A Look Back on O’Reilly’s Interview with the President

O & O InterviewThe more I think about it the more I figure that Bill O’Reilly should have passed on the opportunity to interview President Obama on Super Bowl Sunday.  It was a dog and pony show we could have done without.

I understand why Bill did the interview and what he got out of doing it.  First, there’s ego, no small point with O’Reilly or any other TV big star.  Bill got to go one-on-one with the most powerful man in the world – on Super Bowl Sunday no less.  The president wasn’t behind a podium emblazoned with the seal of his office.  They sat on similar chairs facing each other and actually looked like equals, even though everyone knows they’re not.

And the audience was huge.  More than 100 million people tuned in to watch the game and while the number who watched the interview (two hours before kickoff) wasn’t as large, it was large enough.  So millions and millions of Americans who don’t normally watch Fox, got to see the network’s biggest star.  And who knows – maybe some of them would become converts.

That’s what Bill and Fox got out of the interview.

The president got something out of it too.  First, he showed his base that he could sit down with Big Bad Bill and come out of it without a scratch.  He got to take his usual shots at Fox, which his base also likes.  He got to put doubt about Fox’s legitimacy in the minds of everyone whose minds weren’t already made up.  And he came off looking like a regular guy — sitting there, smiling, tieless.  All that was missing was the beer and chips.

The problem is no news came out of the interview.  And it gave the president the opportunity to give his side of the story, virtually unchallenged.  That’s not O’Reilly’s fault.  It’s a 10-minute interview.  Live.  You can only interrupt the President of the United States so many times.  And in the end, the president can say whatever he wants.

And he did.

On the matter of the IRS targeting conservative opponents of the president, Mr. Obama said there was “not even a smidgeon of corruption” in that supposed scandal.

Maybe.  But then why did Lois Lerner, the IRS employee who was at the center of the controversy, exercise her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination during a House hearing on the scandal?  Not a “smidgeon of corruption” and she’s afraid of incriminating herself?   Really?

On Benghazi, O’Reilly asked if Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, who had just learned that the attack in Benghazi was the work of terrorists, passed that information along to the president.  The president dodged a direct answer, so we still don’t know why Susan Rice went on all those Sunday news programs to tell a story about an anti-Muslim video causing the trouble that led to the deaths of four Americans.  We still don’t know why the president and others on his team misled the American people for several weeks about how a supposedly spontaneous riot got out of hand.  The president told his version of events.  No reporter can force anyone, let alone the president, to answer a question he doesn’t want to answer.  And eventually, it was time to move on to the next subject.

In other parts of the interview, Mr. Obama made clear that he wanted to look forward – not back.  Looking back is something O’Reilly and Fox could do.  “I try to focus not on the fumbles, but on the next play,” the president told the anchorman.

As I say, the president got what he needed and Bill got what he needed.  And the rest of us didn’t get much.

Mr. Obama went after Bill and Fox twice during the interview, saying a reason people care about Benghazi and the IRS is because, as the president put it, ”these kinds of things keep on surfacing, in part because you and your TV station will promote them.”

That’s when Bill should have taken his notes and thrown them in the air.  (That would have been a very nice TV moment.) He should have looked the president in the eye and said:

Mr. President, this is the second time during this brief interview that you’ve gone after Fox News.  So let’s set the record straight:  Fox News isn’t responsible for the disastrous rollout of ObamaCare.  Fox News isn’t the cause of the lax security in Benghazi that contributed to the four American deaths.  Fox News didn’t tell the IRS to target your political enemies.  You and your administration are responsible for all of those things. So, Mr. President, if you have any specific complaints about Fox News coverage of these matters, this would be a good time to share those complaints with the American people.”

Bill told me that there’s value in asking questions even if the president doesn’t really answer them.  The people watching can see what’s going on, he said. There’s some truth to that.  But I still think there’s not enough upside for any journalist to do the interview.  Ten minutes, live, plays into the president’s hands.  It’s too easy to run out the clock.  And if the reporter jumps in too many times, he looks disrespectful.

Still the interview was a little more interesting than the actual Super Bowl game … but not nearly as entertaining as the Bruno Mars halftime show.  But then, it’s easy to be a Monday morning quarterback.

 

 

 

Bernie's Next Column.

Enter your email and find out first.

  • Rose

    O’Reilly is brave to show respect for the president to an audience of bloodthirsty racists and ditto heads.

  • http://theromancatholicvote.com/ catholicvoter

    I don’t know why anyone familiar with Obama even bothered to watch the interview. Obama seems practically incapable of telling the truth, so why listen to what he has to say?

  • Joel Wischkaemper

    I don’t agree, but it speaks well for you that you do have your position. Denying all that he has stumbled on, and spinning the deeds in immigration to Bill O’ Reilly left a lot of people with a huge sense of worry.
    FairUS has a headline out today:

    FAIR’s Top Five on Immigration — Obama Cuts Fines for Businesses That Hire Illegal Aliens

    Whenever there is a statistic out there that the President doesn’t like, he changes the information. He cannot force the DHL to inflate his apprehension numbers, and so he has been moving the Enforcement section of the Immigration Yearbook all over the Cyber world. Finding table 33 in the Enforcement Section, which clearly tells us the number of apprehensions year by year, is very difficult, and the moment I find it and use it, for example, the information is moved again. I don’t see any use at all in confronting the President on this matter, or any other in fact. We will not wind up with the truth, but we will wind up with a warm fuzzy blanket that blows away with correct information.

    Mr. O’Reilly? Looking at the issues in the News World, (so very many) maybe O’Reilly doesn’t have time to look. Maybe all the contentions of the four main Immigrant Issues Sites is wrong. Maybe though, Mr. O’Reilly doesn’t feel that is as critical as other points. It didn’t come out well for Mr. O’Reilly at all in my opinion, and did come out very well for Mr. Obama. I am afraid of Mr. Obama.. I didn’t like the interview at all.

    • legal eagle

      It would appear that your dislike of Obama has affected your common sense….”I am afraid of Obama” says it all….How sad…

  • FreedomReigns

    Bernie, your pal, Bill has OD’ed on Obama’s Kool-Aid. The Factor is in decline and time for Billy to ride off in the sunset and let Megan Kelly’s show expand to cover his time slot too. Look at it this way, maybe Obama will make Bill an Ambassador to Ireland.

  • SemperFi1946

    The idea that anyone will ever get Obama to admit to any incompetence, or to take responsibility or be held accountable – is beyond naive.

  • Rose

    I didn’t see the interview, but I am sure Bill looked like a big ole falafel sitting across from the debonair Obama. Ha! As for Fox News, it has never laid a glove on Obama and looks more rabid and crazed for all the trying.

    • SemperFi1946

      So you are proud of 5 years of economic stagnation the worst worker participation rate since 1978, 32% increase in welfare, 47% increase in foodstamps, 6.5 Trillion dollars in new debt with nothing to show for it, more people in poverty than ever before, EVERYTHING costing much more than 2009, especially gasoline, food and utilities – and this is something to be proud of?

      • Joel Wischkaemper

        I think Rose was suggesting Mr. O’Reilly was incompetent in his efforts. I agree with your points but as the United States continues to lose heavy industry to foreign countries, (I don’t see a way to stop the exodus at the wage level this country is at) How exactly does the United States produce an automobile engine that is inferior to others auto engines, and expect to sell it for more money?

        For me.. the President either faces the reality of the Economic United States or we continue the spiral down. A problem there is that this President seems thoroughly involved with those very forces who want the pretense continued.
        Is Obama’s conduct the reason those numbers are as they are? Is the social system/economic system of the United States the reason those numbers are as they are?

  • bbf

    Please please please.. I am so sick of O’Reilly still talking about his interview with Obama. ENOUGH ALREADY. Hasn’t it been over 10 days? Time to stop trying to milk it. PLEASE. I am at the point where I just change the channel when he starts talking about his interview. Does anyone besides him really care?

  • wildjew

    Bernie, re: your segmenet with Bill O’Reilly last night (Feb 10, 2014), “Bill’s demeanor with President Obama” I wanted to make a point that should be inferred from your interview, something you may or may not agree with:

    O’Reilly says: So (Rep. Nancy) Pelosi picks up the mantra, “Oh I’m not going to talk to O’Reilly because of what he did to Obama…” Now this is what I think is cheap, very, very cheap, and I wanted to get your opinion on it.

    Goldberg: “I think Pelosi and Geraldo are reading out of the same book here. They see this man as somebody special, not a regular politician, not even a
    regular president. He can’t be interrupted. He can’t be questioned the
    way you questioned him. They are used to a docile press core that
    goes…look I didn’t write A Slobbering Love Affair for nothing….”

    What you inferred (indicated or should have indicated), Pelosi and Geraldo are reading out of Obama’s book. Obama sees himself as somebody special, not a regular politician, not even a regular president. He can’t be interrupted. He can’t be asked hard questions. It cheapens, minimizes, strips him of his majesty.

    • legal eagle

      How do you wake up every day being so bitter and hateful? Must be a sad way to live one’s life…

      • wildjew

        What I wrote just above is calm and dispassionate. You call the truth bitter and hateful because of your left-leaning worldview.
        I see a dangerous charlatan in the White House that foolish Americans elected and then re-elected. I see a political party (my party) that does not appear to have the ability or the will to stop him. That to me is very frustrating. What is sad is what Obama is doing to this country.

      • Jeff Webb

        Your old white fellow cultists who also long for the good old days tell you to post that? Did they tell you to take your meds yet?

      • Shane

        Another Obamabot heard from. You clowns should realize that Obama is NOT the messiah.

      • Joel Wischkaemper

        Unless you support your contentions, all you have done is sling a little mud. Obama has a huge number of failures at this point. Maybe YOU should get off that weed for a couple of years.

  • stmichrick

    President Obama has everything to gain by talking to OReilly. He can wait for O’Reilly to be disrespectful and gain pointswith his base, or he can just repeat his version of ‘the facts’ once again and gain points with his base. Win-win.
    Obama’s lies are different than Nixon’s or Clinton’s, who lied to cover for shenanigans committed by themselves or others. Embarassing things, but made worse by lying and getting caught.
    Obama’s lies are more sinister. They are based on a premise that the country may not be ready for their progressivism policies (“fundamental transformation”) but are going to get them anyway because we will couch them in moderate language and enough omission in order to get them passed by Congress.
    Sure, people will be upset when they are found out. At that point it will be too late as the dollars will be flowing and the bureaucratic enforcers will be in place.

