Dishonest About Publishers Weekly Not Reviewing Killing Reagan

Bill O'Reilly Proves He Is A Lying Right-Wing Idiot Once Again

O'Reilly Wrong About The Constitution & Obama's Power

4 Fox Hosts Slam O'Reilly Over His Ebola Reporting

Historians & The Patton Family Rip O'Reilly's New Patton Book

Jon Stewart Slams Fox For Criticizing President While At War

Facts On The Economy Bill O'Reily Is Totally Ignoring

Under Bush O'Reilly & Fox News Did Not Blame Him For Beheadings

Study Finds Fox News Only Tells the Truth 18% of the Time

More Republican Corruption O'Reilly Has Ignored

Jon Stewart Destroys O'Reilly & Fox For Ferguson Shooting Bias

O'Reilly Caught Lying About ISIS Threat & Juan Williams

NY Times Charles Blow Says Bill O'Reilly Is The Race Hustler

Homeland Security Shows Gutfeld & Baker Are Liars

More Republican Corruption O'Reilly Has Ignored

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Cost Of Obamacare

Bill O'Reilly Is Lying To You About Obamacare

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Electic Car Company Success

The Most Annoying Celebs Who Should Go Away

Bias Alert: O'Reilly Spins Presidential Election Media Study

O'Reilly & Fox Still Ignoring GOP Voter Registration Fraud Story

Biased O'Reilly Tells Romney To Call Obama A Socialist

O'Reilly Slams Obama With Dishonest Tip Of The Day

O'Reilly & Brit Hume Spin And Lie For Mitt Romney

Fox Promotes Ridiculous Study Of Doctors & Obamacare

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Media & Obama

Low Gas Prices Shut O'Reilly & The Repiblicans Up Fast

I Am Waiting For The O'Reilly Health Care Bill Apology

More Proof O'Reilly Is Wrong About The Media

O'Reilly Ignores MRC Calling For Sharpton Firing

Gallup Poll Proves O'Reilly Wrong On The Deficit

O'Reilly & Fox Lie That Obama To Blame For High Gas Prices

Scientist Group Slams Celebs Like Snooki & O'Reilly

More Proof O'Reilly Is Wrong About America

O'Reilly & Ingraham Lied About Planned Parenthood (Again)