    • legal eagle

      It’s called advocacy….Should the POTUS not advocate for his policies? That’s why he was elected….Want him to advocate that we go back to the 50′s like most O’Reilly and Goldberg followers would prefer?

      • stmichrick

        Legal; knowingly telling a falsehood is called lying. Obama knew he was re-defining health insurance on a comprehensive basis. So when many people would lose their existing policy or provider network as a result, he can only say he was either incredibly stupid or he misled them (lied). He chose to characterize it as the latter.

        • legal eagle

          Legally there is no such thing as “lying”….get a clue..

          • Jeff Webb

            And yet, lying does exist, and BO is a helluva liar. What’s your point?

          • legal eagle

            Most people stop calling others liars at about age 10…Sounds like you are intellectually stifled…

          • dhouse55

            The fact that one more liberal lawyer can’t stomach being called a liar, nor survive on a world where his Jerkoff excuse for a president Is regularly a liar, a fraud, never mind incompetent is not at all surprising. Guess “you did not have sex with that woman”, either, Did you? Moron.

          • Jeff Webb

            >>Most people stop calling others liars at about age 10…<>Sounds like you are intellectually stifled…<<

            Spoken like a bitter, old, white, left-wing cultist who needs his meds and misses the good old days.

          • Joel Wischkaemper

            Calling anyone a liar is drawing the line in the sand. If you are an elected official, you either don’t go there, or take a hike.

          • stmichrick

            So you would not call Richard Nixon a liar? I mean after you were age 10?

          • legal eagle

            I’d call Nixon a criminal….

          • stmichrick

            He wasn’t convicted of any crime. Obama might be.

          • legal eagle

            What crime might that be Mr. District Attorney?…LOL

          • stmichrick

            Violating his oath of office.

          • legal eagle

            Crime refers to violation of a federal statute….You know there are no crimes… but I doubt you care…

          • stmichrick

            I think lying under oath is called perjury. And I’m sure that officials who did not lie UNDER OATH like Richard Nixon are shameful because they lied to the American people. So, to you, who is worse, Nixon or Obama?

          • legal eagle

            Nixon was shameful? You know that how?

      • Jeff Webb

        Typical dismissive comment–you’re just a bitter, old, white left-wing cultist who should take his meds.

      • Joel Wischkaemper

        Of course.. and then he asks Congress and the people if they will support his policies. At this point, you either see the BIG problems, or he is very guilty of two items:
        1. He jiggers numbers as they come out of the bean counters.
        2. He forces his policy rather than proposes his policy.

        • legal eagle

          Is that like Will Smith’s “Get Jiggy With It”? LOL

      • stmichrick

        ‘Advocacy’ means avoid mentioning that everyone’s health insurance policy will be re-defined to meet a government standard, which includes a new cost and provider network?
        Nice diversion tactic, legal eagle!

        • legal eagle

          “Advocacy” also means that stating that Iraq had WMD’s and nuclear weapons was a reason for invading the country…

          • stmichrick

            So as an informed person you’re telling me that Bush knew there were no WMDs and invaded because….
            …and thought it would be good to lie, knowing that they would not find any. Hmmmm.
            You need to read more or give up on the hallucinogens.

          • legal eagle

            I am telling you that Bush did not know for sure and committed U.S. ground troops to a war without knowing whether his rationale for an invasion was,in fact, true.
            Do you believe the POTUS should commit the country to a war without having certainty of the facts?

          • stmichrick

            But Hillary and Bill Clinton, John Kerry and a host of others thought it was OK…
            They all thought they had the facts, and after 9/11 were not all that cocky about ignoring enemies like Saddam Hussein who had used them already. Sounds reasonable to me. Guess they should have called you.

          • legal eagle

            Hillary and Kerry backed the president…Bush made the decision….Would you argue that Barry Goldwater was responsible for the Vietnam War because he voted for the Gulf of Tonkin resolution?

          • legal eagle

            Sounds reasonable to you but not to the parents of all the dead and wounded caused by Bush’s poor decision.

          • Joel Wischkaemper

            No one knew they were there with a certainty. Saddam wanted everyone to believe they were there with a certainty and he led the world to believe.. they were there. He told us .. it would be the mother of all battles, and of course, he did not have the weapons he suggested he had.. he wanted everyone to believe he had them, and would use them.
            It sort of worked: everyone believed he had most of them and would use them. Some of the weapons of mass destruction that he did have, were not used on the co-coalition. A wise decision. But we knew he had them.. he used them on his own people.
            With the no-fly zone in effect, the West was in a very ugly position. We got ourselves out of that tar ball with the war, and I most sincerely hope we never get close to such a thing as the no fly zone again.

    • bbf

      Wait for O’Reilly to be disrespectful? Obama has been disrespectful to the whole nation. How can anyone be respectful to Obama?

    • Joel Wischkaemper

      President Obama has everything to gain by talking to OReilly. He can
      wait for O’Reilly to be disrespectful and gain points with his base, or
      he can just repeat his version of ‘the facts’ once again and gain points
      with his base. Win-win.
      —————————————–
      I have immigration articles back to 1990. Obama (and Bush) have jiggered the numbers a dozen times. He wants (they want).. “A different way of looking at it”. I cannot think of a time or circumstance when changing numbers is a moral position. I do think changing the numbers means ‘the facts’ can be manipulated endlessly. Further, and as important at this point, I believe that is intensely disrespectful of the American People. Does Obama know it is happening? I am sure he does. NOW…respect me please.. put him on a polygraph, or force the exposure of manipulative policy to which the changing of the facts was supportive and boy howdy.. he did do that.

      • stmichrick

        You’re right Joel. Next time I would like to see O’Reilly wheel out a polygraph and hook Him up!

  • Wheels55

    I agree 100%. If Bill was going to press hard on these issues, he would have had to be disrespectful and the President would not have wanted to sit with Bill and certainly would not do so again. So, it was a ratings show – not news. I did not learn anything I didn’t already know. I think that is what an interview like this should have produced – new insight. It didn’t.
    Bill, next year set up the interview and them cancel by saying the President has not been honest in the past interviews.

    • legal eagle

      Do you really think that Obama gives a crap about a circus act like Bill O’Reilly? Watching O’Reilly is like watching interviews on WWE wrestling….

      • stmichrick

        Legal; so what you’re saying is that Obama was stupid to talk to O’Reilly?

        • legal eagle

          Not at all…He did several interviews that week including one with Jake Tapper on CNN….O’Reilly is not a journalist…He is an opinion guy who has made an interview with the POTUS about himself for self promotion purposes…
          O’Reilly’s show is the equivalent of watching WWE wrestling…fake but sometimes interesting..

          • Joel Wischkaemper

            Boy that makes a huge amount of sense.

            Ahhh…Ahhhh if the President didn’t know who O’Reilly was, or his head was in the sand, or he had not fibbed about his administration from the get go on the interview, it would make a huge amount of sense.

          • legal eagle

            Can you tell me the name of a President who could not be accused of lying? Was Bush a liar? How about Reagan? How about Poppy Bush?
            What’s your point?

        • legal eagle

          Not at all….The POTUS can do an interview with anyone he pleases….I don’t remember Bush sitting down for an interview with Chris Mathews…do you?

          • stmichrick

            He invited Chris Matthews to the WH Christmas Party. Dumb.

          • legal eagle

            I asked you if Bush agreed to an interview with Chris Mathews and you respond by saying Mathews was invited to a WH Xmas party? I rest my case…

          • stmichrick

            Inviting him to the WH Christmas Party was the least he could do, decent fellow that W is. There is no reason for a President to go on MSNBC. Nobody watches it. Ask Obama.

      • Joel Wischkaemper

        Ah HAH… THAT is why so many people in the administration, including the President, have tried to be his snuggle buddy and change his approch, or, ..censor Mr. O’Reilly.

        • legal eagle

          Censor Bill O’Reilly? Who is trying to do that?

      • stmichrick

        Watching Obama and Sebelius pitch the Affordable Care Act is like watching a medicine show.

    • bbf

      Found out last week that all of the questions were submitted in advance. The whole thing was a farce,.

      • Sheila Warner

        You are incorrect. The President did not have the questions in advance. After the interview was over, he signed Bill’s notes so that they could be auctioned off to raise money for the Fisher House, which helps families of wounded troops travel to be with their wounded loved ones. Bill never submits his questions in advance for anyone. Whoever told you differently, or wherever you read it, the information was not correct.

        • legal eagle

          Shelia,
          No news organization submits questions in advance nor are they asked to…Can you imagine the media storm if the WH demanded advanced knowledge of the questions?

    • legal eagle

      As Fox News does not have the Super Bowl next year it will be a little difficult for O’Reilly to do that….Valerie Jarett was on O’Reilly last night and O’Reilly told her that FLOTUS should come on his show and tell black teenaged girls not to have sex….Don’t think she’ll be on any time soon….LMFAO

  • LHS

    Well put, Bernie. The people that actually pay attention and are honest with themselves saw the prez weasel out of any real answers and his hiding of all the corruption in his administration, whether it’s a “smidgen” or not. The blind lemmings that voted for him twice only saw O’Reilly “bullying” him.
    This mentality is dangerous and a real challenge to counter, but the light must continue to be shine on the crooks. Because that’s what they are. This didn’t stop with Nixon.

    • LHS

      Excuse me. “shone”.

      • Joel Wischkaemper

        I still think the President had prior knowledge of the questions and some of what we saw was show.

        • legal eagle

          and you know that how?

          • Joel Wischkaemper

            I said I think. You are asking me how I know.. I have not claimed to know.

            I ‘think’ due to the way the questions were answer. I think due to the way Obama responded.

            My goodness.. and just think, you are a legal eagle?

          • legal eagle

            Aren’t you interested to see whether what you’re saying is factual? Don’t you care if your assumption is correct?

          • Joel Wischkaemper

            Suspecting.. thinking, and knowing, are two different concepts. I would love to know if Obama had the General Areas he would be speaking to, but I will never know, and neither will you. Stop trying to make a silk purse out of a sows’ ear. You made a stupid statement, and you are trying hard to make it acceptable. I will not respond to you again.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            >>Aren’t you interested to see whether what you’re saying is factual? Don’t you care if your assumption is correct?

            If only you’d ask this question in the mirror from time to time. lol.

  • wildjew

    Bernie, let me quote Bill O’Reilly from his segment last night: “Feb 06, 2014, Why President Obama doesn’t believe Benghazi is important.”

    O’Reilly begins by saying, “The far right (read: the loons, the ‘birthers’, the Obama-haters, etc.) is making a HUGE mistake thinking President Obama is actively trying to harm the nation. HE IS NOT. His overriding concern can be summed up in two words: social justice. It all comes back to that. The president sincerely believes the deck is stacked against minority Americans and many of the working poor people….”

    Does O’Reilly know what is in Obama’s heart? Here is the problem I have with this exculpating rationale, beyond the question whether Bill O’Reilly knows what is going on in the hearts of men.

    There is this saying (quoting directly from Wikipedia): ‘Ignorantia juris non excusat (Latin for “ignorance of the law does not excuse” or “ignorance of the law excuses no one”) is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because he or she was unaware of its content’.

    This principle is also contained in the Jewish Bible, the Torah. I think the same applies to a president who is greatly harming ‘his’ country. Obama’s motives, in the “overall scheme of things” are not as important as the destruction he has brought and is bringing upon this country.

    • nkqx57a

      Right you are wildjew…Believe Bill is miss reading Obama’s motives…that is too, fundamentally change America. But that change is fundamentally killing America.

      Obama isn’t ignorant of the law…he knows very well that he is not being TRUE to the “spirit of the law”…which by legal standards is not the same as breaking the law and Obama knows it all to well.

      What Obama has done and continues to do, NO other President has ever done, because no other President ever wanted to fundamentally change America. They knew that Presidents don’t change America, “We the People” do.

      • bbf

        Speaking of what no other president has done…targeting an American citizen and his son for assassination. Why the silence of the so-called liberals?

        • Sheila Warner

          Again, where are you getting your information? The Left was outraged by the President’s use of drones, and especially when an American citizen was killed. There was bipartisan angst over that strike. The Libertarians, perceived to be conservatives, were the loudest voices, but there were plenty of libs who were upset, too.

      • Joel Wischkaemper

        Ignorantia juris non excusat……..

        I like the idea.. where do we apply it. Anyone who can read the ten commandments knows what “moral” behavior is, and pray not many need it explained. Senator Dick Durbin suggested it was morally correct to ignore the laws of the land, (on the books) and help the illegal aliens. Way to many people are loose and sloppy when they expect us to know the laws of the land when it comes to the income tax laws. The very minute any law, beyond the ten commandments, is put under the shelter of that saying up there, we are going the wrong, wrong way.

    • Drew Page

      I must agree. If Obama truly believed in “social justice”, it would be social justice for all. Where is the social justice in taking from people who worked for their money and giving it to those that won’t? Where is the social justice in a president continually lying to the people? Where is the social justice in imposing a health care system that that the vast majority of people in this country don’t want? Where is the social justice in policies designed to keep poor people dependent on government? Where is the social justice in blaming the ills of the poor on the wealthy?
      It’s very convenient to claim you are a proponent of social justice for only a certain segment of society. When those in the upper 10% of wage earners pay 70% of all federal income taxes and are told they aren’t paying their “fair share” and the lower 50% of all wage earners pay 2.3% of all income taxes, what is the “fair share” that those among the lower 50% of wage earners should pay. Is it social justice for those who pay no federal income taxes to get a “tax refund”?

  • Brad Ghorn

    The President’s primary talent is his ability to not answer questions that he does not want to answer. With issues like Benghazi and the IRS, he never answers any question. He usually gives the excuse that there is an ongoing investigation and so he cannot answer. After the investigation is over, he says the results are in and it is time to move on. He only provides talking points when answering questions. The President is one of the dullest interviews anyone can ever get.

    It is interesting the difference between someone like Christie and Obama. Christie has shown he will fire people for doing wrong. Obama has shown that he will never fire anyone and that he will often give promotions or bonuses to those who have demonstrated incompetence or corruption.

    • mansiseth

      christie was the ring leader so he will fire people to save his own big fat a@@

      • Brad Ghorn

        One could say that Obama is the ring leader and so he promotes wrongdoers to save his own ass.

      • Stimpy

        Ring leader of a traffic jam that affected how much of the country? Compare that to an administration that isn’t at all shy about unleashing the full force and resources of IRS, Treasury, OSHA, and FBI against a business woman who has the gall to start a conservative political action group? You and the liberal media have your heads up your collective big fat a@@.

    • Drew Page

      In the Obama administration they screw up, cover up and move up.

  • D Parri

    Mr. Goldberg, as of yet, we do not have a King. So, this is an interview that is as close to that as one can come here in America.

    The best that an interviewer can hope for is that the POTUS might open up slightly…or in the rare instance–be honest.

    Didn’t happen. But, Bill O did perform as expected and it was a generator of airtime filler that managed to traverse the networks with varying intensities.

    Unfortunately, but expected, there were no newsworthy revelations…just fodder for columnists, journalists, and pundits.

    • mansiseth

      did u see the sucking up bill o did when he interviewed george b. oooh the soft ball questions. i thought he was talking to a prek kid

      • Jeff Webb

        Save yourself some energy next time and just post “Squirrel!”

        • mansiseth

          have some original tag line. don’t be lazy

          • Phantom

            Use capitol letters to begin sentences. Don’t be so lazy.

  • John

    Amen!

  • Seattle Sam

    Richard Nixon to Bob Woodward: “These kinds of things keep on surfacing in part because you and your newspaper will promote them.”

    • Wheels55

      Good point. Just in case anyone thinks Obama has any originality to his routine. he doesn’t.

  • Paul Courtney

    Bernie: What is Lois Lerner afraid of? The Holder Justice Dep’t? She should be ok if she can avoid making an anti-Obama video.
    On another front, any one notice how easily the D’s glide from one lie to another? From its creation until couple days ago, the ACA was going to cause explosive job growth (video of Nancy Pelosi boasting of 4 mil. jobs, 400k right away is just one example of what they were all saying). CBO report was still rolling out printer when D’s “transitioned” to, “well, fewer hrs worked=freedom,” thereby admitting the “job growth” narrative was not merely a mistake, it was lie (another in string). Try to find video of Pelosi, Reid, Gibbs, any D, when ACA was passed, saying intent of law was to get a subsidy to people who want to cut their hours to qualify for subsidy. Certainly we can’t object to paying more so others can CHOOSE to pay less, can we?

    • Beawell12

      Hey, Doofus! You do understand the difference between employers reducing the # number of jobs available to workers and workers reducing the hours of their labor available to employers, right? It’s such an obvious distinction that even ill-informed right wing nut jobs such as yourself cannot avoid recognizing it.

      • Paul Courtney

        Your post attacks a talking point I don’t employ (namely, Obamacare cuts jobs); and my post specifies workers reducing hours by choice (which D’s would not discuss; D’s who knew it wouldn’t grow jobs even as they insisted it would), clearly I DO understand the difference and just as clearly you didn’t read my post. We can see you are a troll, an incompetent one to boot (so an authentic D- hey, you work for CMS?). Looks like you just picked a two-line rant from column b and mailed it in.

  • Auntie Willow

    Bill’s interview with the president was entirely predictable: entirely useless. We have heard enough from Mr. President, a man who has diminished the office he holds to such a point that many of us no longer recognize our own
    country. Bill O’Reilly set up the liberals for yet another media coup. Disgusting! BTW you are one of the main reasons I watch the O’Reilly Factor. I tell my husband, “too bad Bernie and I are both happily married, or I’d start chasing him”

    • mansiseth

      auntie that is democracy at work. if you like the country of segregation, gay bashng, ignoring science and embracing bible then u have to go may be to russia

      • YourMama

        Isn’t there a gay pride march you should be in?

        • mansiseth

          and u are going for a KKK meet what the F*$% is ur point.

      • Jeff Webb

        If that’s the best response to have to offer, then this site is way over your head, kiddo.

        • legal eagle

          I see your still working the room…responding with a snarky remark to anyone who does not worship at the altar of the angry old white guy, Bill O’Reilly…

          • Jeff Webb

            You’re just bitter that FNC came along and took away the liberal monopoly on the airwaves. It was so much better for you in the good old days, when your cult didn’t have all this pesky competition, wasn’t it? Maybe you should stop whining and take your meds.

  • Barbara

    Bernie, we should be straight, and you of all pundits are; Bill O’Really (intended) is a sell-out. His “being fair” is BS along with his egotistical puffy pontifications that show him to be all about himself. His constant interruptions of guests and other pundits when HE asks them questions are so annoying. Others do it, but he’s the worst. Viewers might really want to hear what someone else has to say besides his honor. You are one of them whom I want to hear when you are on his show. O’Really sometimes has something of substance to say, but the universe does not revolve around him. Thank you for pointing out his ego problem.

    • Stimpy

      O’Reilly also gets all parental when talking about decriminalization of marijuana. Bernie yes. Bill no. I too tune in hoping to see Bernie or Charles Krauthammer. Not much reason to watch Bill.

  • bbf

    I decided not to waste my time looking at Obama and O’Reilly show. I knew Obama would lie.,.and O’Reilly would mostly play suck up. I am so sick of his talking day after day after day..everyday this week about his stupid interview. From the excerpts that I have not been able to avoid..I am so glad i did not waste my time. Mr. Goldberg you say one “cannot interrupt the president too many times”. He has certainly interrupted the lives of thousands of men and women and hundreds of children with his increase use of drones in Africa and the Middle East. Mostly died from incineration. He also interrupted the lives of an American citizen and his son by targeting them for assassination. His support of NATO’s illegal invasion if Libya has reportedly interrupted the lives of 30,000 Libyan civilians dead. Do you respect him for this?

  • Florida Jim

    I wish O’Reily would have done as you suggest but that ends O’Reilly as a Presidential interviewer with Obama having 2 more years in office unless, my prayers oust him. Obama is very quick to distract, with Fox News as the problems, this time, and “no smidgeon of corruption in IRS” another blatant Obama lie as was the Benghazi comments on the planned attack. Having these notes in your head to pull out would have helped but Obama is a “slimy Chicago politician” as we have seen over and over. O’Reilly did what he could and showed many others watching what a “slimy Chicagoan” looks like. I am a Chicagoan so I know of what I speak.

  • Andrea Leo

    Mr, Goldberg, you were on the mark with everyone of your points. I found it sad that Bill looked like a ball of clay in the hands of an expert fabricator who has been crafting his skills since ……?….Do you know if Bill had to submit his questions before the interview, as is often the case?