Fox Unemployment Chart Shows Their Right-Wing Bias

U.S. Troops Burn A Box Of O'Reilly's Books

Kelly & O'Reilly Make Up Another Green Energy Scandal

O'Reilly Ignoring All The Stock Market Increases

O'Reilly Flat Out LIED About The Debt Obama Added

O'Reilly Caught Doctoring Florida Mans E-Mail

O'Reilly Ignored Michele Bachmann Church Scandal

O'Reilly & Morris Lied About The Debt Polls

O'Reilly Hypocrisy On The West/Schultz Story

The Truth About Those Bush Tax Cuts

Number Of Tea Party Events Down 50 Percent

NWLC Says O'Reilly Statement Made Up & Offensive

Video Proof O'Reilly Is A Right-Wing Hack

O'Reilly Gets It Totally Wrong On Norway Terrorist

Norway Terrorist Info O'Reilly Ignored

O'Reilly Ignoring Ensign/Coburn Hush Money Scandal

O'Reilly Calls Obama Health Care Waivers A Scam

O'Reilly Complains About Losing In His Own Poll

O'Reilly Ignores Republican Hypocrisy On Judicial Filibusters

O'Reilly Ignoring Republican Unpopularity

O'Reilly Tells GOP How To Beat Obama With Scare Tactics

O'Reilly & Fox Are Lying To You About The Debt

O'Reilly Spins The 2008 Presidential Media Study

Important Tax Information Bill O'Reilly Has Ignored

O'Reilly Ignored McCain Op-Ed On Bin Laden

O'Reilly Scrubs Website & Podcast Of False Obama Claims

O'Reilly Ignored DOJ Black Panther Report

O'Reilly Still Ignoring Wisconsin Judge's Order Story

O'Reilly Ignored Jobs & Unemployment Report

Fox News Town Hall Protester Hypocrisy & Double Standards

O'Reilly & Varney Speculate About Oil Prices

O'Reilly Spins The Quinnipiac Temperature Poll

O'Reilly Proves How Stupid He Is Again

How O'Reilly Puts Out Right-Wing Propaganda

Fox News Insider Admits They Make Things Up

Luntz Admits Fox Has Anti-Obama Focus Groups

Reagan SG Says Health Care Bill Constitutional

O'Reilly Ignores Gore Answer To His Question

O'Reilly Wonders How The Moon Got There

More Republican Hate & Racism O'Reilly Has Ignored

Another Poll O'Reilly Has Totally Ignored

O'Reilly Thinks We Are Still In A Recession

O'Reilly's Nazi Comment Defense Was Laughable

Fox News The Least Trusted Cable News Network

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Media (Again)