  • brent kaufman

    I think that less important than the actual interview, is the backlash from all sides recognizing that he sat there and lied with a straight face to America. Jon Stewart mocked him, the NY Times called him out, and so on… That, alone, is worth a great deal.

    • tomwinfield77

      You are right …

    • Wheels55

      At this point, I don’t think Obama cares that people see him telling lie after lie. He got re-elected. It’s just a walk in the park for him from now on.

      • brent kaufman

        Obama may not care because he is smug and over confident. But the people do care and that is evident in the fact that even his supporters are calling him out after his lies in the interview. Of course, die-hard believers will stand by their man no matter what, but the independents and those who make an effort to be more intellectually honest are starting to open their eyes, or take off their rose colored glasses (depending on your choice of metaphors).

  • Sheila Warner

    I thought it was a shame that Bill took the bait about “you and your news station” (hello! It’s the number one rated news CHANNEL) being unfair. Bill made it personal, by challenging the President to give him one example of when Bill had been unfair. I think you are correct, Bernie. Each side got what it wanted.

    • George Williams

      Not to mention that it was number one long before Obama came along. Obama always overrates his importance.

      • Sheila Warner

        Bill mentioned that, but it got lost in the back and forth.

  • SkyCitizen

    Your point is well taken Bernie. I didn’t get any news out of this but what I did get is a denial of the President’s goal to “transform America”. Also, I have been assured by the President that there wasn’t a “smidgen of corruption” at the IRS. When I put that all together with “you can keep your Doctor”.. etc. I can’t help thinking of Jon Lovitz and his stint as the Vice President…err President of the Pathological Liars Association.

  • Lee

    yes, O/Reilly should have gone after the President as you say, :throw his papers up in the air”. But we all have to remember O’Reilly wants another shot at Obama next Super Bowl and he won’t get the interview if he loses his cool and goes after Obama, no matter how much Obama deserves it. O’Reilly’s ego is so large that huge ego won’t allow O’Reilly to lose his cool.

  • buckrodgers

    Journalism has turned into a three ring circus under this administration, the way the media has been pandering to this President is not only sad it’s pathotic, unfortunately the liberal media has played the race/gender card so often that it’s about to destroy them and they have nobody to blame but themselves, every single day CNN,NBC,MSNBC,REUTERS, THE AP,THE WRAP And ABC which has lost so much credibility, that it had to partner with yahoo news to deceive it’s readers, post the same story on Yahoo where anybody with a computer can mock and make fun of them, when legitimate news outlet have to compete with comedian journalist like Jon Stewart, you know journalism has hit rock bottom and is ready to go the way of the dinosaurs. is it possible that President Obama views the liberal media as a bunch of closet racist who pander to African American, but refuses to give them a seat at the table of power, President Obama is helping Fox News, every time he criticizes them, at the same time he is hurting liberal outlets that have worshiped the ground he walks on, deep down he really hates the way his white disciples have treated African Americans.

  • wildjew

    Bernie, I will try to explain why Bill O’Reilly did not take his notes and throw them in the air in exasperation over Obama blaming Fox for making “non-scandals” into scandals. Bear with me. The first hint came near the end of the interview when O’Reilly assured Obama his heart was “in the right place.” Obama’s heart is not in the right place. Sorry Bernie. It is not.

    In the interview, O’Reilly read a question from a viewer, Kathy LaMaster, Fresno, California.

    “Mr. president, why do you feel it is necessary to fundamentally transform the nation that has afforded you so much opportunity and success?”

    Obama: I don’t think we have to fundamentally transform the nation…..

    (O’Reilly interjects: But those are your words)

    …..I think what we have to do is make sure that here in America, if you work hard you can get ahead.”

    O’Reilly commented the following night on Obama’s answer: “But here is the deal. No one can make sure that happens. NO ONE. It’s a noble goal but basing expensive policy on a dream runs up a huge debt and is ultimately frustrating to the taxpayer. That being said, the president and I agree that rewarding hard work does build a strong country.”

    Bill O’Reilly was either taken in by Obama or he does not appreciate what Obama is doing to this nation. Obama’s goal is NOT insuring if you work hard you can get ahead. It is more akin to, if you do not work at all (if you sit on your behind) you can get ahead. Notwithstanding what Mr. O’Reilly believes, that is not a noble goal. This president is NOT about building a strong country. The opposite is the case.

    Bernie, in spite of what you and Mr. O’Reilly think about this president, he is a charlatan. You cannot trip up a charlatan. O’Reilly asked good questions. My problem with Mr. O’Reilly is he genuinely believes Obama wants what is best for this country. I HAVE heard O’Reilly say that, with you nodding in agreement. That colors his interviews. You will notice Bill O’Reilly mocks those (on the “far right”) who he says, “hate” Obama.

    I hate evil. Why doesn’t Bill O’Reilly hate evil? Do you hate evil Bernie?

    • merdemouiller

      I have to agree. In the face of Obama’s monumental hypocrisy, the only rational stand is to despise him. I can’t say this too many times – this is the Richard Nixon of the Left. And he should be ostracized as such.

      • wildjew

        I dislike Obama. I despise what he is doing to me personally and this country. I am not a good hater.

        • legal eagle

          Obama is doing something to you personally? Would you like to share?

          • wildjew

            Yes. I am looking at the value of my property and the real estate picture in general. There is little to no construction in our state. No one has money to invest in property except people looking for bargains. The worth of my property is deplorable under this Obama economy, with no end in sight.

          • Sheila Warner

            We’ve seen our wages depressed since President O took office. Causal? Perhaps. But people usually hold the President who is in office responsible for economic woes. It’s why President George W’s poll numbers dropped precipitously during the great economic collapse.

          • wildjew

            That’s exactly right. A president “should” get credit for a good or a bad economy. Obama seems to be the exception to the rule. Why?

          • Sheila Warner

            I believe it is because the GOP is in total disarray. They are not getting any coherent message out there. I’m neither Dem nor GOP, but at this point I think the Dems have screwed it up so badly that I wish the GOP would do something that matters.

          • legal eagle

            The GOP’s message is about as incoherent as yours…He just doesn’t appeal to older white people who fear change and want to go back to the 50′s….

          • Sheila Warner

            Since I’m not a Republican, what you said doesn’t apply to me.

          • legal eagle

            Your not a Republican but you voted for Romney and Christie…It’s actions that count not words…

          • Sheila Warner

            I also voted for Van Drew, Nelson Albano, and Bob Andrzejcak, each one a Democrat. Albano lost, but he was my choice. And, I am not supporting GOP Frank LoBiondo in November. So, no, I’m not a GOP member, so what you said doesn’t apply to me. I always split my votes.

          • Lc Goodfellow

            brain rust can actually be prevented
            ” Your Brain is Rusting like an old jalopy “

          • legal eagle

            “Rust Never Sleeps”
            Neil Young

          • legal eagle

            Well my properties in Southern Cal and New York City are booming so perhaps it’s your location not the federal government?

          • wildjew

            I am in the central Florida area. They say real estate is picking up but I see a lot of property around me sitting on the market. I do not see much if any construction. A neighbor who lives in an adult mobile home community near me says no one is moving in. These are mobiles mind you. He said a few people took what they could get for their used homes. A decade or so back, I saw new homes going into this community by the day or by the week. My neighbor (a farmer) had to sell ten acres of his property to pay his bills. I was astonished at what he had to take compared to what property was selling for 8 to 10 years back. Maybe parts of California are like Miami and the coast. Maybe they are doing better on the coast. I’ve not seen any significant recovery up here. If real estate is so great in New York City, why aren’t they bringing their money down here to Florida? Where is all that money? I think Barack Obama has been very bad for the economy and for business in general.

          • legal eagle

            Orlando Asking Price History

            The median asking price for homes in Orlando peaked in April 2006 at $315,166 and is now $110,166 (35.0%) lower. From a low of $144,340 in January 2011, the median asking price in Orlando has increased by $60,660 (42.0%).

          • legal eagle

            You just hate Obama….Move to South Florida where the New Yorkers live..

          • wildjew

            Obama insisted, “We could put people to work right now.” But he had already promised and failed to deliver on that in his first term. In his second term, he is still dishonestly promising to create shovel ready jobs, after already admitting that there was no such thing, while ridiculing Keystone’s jobs.

            “We have not massively expanded the welfare state,” Obama claimed even as food stamp enrollment has increased by 70 percent under him so that 1 in 5 households are now on food stamps. Eight million people have been added to the rolls and ObamaCare is set to increase the already bloated rolls by another 3 to 5 percent in some states.

            The number of Americans on disability has increased by 23 percent under Obama. The 5.9 million added to the disability rolls represent more than double the number of jobs that he claims to have created.

            “They gotta work hard, they gotta be responsible,” Obama finished. “That’s what it’s all about. That’s how you and I ended up sitting here talking.”

            The culmination of all his absurd lies was the pretense that his elevation to the highest office in the land after spending not even a full term in the senate was on the basis of merit. Two years after going from the Illinois State Senate to the United States Senate, he had already launched a campaign for the White House making him the least qualified candidate put forward by a major party in a century.

            http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/obama-lied-with-every-word/

          • legal eagle

            Nice of you to change the subject from real estate to disability….LOL
            Maybe you should try reading something other than right wing opinion pieces that support your view…..It’s called “intellectual curiosity”…You should try it…

          • Jeff Webb

            Sounds like you’re one of those old, white, bitter left-wing cultists who needs medication and pines for the good ol’ days.

          • wildjew

            I do read the other side. Do you? Speaking of Obama’s side, have you read Karl Marx lately? “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” Read about Stalin’s collectivization of agriculture in Soviet Russia and think about Obama “collectivizing doctors and hospitals into government-supervised accountable care organizations.”

          • legal eagle

            This is how Obama has hurt you personally?…..LMAO

          • wildjew

            Do you think this is the Bush economy?

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            You have to understand wildjew. It it’s good, Obama deserves credit. If it’s bad, it’s a Republican’s fault.

          • wildjew

            Yea, I am discovering it is difficult if not impossible to reason with an Obama-supporter. Maybe they thought the same thing about the right when Bush was president. That is why I am an “independent” conservative.

    • Tim Ned

      You lost me at the hate part. As a conservative I do not hate this president or any other diplomat who serves this country even when I adamantly disagree with their policies. Diplomats in the foreign service can work out of embassies in the most god forsaken places on earth, democrat and republican. Regardless of how they vote, they are there to help Americans and everyone I have met overseas work endless thankless hours under extremely difficult circumstances.

      I believe O’Reilly is like me in that he respects the office of the presidency as well as the president himself. This President believes he is right. But he is in office for the next three years and there is nothing we can do about. The Republicans need to win in 2014 and 2016. That is the answer to get this economy turned around and to put real affordable health care in place. Something my party should have done years ago when we had control.

      Sound strategies and campaign organization win elections and change direction. Not hate!

      • wildjew

        I am sorry. You completely misinterpreted what I wrote. Bill O’Reilly characterizes his critics on the right, not as those who hate what President Obama is doing to this country, but those who hate Obama himself. It smacks of the charge, if you criticize Barack Obama then you are a racist.

        For argument sake only, let me give you an extreme example for purposes of discussion. Were you a German in the nineteen thirties, early nineteen forties would you write, ” I do not hate this chancellor or any other diplomat who serves this country even when I adamantly disagree with their policies.”?

        Would you write: “I respect the office of the Reich chancellery as well as the Fuhrer himself. This chancellor believes he is right.” ?

        At what point do you lose respect for an elected president?

        • Tim Ned

          “At what point do you lose respect for an elected president?”

          ANSWER: In 1933 Germany, NOT 2014 USA

          • George Williams

            You seem confused and not really making much sense. People can have respect for the office of the president and at the same time legitimately lose respect for the man occupying it. We’ve had many elections that were caused by the latter. Respect is not an entitlement but must be earned. This president has lost a great deal of respect in the eyes of millions, and deservingly so. The nation need not become Nazi Socialist before the president loses the respect for the American people. Run of the mill corruption is all that’s necessary.

          • Tim Ned

            I cannot argue with someone who has lost respect for this President and I concur. When it comes to his policies I have no respect. My point is clear and it is based upon the strategies of Gov. Scott Walker of WI. This man is a calm, hard core, fighter, and a winner. He made his attacks against policies that everyone agreed to. He won the election and he won the recall election by a wider margin. He addressed the issues clearly when you have a candidate like him, the resonate with the voters. He attacked Obama but on the issues. I have a daughter that lives in Madison and this is a highly liberal city. The scene at the capital during the recall days were unbelievable. The protesters did over one million in damage to the capital. The UW hospital was out giving the union workers sick leave letters so they could get paid while they were protesting. Highly illegal and reprehensible. Walker used everything they did against them and he destroyed them in the press. Because he was right.

            Good strategies win elections.

          • wildjew

            With Obama, mine is beyond losing respect for the man. I feel pretty certain Obama is deliberately hurting this country because of imagined grievances he has with it and its founding. You cannot listen to Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s sermons and not conclude he hates this county, that he is a dedicated racist and anti-Semite; not if you are honest. Wright is Obama’s twenty year spiritual mentor. He ran with these disreputable people his entire adult life. Obama is a very savvy politician who is able to hide his thoughts and emotions. Like Wright said in an interview: “He’s a politician, I’m a pastor. We speak to two different audiences. And he says what he has to say as a politician. I say what I have to say as a pastor….”

          • legal eagle

            Go see a doctor and ask for a mental enema…You need one badly…

          • George Williams

            Let’s say Obama shoots Michelle in the head in a heated argument over vacation spots. Do we need to take a time machine back to 1933 to surrender our respect? Again, you have a very strange tolerance for behavior that his clearly intolerable to the rest of us. No human is entitled to respect just because of the office he holds. He is president, not God.

        • George Williams

          If the Jews of Germany managed to muster more hate for the Nazis they may have become motivated to emigrate before it was too late. There were too many pacifists among them. .

        • legal eagle

          Again with the holocaust analogies…like a broken record….

          • wildjew

            Go ahead, hide your myopic Jewish eyes and head in the ‘sand’.

            “You see for Israel there is an increasing delegitimization campaign that has been building up. People are very sensitive to it, there is talk of boycott and other kinds of things….” (John Kerry, “Threatening for Peace”)

          • legal eagle

            Anyone who disagrees with Likud policy is either myopic or anti-Semitic….AIPAC has played this card for so many years no one pays attention anymore..

          • wildjew

            Likud? You are joking, aren’t you?

      • George Williams

        So, if a president violates rule of law and the Constitution, is promoting national bankruptcy and has disrespect for the will and sovereignty of the nation, you don’t harbor even a little bit of disdain for him? What would it take for you to go to the streets with pitchfork and torch in hand?

        • Tim Ned

          Taxation without representation! That was the main cause of the American Revolution.

          Disdain and hate have nothing to do with it. 2014 has everything to do with my political views and wining is the answer.

          • George Williams

            Oh really? The colonists managed to muster the will to shoot their fellow countryman over taxes? What a laugh. What about the obnoxious behavior of the British and the anger at the privation they underwent when they occupied Boston?. It took far more animosity than that generated by a tax issue to cause that insurrection. Only hate can make people look down the barrel of a musket when self defense is not a issue. No. The only thing that is going to provoke citizens to overrun the polls to remove the Democrats from power is the hate of people who can’t stand to see their country going to hell.

          • Sheila Warner

            Remember that winning takes caution, reason, and careful strategizing….something I don’t see the GOP doing right now. At this point I believe Hillary will be our next President if the GOP can’t get its act together.

        • Sheila Warner

          Hate puts blindfolds on. Righteous anger is another thing. One always has to be rational when addressing injustice and criminal activity. Hate wastes too much energy. I don’t hate anyone.

      • Sheila Warner

        I respect the office, but I do not respect the President. He’s told too many lies and I have lost respect for him. Thank goodness the office of the President has survived other poor Presidents. I still have some small amount of optimism that we will survive President Obama, too. His undoing is that his last set of lies (you can keep your doctor, you can keep your plan) is so brazen that the American people are waking up. Even in the interview, he lied, when discussing the grandfather clause. That was undone in 2010 by Sec Sebelius when she changed the regulations surrounding the clause.

        • legal eagle

          Thank you for expressing the thoughts of the angry old white person party…….but of course you are an independent….LOL

          • Sheila Warner

            So, again, which party would that be? And anger can be a great thing, when directed at injustice. I wear the “old” label proudly, too. I cannot help it that I am white. Of course, having two mixed marriages in my own immediately family makes race a moot point for me. As you well know…..

          • legal eagle

            Mixed marriages in family=some of my best friends are black…….LMAO

          • Sheila Warner

            Did I mention black? You assume too much…

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            You’ll have to excuse him, Sheila. His white guilt only extends to African Americans for some reason. No one’s sure why. Must be something from his past.

          • Sheila Warner

            And neither of the mixed marriages are black/white. He’s soooo lame. He shoots from the hip without having the facts. I guess he has no friends.

          • Lc Goodfellow

            Watch for the muzzle flash, Seagull, Is shooting ‘Blanks’
            You wouldn’t want him to hurt himself. Well, maybe once.

          • Sheila Warner

            Ha ha. Nice reply. Just once, okay, I’ll go for that.

          • Sheila Warner

            Now that I’ve challenged him on the black issue, he now has so many nations, so many ethnicities to try to figure out what other races are in my family. Maybe it’ll slow him down a bit. But I doubt it.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Says the guy who routinely refers to black people as “coloureds.”

          • legal eagle

            It’s “coloreds”.. Unfortunately you’re sense of humor has not developed sufficiently to recognize sarcasm…..

          • Sheila Warner

            Figure out the ethnicities/race of those marriages, yet? Hint: none of it is in my profile, so your stalking won’t do you any good.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            No, what it is is left-wingers like yourself believing they have a permission slip to throw around racially-insensitive terms as long as they build a straw-man to attribute the posed mindset to.

            I’ve never understood your obsession with identifying people by the color of their skin, but I suspect you’re trying to vindicate yourself from something in your past. I hope you forgive yourself some day for whatever it was instead of directing your guilt at others.

      • 4deuce

        I respect the office of President but hold this one in utter contempt. Why should I show him respect when his overt acts that violate the US Constitution shows his contempt for it and for me both? To show respect to THIS White House occupant shows a lack of respect for those who came before us and made the USA the envy of planet Earth in less than 200 years. Obama the man, the occupant, deserves no respect because he is a man in love with himself and he and his bloated ego are all that matters to him.

    • Sheila Warner

      I used to believe that the President wants what is best for the country. Now I believe the President only wants what is in his own best interests, the country be damned.

  • nelly2004

    Bad job. Bill has turned fair and balanced into bending over backwards
    to give the left the benefit of the doubt when facts beyond a reasonable
    doubt say otherwise.

    For O’reilly to say that Obama doesn’t want to harm the country he just believes in what he is doing is naive.
    Seems O’reilly has been charmed by this phoney administration, just like Juan Williams. They are becoming useful idiots to the left.

    The people clearly on the right are not fringe. They want the truth and they want honest representation in government and the rule of law followed. O’reilly is buying the ruling class mantra with the people as subjects and his ego is fed because he has access.

    For Obama to say that he thinks Fox basically slanders him but he likes
    Bill anyway was disingenuous and had the effect of disarming Bill when he should have strongly made the points Bernie mentioned.

    O’reilly was too accommodating and Obama’s was in usual pathological lying mode.

    This interview served Obama and his lying administration.

  • TS1776frdm

    If Only..Goldberg had been the Interviewer..on Sunday with Obama.. Well, we can dream on.!! Obama and Administration and most of DC are so incredibly toxic to Freedom, Liberty and the former American Way.!

    • Tim Ned

      I would pay to see that interview! Couldn’t agree more!

  • rbblum

    The Obama-O’Reilly interview was a great example reflecting that Obama is exceptionally good presenting the notion that the alternative universe is real.

  • Mikal Gastpipe

    In my posts before the ‘interview’, I NAILED the outcome. It was as ‘predictable’ as the sunrise. There will NEVER be a ‘substantive interview’ done in a 10 minute time frame of ANYONE, much less a President. It was a win/win for Obama.

  • Dennis

    This is why I didn’t waste one minute watching the interview. Obama is not going to admit to anything and I can barely stand the sound of his voice after all of the lying he has done to us over the years, not to mention the corruption and incompetence. I’ve simply had enough.