O'Reilly Claims Estate Tax A Seizure Of Property

O'Reilly Called Bernie Sanders A Loon

Bloomberg Tax Cut Poll Proves O'Reilly Was Lying

O'Reilly Ignored Positive DADT Study & Story

O'Reilly & Fox Ignore Judge Being A 9-11 Truther

More Real News O'Reilly Has Ignored

More Proof O'Reilly Spins The Obama Job Ratings

O'Reilly Got The Ireland Economic Crisis Wrong

O'Reilly Ignored The Tom Delay Conviction Story

Women Of America: You Need To Read This

Conclusive Proof O'Reilly Is Dishonest & Crazy

O'Reilly Nazi Comparison Hypocrisy

O'Reilly Ignores New Poll While Promoting Paladino

Andrew Sullivan Called O'Reilly A Dishonest Propagandist

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Nevada RCP Senate Poll

O'Reilly Ignored Right-Wing Abortion Bomber Terrorism Story

Fox & O'Reilly Ignored Friday Pro-Mosque NY Rally

O'Reilly Busted For Health Insurance Premium Lies

Most Factor Gear Made in Vietnam And China

O'Reilly Caught Lying About His Ratings Again

O'Reilly Busted For 1st Time Retraction Lie

The Bill O'Reilly Non-Apology Shirley Sherrod Apology

O'Reilly & The Right Are Racist Idiots

O'Reilly Ignored Tea Party Express Racism Story

O'Reilly Compares Gay People To Al-Qaeda

Proof O'Reilly Spins The Obama Job Rating Polls

O'Reilly Ignored Mark Kirk Military Award Lie Story

Where Are The Sedition Charges Now O'Reilly

O'Reilly Caught In A Massive Lie About Jail Time

O'Reilly Running Ads For Emergency Food Supply

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Tea Party Militia Links

O'Reilly Caught Spinning Gallup Tea Party Poll

O'Reilly Ignored Harris Poll Showing Republicans Are Stupid

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Health Reform Bill Tax

O'Reilly Caught Lying About NEJM Health Care Survey

O'Reilly Caught Lying About His Ratings Again

The Truth About Ratings For News Shows

Gallup Poll Proves O'Reilly Is A Right-Wing Spin Doctor

O'Reilly Spinning Fox News Most Trusted Poll

Fox News Did Not Air Hope For Haiti Telethon

O'Reilly Caught Spinning Obama Terrorism Polls

O'Reilly Caught Lying About House Ethics Committee

O'Reilly Caught Lying About His Ratings Increase

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Limbaugh Racism

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Religious Festival

O'Reilly Caught Red Handed Lying About CNN

O'Reilly Caught Violating Journalistic Standards Again

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The ACLU & Racial Profiling

More Proof O'Reilly & FOX News Do Not Tell The Truth

O'Reilly Called Bruce Springsteen Un-American & Un-Patriotic

The Bill O'Reilly Senate Torture Report Countdown Clock

O'Reilly Caught Lying About The Obama Approval Numbers

FOX News Caught Lying About Obama Budget

O'Reilly Busted For Helping GOP Smear Pelosi

O'Reilly Caught Lying About Obama Earmark Promise

Military.com Report Proves O'Reilly Wrong About Homeless Vets

O'Reilly Places 7th in 2008 Wingnut of The Year Award

O'Reilly Denys Reality About Abstinence Only Programs




Proof The O'Reilly Factor is Biased Against Barack Obama
O'Reilly said he is a non-partisan Independent, who is fair to both sides, and that he has been fair to Barack Obama. To check that claim I did a 3 month study of the Factor, it started on August 1st, 2008, and ran until October 31st, 2008. I watched the Factor every night and counted the negative and positive comments for Obama and McCain.

Visit the web page I set up, and you will see the stunning bias from O'Reilly and his mostly Republican guests against Barack Obama. Then you will see there is no doubt Bill O'Reilly is a dishonest and biased Conservative. This study is conclusive proof that O'Reilly is in the tank for John McCain.

Visit The Web Page Below to See The 3 Month Factor Bias Study:

www.oreilly-sucks.com/3mbiasnumbers.htm

Proof O'Reilly Lied About The Balance on His Show
O'Reilly claims the factor is balanced, and that he personally makes sure every week he has an equal number of Republican and Democrat guests. This is a bold faced lie, and I can prove it. I put together a web page that shows the guest list from the factor for the last 2 weeks. Read it and you will see with your own eyes that Bill O'Reilly is lying when he says the factor is balanced.

And remember that we are 3 weeks before a major Presidential election, or the Republican bias numbers would be worse than it is normally. O'Reilly is actually having more Democrats on than he usually does, and the balance is still not even close. If we were not so close to an election it would be a lot worse.

Visit The Web Page Below to See The Lies About The Factor Balance:

www.oreilly-sucks.com/oreillybalanced.htm

O'Reilly Sucks Investigation: Dishonesty, Deception, And Bias By Bill O'Reilly
O'Reilly claims there are no Republicans or Conservative groups that rival George Soros. O'Reilly said the top three conservative tax-exempt foundations are totally dwarfed by Soros and the radical Ford Foundation. And that they have 15 times more the assets. George Soros net worth is $8.5 billion, the Ford Foundation has a net worth of $13 billion. But the seven billionaires who donate to Newt Gingrich and other right-wing causes have a combined net worth of $34.8 billion dollars.

Somehow O'Reilly claims that Soros and the Ford Foundation have 15 times more the assets than anyone on the right. When the seven billionaires alone who give money to Newt, have roughly $14 billion more than Soros and the Ford Foundation combined.

Visit the web page below to see the massive money O'Reilly has ignored from the right:

www.oreilly-sucks.com/oreilly-investigation.htm

(( Right-Wing Hate Speech Ignored by Bill O'Reilly ))
O'Reilly claims there is no hate on the right, that it's all on the left. But the way he defines hate is ridiculous, if a liberal blog or website writes an article that criticizes George W. Bush (or any Republican) O'Reilly calls it hate. When it's not hate, it's reporting the facts, there is no hate. A great example is when websites like oreilly-sucks.com, mediamatters.org, etc. criticize O'Reilly he calls it hate, and says they are hate groups who lie about him.

That is a lie, it is not hate, and they are not hate websites. There is real hate on the internet, but O'Reilly does not report it, because most of it is from the right. I have documented this hate in my blog and on a web page, all of it was ignored by Bill O'Reilly, and it was never reported on the Factor.

Visit the web page below to see the massive right-wing hate O'Reilly has ignored:

www.oreilly-sucks.com/right-wing-hate.htm


www.oreilly-sucks.com Privacy Policy

Copyright 2001 - 2014


eXTReMe Tracker