  • legal eagle

    Fox News is attempting to distract us, [and] rather than being a news organization, they are a spite-driven anger machine rooted in a fear that any change in the status quo will inevitably erode our nation’s traditional power structure, leading to internment camps for ‘real Americans,’ powered by solar energy and tacos. Wait! Hard-shell, gay tacos.”

    • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

      How would you know? You never watch Fox News.

      • legal eagle

        keep repeating then same crap…Soon you’ll believe it…

        • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

          You prove it every time you make up bologna about what is being reported on the network and what isn’t.

          There are plenty of legitimate criticisms of Fox News. You have yet to discover any of them, however, because you never actually watch it.

          • JMax

            I watch it every night. I’ll attest to legal eagle’s accuracy.

          • Tim Ned

            To what can you attest to? There are no facts in Legal’s comments only the same old comments labeling anyone he disagrees with. So what do you think of John Stewart’s pounding of Nancy Pelosi? Did you agree with him? I catch him occasionally and he’s funny. Some things I agree with but for the most part I disagree.

            But you and legal disagree with everything from Fox and specifically with O’Reilly. Do you support gay marriage? O’Reilly does. Do you support the death penalty? O’Reilly doesn’t.

            Some people can watch an alternative news network and accept the facts even if they disagree with the messenger.

            But Legal can’t because he has the Democratic Leadership marching orders; diminish Fox news, call anyone who is against the party initiatives a racist, make sure you label them Old white guys, and god forbid for any respectable Republican like a Allen West to come along.

            Come on Legal let’s play the game. What’s your opinion of Allen West and please don’t clean it up because you are being challenged. Com’on, spit it out.

          • JMax

            I don’t have a problem with Stewart criticizing Pelosi. Sometimes she deserves it; sometimes it’s just funny.

            I don’t disagree with everything O’Reilly says. I agree with him on gay marriage, but you’ll rarely if ever here him actually support it, which is to say show positive stories about it. He just personally says it’s OK. I haven’t heard O’Reilly say anything about the death penalty, but I agree with him if he is against it.

            I agree with O’Reilly on raising the minimum wage.

            But I watch the Factor almost every night and most of what he says is hype, bogus, and supposition that fits in with what his audience wants to hear.

            Some of what Allen West has said and written is just wacky at best and near treasonous at worst.

          • legal eagle

            Allen West is a cartoon figure bought and paid for by Roger Ailes….wind him up and he’ll say something provocative and outrageous. One of the small list of Fox News token blacks…..

          • JMax

            Very apt description.

          • Tim Ned

            JMax really, calling John McCain “a right wing military nut job”?

            You going to stand up for this legal guy? Wow!

          • JMax

            Who is talking about McCain? We were talking about Allen West.

          • Tim Ned

            Thanks! I knew you wouldn’t let me down. Now I am LOL.

          • legal eagle

            What point do you disagree with?

          • Tim ned

            Silly me, how could I not see that he is part of a deeper and darker sinister plot through Fox to brainwash us ole poor dumb white foke.

          • legal eagle

            It’s called reinforcement….the problem is that you have lost your curiosity and know longer care about what people who don’t agree with you think or say….you are the definition of an ideologue…

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Is this what you shout into the mirror every morning before flipping on MSNBC for the next 8 hours?

            Leave the rest of us out of your self-loathing rants, legal.

          • legal eagle

            I didn’t hear you disagree with anything???

          • Lc Goodfellow

            ” …. educated beyond your intelligences … ” – AW
            Your breath must be nasty as hell.

            The Preacher is looking for ‘Thee’ and john coppper.
            You can LMAO, butt that a dam big order, considering
            the size of your LMAO

          • Tim Ned

            Interesting, let’s compare notes:

            Gay Marriage; I’m like Bill I could care less either way. Not a big issue.

            Death penalty: Disagree with Bill.

            Minimum wage: Disagree with Bill.

            OMG JMax; you have more in common with him than I do!

          • JMax

            If you want to base your conclusion on three criteria, OK.

          • Tim Ned

            Those are three pretty major issues!

          • JMax

            I don’t see how they could be pretty big issues (to Bill) since I can’t remember him ever saying we was against the death penalty and he couldn’t care less about marriage equality (you said it’s not a big issue). And he’s pretty meek on the minimum wage issue from what I’ve seen, sort of his mumble under his breath and move to the Miller Time segment.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            You’ve convinced me by now that you don’t actually watch O’Reilly’s show. In fact, I’m starting to believe that you and legal eagle are the same person. If not, you’re soul mates.

          • JMax

            Ask me a question about the first 15 minutes of any show so far this week (not including any segment with Karl Rove, Dennis Miller, and probably not Krauthammer). Of course this will be pretty easy because most of this week was dedicated to how great he did in his interview with Obama and bashing any criticism. O’Reilly to Karl Rove: I did good, didn’t I? O’Reilly to Bernie Goldberg: I did good, didn’t I? Etc. And it will go down as one of the great pieces of journalism in American history.

            I can tell you that in his talking points last night he admitted that Obama does not wish to harm the country and that we has the best intentions for America and the American people. I imagine you shot your TV at that point.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            lol. It’s all online, JMax. I could ask what was on an episode 3 years ago and all you’d have to do is look it up and tell me. That doesn’t mean you watch it.

            The problem is that O’Reilly has spoken regularly about topics that you keep claiming you’ve never heard him talk about before – Bridgegate being the most glaring example.

            The only conclusion to draw from that is that you just don’t watch his show, but pretend to in order to lend legitimacy to your criticisms of the network.

            You’re certainly not alone in that practice. Many liberals that blast Fox News only allow themselves third-party exposure to the network, via outlets like The Daily Show and MSNBC.

            What I’ve learned from this little exchange is that your criticisms have no weight behind them.

          • JMax

            Fine. Suit yourself. I’m going upstairs to delete the last two weeks of the Factor off my DVR (after I watch tonight’s show. Is it Ingraham or Guttfeld. tonight?)

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            And what exactly is he accurate about? His regular statements that Bernie Goldberg never disagrees with Bill O’Reilly? That Charles Krauthammer speaks for 45 minutes every night on Special Report? That Fox News hasn’t covered Bridgegate?

            Anytime legal makes a specific charge regarding what is actually on Fox News’ programming, it’s an utter lie – completely made up. He doesn’t watch it.

          • JMax

            OK, I’ll disagree somewhat with legal on some of those. I give Bernie credit for sometimes disagreeing with BO. I don’t watch Special Report. I pretty much only watch The Factor on a regular basis, but I can tell you if BO mentioned Bridgegate, I must have blinked.

          • Tim ned

            You blinked!

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly
          • JMax

            “Covered”? Uh, no. He mentioned it, suggested possible prosecutorial misconduct, and pivoted to Benghazi. To “cover” it would mean to present the allegations, the context, what is known and not known.

            BTW, as soon as the Miller segment comes on each week I turn it off. Miller used to be funny.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Oh give me a break. The notion that Obama attributed the attack to terrorism was thoroughly debunked about 15 minutes after he started trying to retroactively convince people that that’s what he said in the first place. The fact that liberals STILL cling to this fraudulent narrative is beyond pathetic.

            It’s no different than how he insisted that he never promised people they could keep their insurance plans PERIOD after a couple of dozen video clips proved differently.

            I’m kind of surprised at you on this one, JMax. I thought you had more integrity than that.

          • JMax

            Looks like you are crossing threads here, but so be it.

            I’m sorry that you cannot fathom that which is not spelled out to you in the exact words you seek or expect. The president referred to the Benghazi victims in the sentences immediately before and immediately following this sentence:

            “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation,
            alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand
            for.”

            You can watch the entire statement here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rDANcaPx1xg

            I’m kind of surprised, John. I thought you could understand more than just sound bites.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            First of all, he wasn’t even talking about the Libya attack in that soundbite. He was speaking in generalities. Listen to his whole speech and pay attention to the context.

            Secondly, the administration sent Susan Rice out AFTER that speech, saying that terrorists were NOT responsible and that a YouTube video and a spontaneous mob were to blame. Again, this was at a time when the administration already knew that terrorists were behind it, because that’s what the intelligence agencies were telling them.

            Thirdly, as Obama just told O’Reilly in the Superbowl interview (and I’m surprised this hasn’t received much attention), ANY kind of attack on a U.S. compound could be considered an “act of terror” no matter who is responsible for it. Not an act of terrorISM. An act of terror – a phrase that can be applied to just about any intentional form of violence. This is a moot point, however, because when Obama used that phrase, it wasn’t in regard to the Libya attack anyway.

            Lastly, in an interview President Obama did with 60 minutes AFTER the YouTube video you linked to before, Obama himself would not attribute the attack to terrorists when that’s exactly what the administration had been told:
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdHZQLqqXLI

            Every fact that has come out since the election regarding Benghazi shows that the administration knew terrorists were behind the attack and lied to the public about it. Either you haven’t been watching the news networks that have reported it (and Fox News isn’t the only one), or you see fit to perpetuate the lie for no other reason that your commitment to Democratic partisanship.

          • JMax

            I watched the entire speech which is why I can say that the sentence I quoted was sandwiched between two sentences referring to the Americans killed in Benghazi and logically connects all three sentences.

            Please show me text of Rice saying terrorists were NOT behind it. BTW, please define “terrorist”, who IS a terrorist, and how the CIA station chief or anybody else witnessing or reporting on the attack as it happened knew that “terrorists” started it, planned it, or were involved.

            Please define the difference between an “act of terror” and an “act of terrorISM”. It seems the issue here in your mind is who did or didn’t use the correct form of the word.

            I continue to maintain that the term “terrorist” does not apply here because to me a terrorist is someone who commits an apparently random act of violence intended to produce terror in the minds of surviving potential targets, most often civilians. I don’t believe the Benghazi attackers had this objective.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Good lord. You’re too far gone man.

            Any intellectually honest person listening to Obama’s speech would easily recognize that he wasn’t attributing the Benghazi attack to terrorists.

            Susan Rice said over and over again that their best intelligence pointed to a spontaneous mob and a YouTube video being to blame. That was an utter lie. All of the intelligence pointed to a coordinated terrorist attack, and the administration had been briefed on it all.

            The rest of your post is like reading Bill Clinton’s parsing of words in his Monica testimony. It’s juvenile and I’m confident that you don’t even buy your own argument. I’m sorry I was wrong about you, JMax. I thought you were an independent minded liberal but you’re clearly an unpaid version of Jay Carney.

          • JMax

            As I said before, you are entitled to your opinion.

            I stand by my argument regarding the use of the word “terror”. The right has had this burr up its butt about the word since at least 2001. It seems that one MUST have a word that they can get their minds around because they can’t get nuance. Much like they were deathly afraid of the Ruskies, commies, Yellow Peril of the 1950s. The enemies of the US can’t be fought by intelligence and police tactics they said. Gotta use divisions of troops as if these enemies don’t use asymmetrical tactics. Every A-rab with a gun is a “terrorist”.

            I don’t give one s**t about whether or not Obama or anybody else used the word to satisfy your needs. I still think the Benghazi attack doesn’t qualify as a terrorist act or act of terrorism or whatever you want to call it. It was a violent armed attack by enemies of the US. It wasn’t a suicide bomb or an IED.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Your hopeless. Pretend Obama were Bush and you’d drop this adolescent semantics argument in a heartbeat.

          • Tim Ned

            John let’s review the facts. On even days of the month it’s a “spontaneous attack from a video” and on odd days of the month it’s a “terrorist attack”.

            Just like health care was a “penalty” when Obama sold it to the people and a “tax” when he sold it to SCOTUS.

          • Jeff Webb

            >>It was a violent armed attack by enemies of the US. It wasn’t a suicide bomb or an IED.<<

            Something else it wasn't: a spontaneous mob reacting to a video, as Obama and Mrs. Clinton claimed for over 2 weeks after they had the facts.

          • JMax

            “Yesterday, our U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi, Libya, was attacked. Heavily armed militants assaulted the compound and set fire to our buildings. American and Libyan security personnel battled the attackers
            together. Four Americans were killed.” – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Sept 12, 2012

          • Jeff Webb

            That still doesn’t explain why Obama and Mrs. Clinton claimed it was a spontaneous mob reacting to a video, does it? One example:
            http://cnsnews.com/news/article/slain-benghazi-officers-mom-obama-clinton-rice-all-blamed-video-they-were-hugging-me

          • JMax

            I guess there’s no taking into account what was going on in Cairo and other places throughout the Muslim world at the time. There is all kinds of evidence that reaction to the video played a part in the attack, from those participants in the attack who were motivated by the video, to those who led the attack who used the world-wide protests as a cover for converging on the consulate.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            All kinds of evidence? It was a single NY Times report that has already been thoroughly debunked. Our intelligence agencies refute that the YouTube video had anything to do with it.

            But please, don’t let that keep you from continuing to spin for an administration that stopped using that false excuse a long time ago.

          • JMax

            NYT report debunked by whom? There is no doubt that violence was happening in Cairo and the Muslim world at the time of the attack. There is solid reporting that some of the attackers were involved at least to some degree because of the video. Please site any intelligence report that says the video had absolutely no connection to the attack.

            I’m not using anything as an excuse. What we know now and what we knew (without doubt or confusion) at the time is different. That happens often.

          • Jeff Webb

            That’s a nice, creative theory to give BO & HC cover, but it’s nothing more. After 24 hours there was no legit reason for the video story at all. It’s not a matter of the administration having evidence the video played a role. They knew the TRUTH, that it didn’t.

            J, you’re defending them out of blind devotion, not because of any honest look at the facts. Whether or not you learn to accept it, it won’t change actual words, dates, and events.

          • JMax

            What if the administration spun what was known and what was not known at the time to deflect attention from what Ambassador Stevens and the CIA were doing at the Benghazi Consulate? What if what they were doing was a highly secret mission to further US interests in the region? Still a scandal? Why do you think the CIA, the chief author of the talking points, put such emphasis on the video and the WH and DOS went along with it?

          • Tim ned

            Ok, now you’re just being silly. Let me play the game.

            Maybe Susan Rice went out and tried to sell a dumb idea about some dumb video was the cause of the attack. And maybe these are secret signals to people like JMax and Legal Eagle to go out and attack websites with these talking points.

            I think my scenario is much more plausible.

          • JMax

            I don’t think so, Tim.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Was his post meant to be as funny as I found it? You’ve become a parody of yourself.

          • JMax

            Serious questions.

          • Jeff Webb

            I read your comment very carefully, and you’ve convinced me. I’m convinced you’re doing everything in your power to ignore an unfortunate reality.

            Free advice: when you have to make this kind of effort, to analyze and parse things this carefully, your argument only looks emptier.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Do you believe this helps your argument somehow? She stood in front of the dead bodies of those who were murdered and told the world that a YouTube video was to blame.

          • JMax

            There was and is clear evidence that the video was a factor.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Like what? The word of a Libyan militant that the New York Times interviewed over a year later? Our own government – the intelligence officials we had on the ground – were telling the administration that it was a coordinated terrorist attack. Why won’t you acknowledge that?

            Many top officials including Gregory Hicks testified that the YouTube video was a non-issue in Lybia.

            The administration was blaming the video for the attack for weeks AFTER they had already been told that it was a planned terrorist attack that had nothing to do with the video.

            What you’re doing would be like me insisting that there were huge stockpiles of WMDs in Iraq after none were found.

          • Jeff Webb

            >>What you’re doing would be like me insisting that there were huge stockpiles of WMDs in Iraq after SAYING none were found.<

          • JMax

            Isn’t that indeed a fact that that was what the Bush/Cheney administration was claiming?

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            No. Re-read it.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Thanks. ;)

          • legal eagle

            O’Reilly is on 5 hours a week…..He has spent at least 10 minutes discussing Christie..

          • George Williams

            Must’ve been during the 10 minutes that you watched The Factor. “At least 10 minutes” does not exclude the possibility that he spoke 5 or even 10 hours over a two week period Must be more Sundowners on your part. I understand. I hope that your keepers do too. How about me re-phrasing it per your bile spewing wont: “He has spent less than 10 minutes discussing Christie.” It’s a lie but I want to keep you consistent with your habit. Don’t mention it.

          • Sheila Warner

            You did more than blink–you went to sleep. O’Reilly has had much to say about it. Mostly giving the Governor the benefit of the doubt until evidence comes in to prove Christie lied. Bill even gave Sen Bob Menendez the benefit of the doubt when other conservatives were breathlessly reporting the rumor that Menendez had used under aged prostitutes.

          • legal eagle

            I didn’t say that Krauthammer speaks for 45 minutes …but you know that….In court the judge would tell you he’s heard you statement about Special Report five times and he would order you to move on….
            How about this fact…Hannity throws around a child size football…must be a metaphor for the size of his brain…

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Your exact quote:

            “Bret Baer’s show is fifteen minutes of news and 45 minutes of right wing discussion with Charley Krauthammer playing the learned right wing ideologue…”

            That is an utter lie. As I pointed out, the panel on that show doesn’t even come on until the 40 minute mark. You hadn’t a clue about that, however, because you DON’T WATCH IT.

            Being a Daily Show viewer, the FOX News clips that Jon Stewart shows is likely your only exposure to the news network, and that would explain pretty much everything you’ve ever written about Fox.

            I’m curious. Why aren’t you trying to deny what I said about Goldberg always agreeing with O’Reilly and Fox News ignoring Bridgegate?

          • legal eagle

            You know I meant that Krauthead is part of a panel….Bernie disagrees with O’Reilly 10% of the time….If that, in your mind, is the formula for dissent then so be it….If you like O’Reilly’s “Howard Beale” act than good for you….it’s good entertainment if you take it with a large grain of salt….As an example, last night he was claiming that Obama is soft on drug dealers….hysterically funny stuff…

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            >>You know I meant that Krauthead is part of a panel….

            A panel that lasts for 45 minutes, right? Your words.

            >>Bernie disagrees with O’Reilly 10% of the time

            Any more statistics you’d like to pull directly out of your butt and pretend it reflects reality?

            Some friendly advice: Actually WATCH it so you can comment on it without looking like a buffoon.

          • legal eagle

            I was being generous about Goldberg…its probably about 5% but who cares?
            Krauthammer used to be a respected pundit until he went all in on the Iraq war….It’s unfortunate that he sold his soul to Roger Ailes….

          • George Williams

            If all you have on him is the Iraq war and that issue is behind us, then you agree with him that Obama is a hopeless narcissist and violating the COTUS every day on Obamcare. Say something bad about George Will. Go ahead, make it up.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            >>I was being generous about Goldberg…its probably about 5% but who cares?

            How would you know? You never watch Fox News.

            >>Krauthammer used to be a respected pundit until he went all in on the Iraq war.

            Like you’d even heard of him until he started showing up on Daily Show clips.

          • George Williams

            “Hannity throws around a child size football…must be a metaphor for the size of his brain…”
            And I thought that it was your football.

          • legal eagle

            Fox News has covered Christie far less than the rest of the media because he’s a Republican whom Roger Ailes may need to run for President…..Think it’s just a coincidence that Christie is now being invited to CPAC?

          • George Williams

            You Lie. The Christie bridge issue has been on Fox in every talk forum on every day since it began. I’ve listened to it ad nauseum. And since the other networks clearly biased in favor of Hillary, it’s just a matter of degree as to what is necessary to inform the public. It’s ridiculous to say “far less” because appropriate levels of coverage are relative to the opinion of the listener. You, for example, live for this kind of dirt, as it helps your wretched hag Hillary. No amount of dirty digging would be sufficient to satisfy your biliousness.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            >>Fox News has covered Christie far less than the rest of the media

            Statistics please?

            >>because he’s a Republican whom Roger Ailes may need to run for President.

            And let me guess: You don’t think that the rest of the media is covering it the way they are because Christie is a threat to Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, do you? Yeah, didn’t think so.

          • Sheila Warner

            Not to mention his fantasy that FNC was “bitching” about the Coke commercial.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Yep. That’s what happens when your only exposure to FNC are the clips Jon Stewart makes fun of on The Daily Show.

        • JMax

          Should I tell them where your quote actually came from?

          • legal eagle

            Be my guest.. It’s from Jon Stewart…

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Which is where you get your only exposure to Fox News no doubt.

          • JMax

            Of course.

          • George Williams

            Here’s something not from Jon Stewart: The CBO has just predicted that as the result of Obamacare, 2.3 million fewer man-hours will be available to employers due to the fact that people will be cutting back on their work weeks over the next few years. They do this because they want the health care subsidies that will accrue to them. That means that the rest of us poor slobs who work full time will be paying taxes to permit them this luxury. The biggest joke of all is that the Obama is now touting this as a good thing for the economy. That’s right, adding what amounts to new taxes/higher premiums on the rest of us so that underemployed people will get subsidized health care is considered a good thing. Only in a country run by Obama, his Democratic Party and sycophantic supporters like legal eagle would we ever hear such crap. They pee on the American people and say that it’s raining. Oh, I heard that from Fox News. Tell me that it isn’t true.

          • legal eagle

            You haven’t worked in years you old man…..man hours are always available… You just have to hire employees…

          • George Williams

            I corrected myself. I was referring to man-years. No, if people are capable of working full time a 1 man-year, and they choose work 30-hrs per week because they will receive Obamacare subsidies, 5/8 of a man-year will lost and the taxpayers who work full time will be on the hook for the costs. And look who’s talking. You claim to be a lawyer. You haven’t picked up anything heavier than a pencil and a latte in you whole working life.

          • legal eagle

            I pick up mu IPAD every day…Does that count? LOL

          • Tim Ned

            Good example. When my attorneys pickup their Ipad, I get a bill! George’s synopsis makes perfect sense.

            Thanks George for the setup!

          • George Williams

            I though so, not a real job in your entire life, yet you set yourself up as the champion of the working man. You haven’t a clue.

          • George Williams

            Your Sundowners is showing. You can’t even comprehend what I was saying. The jist of my narrative is that people are expected to voluntarily cut their working hours so they are eligible for subsidized health care, making themselves welfare recipients.

            This article describes the issue at hand: http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/feb/05/gretchen-carlson/carlson-cbo-says-obamcare-will-cut-full-time-jobs-/

    • dennis

      Your’s might be the single most idiotic comment of all time. Have you ever watched Fox or allowed a rational thought to burrow it’s way through the concrete and into your tiny little head? No wonder Obama won twice with supporters like you

      • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

        Dennis, he’s proven time after time that he doesn’t actually watch the network. He just parrots whatever he hears in MSNBC hosts say about Fox.

        • Mikal Gastpipe

          I’d bet the RANCH on THAT!

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            And you’d win.

          • Mikal Gastpipe

            EVERY time…

          • Progan0l

            Progan01 likes to flag me on Bloomberg. But here’s his info:
            Peter Rogan
            (248) 588-9591
            4210 Rochester Rd
            Royal Oak, MI 48073
            You can look him up on FaceBook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and YouTube. He’s 58, hasn’t had a job in years, NEVER kept a job for as little as 3 years, twitchy, bald, fat, lonely, and lives in Section 8 housing. You know, typical liberal.

        • legal eagle

          John,
          What proof can I offer you regarding my viewing habits? Not only are you repetitious but you seem to feel that repeating an opinion makes it a fact….

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            The same proof I offer every time you ask me this. You keep insisting that the network is ignoring stories that they report on heavily, and claiming that they obsess over stories they barely report on at all.

            If you actually watched it, you would know that what you write about the network has no basis in reality.

            You thought Charles Krauthammer was on Special Report for 45 minutes a day for God’s sake!

            If I were to insist to you that Chris Matthews has black hair and Lawrence O’Donnell was a woman, what would be the explanation for that other than me never having watched them?

          • legal eagle

            Have you been treated for OCD? Your obsessed with my comments….LOL
            You couldn’t argue your way out of a paper bag…you just keep repeating B.S.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            I’m obsessed with taking to ask those who lie – as you do in practically every post you leave on this website.

          • legal eagle

            You need to get a life….You’re obsessed with everyone who lies? You need to get some medical attention ASAP..

          • George Williams

            He consulted with me and I’ve pronounced you hopelessly psychotic. Check in time is noon tomorrow. Don’t be late.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Thanks for finally admitting that you’re a liar. Did it feel good?

          • George Williams

            It’s the Sundowner’s syndrome. He’ll recant in the morning.

          • Sheila Warner

            Love this one! I’m truly LOL.

          • Tim Ned

            Facts! Just bring in some facts in place of your hate.

            I don’t agree much with Rachel Maddow. But I have the respect she can articulate her positions even though there is not much I agree with her on politically.

            Some where in life you believe you got a bum wrap and you have found the people to blame; The Republican Party! You need to get this under control.

          • George Williams

            He doesn’t need no steenking facts, he’s an angry old white man. And a apparently a self-hating one at that.

          • Tim Ned

            Agree!

      • Mikal Gastpipe

        The Obama kool-aid is a LOT better tasting than the Jim Jones kool-aid.

      • legal eagle

        I do watch Fox News. It’s like watching WWE wrestling….Fake outrage, O’Reilly ranting about subjects he has no clue about….Hannity parroting RNC talking points, The Five ganging up on a buffoon like Bob Beckel and Greta V.S. having her daily interview with Alan West or Trump…..
        Fox News is the de facto clubhouse for angry older white men, who are upset that the 1950′s are over….

        • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

          No. You don’t watch Fox News. You’ve proven that beyond a shadow of doubt time after time.

          Although my guess is that you do indeed watch WWE wrestling. It seems more at par with your worldview.

          • Tim Ned

            Maybe John he gets the two confused? That would explain a lot.

          • D Parri

            Think about it, TN, it makes sense that he would make these comments.

            After all, the CBO report is “good news”, ObamaCare will help all Americans have better healthcare, the minimum wage increase will benefit the working class….

            I think the basic logic is “black is white, and white is black”, “good is bad and bad is good”, etc. Legal Weasel is a good little ideologue!

          • D Parri

            I doubt if it has been fixed, but I thought I’d just try. I left you an upvote.

            I have been on a lot of other websites where the voting function was working just fine…like it used to do here. That means that there is some dysfunction for me when I use this site, not other sites. The ID is the same.

        • George Williams

          That’s right, only people as elevated in intellect as yourself can judge Barack Obama. Tell us why there’s no smidgen of evidence that the IRS is a scandal. First the White House tells us that it was rogue agents in a Midwest IRS office and then we find out otherwise, that it was directed by an appointee in Washington.. This was deja vue all over again, as they say. Time and again the White House jumps to defend itself by deflecting and time and again we find that the truth is otherwise. No, it is not O’Reilly that is without a clue, it is the sadly pathetic Obama sycophants like yourself who are in denial that don’t have a clue.

    • George Williams

      Uh, just what are they trying to distract us from? Just to inform you, the Republican Party has a wing of gay people who don’t agree with Obama’s agenda either. Your reference to gays is just a means to distract us from the issue that this is about bad governance, not racism or bigotry.,

      • Tim Ned

        Legal just doesn’t want us to “look at the man behind the curtain”.

        Compliments Wizard of Oz.

    • 4deuce

      No, YOU are trying to distract us – with your moronic daily flood of defend-Obama-at-all-cost posts.

    • Jeff Webb

      Oh, you’re just pining for the good ol’ days, when you bitter, old, white left-wing cultists didn’t have to worry about your opponents enjoying the First Amendment as much as you. You should go take your meds.

      • legal eagle

        The right wing haters have ben around long before you and I were…You’re just the next generation…How sad..

        • Jeff Webb

          Regardless of time in existence, what’s really sad is that left wing bitter old white cultist haters longing for the good old days who need their meds exist at all.

  • joepotato

    There’s not a smidgeon of corruption in the IRS and nobody died in the Benghazi Affair… The Indonesian “I” (imposter) POTUS shrugged off the deaths in Benghazi, and the blatant corruption that prevails in his imperial regime… That’s about it…

    • forrest

      Bernie has a bug up his butt about bill o for some reason and its probably none of our bussiness. They go back a ways. He is probably right about not much being accomplished with an interview on superbowl sunday because the jocks would rather run down the street for another six pack or to get something other. I think the President did the thing just to piss Bill off by telling him to his face how bill was so unfair to him on all the important issues that the President is willing to throw under the bus. We pay the President for answers so if he is not answering the questions for us americans then he is not being fair to us, period. Bill Oreilly gave it a shot and thats a lot more than I can say for the rest of America.
      Hey Bernie. When are you gonna interview the President?

      • legal eagle

        Bernie will interview Obama when Obama decides to appear on a segment of Real Sports on HBO….could happen…and Bernie will not be throwing papers in the air and demanding answers…but Bernie’s hair will remain perfect…LOL

    • legal eagle

      Benghazi Affair? The only reason you give a crap about Benghazi is because it’s a talking point against Hillary….What exactly do you believe Obama did wrong in the “Benghazi Affair”?

      • George Williams

        There you go again, deflecting. Apparently Hillary is so sacred that she’s beyond reproach and only picked on because she’s a woman. Go ahead, use the she’s a women and running for election get out of jail card. We see this absolution of sins all the time in the Democratic Party. Bad governance criticized = racism or must be the war on women. It’s never bad performance, because all we have to do is look how well the nation is with its low labor force participation rate and great Obamacare web site and all the low premiums, low deductibles that go with his hugely successful program that no one read to be sure that it was workable. After all, reading the would have jinxed the whole thing. Democrats are geniuses because they don’t even have to read their legislation for it to become raving successes.

      • Lc Goodfellow

        Wake up Ol’ Seagull, your as full of it as a Xmas Turkey.
        Benghazi- more absurd lies than Obamacare, a possible arms deal with rebels gone bad, and the cover-up of murder.
        How could one leader be involved in this many lies, frauds, scandals, and cover-ups?
        There’s enough here for a century of Presidents!

      • joepotato

        You think you’re so F____ smart… This conversation is not gonna happen, Mr. Seagull troll… I don’t have time… nor will I make time for trolls like you…

  • Didn’t watch

    100 million viewers watched the Super Bowl. 10 people watched O vs. O interview. Gave everyone time to go to the bathroom, get some more nacho’s and a beverage.

    • legal eagle

      You probably stayed in the bathroom for the whole game…

    • Sheila Warner

      Funny!

  • Just Sayin’

    Sporting events should be about sports. Not various social issues (i.e. pink attire, etc.) and NOT politics. I’m sick of the omnipresence of Mr. Obama. Even his wife had to insert herself in the reading of the Declaration of Independence, which they don’t seem to read on July 4th. Can’t we have one day without them?

    • brickman

      I agree that sporting events should be about sports. Can we stop with God Bless America during the 7th inning stretch.?I’m okay with the National Anthem at the start of the game, it’s a song of unity. How about “This Land is Your Land” alternating with God Bless America. My wife definitely agrees with you. She has been fighting breast cancer. She watches sports to forget her troubles. Every game has at least one or two “human interest” stories that do nothing but depress her. The Olympics are the worst.

      I watch a lot of soccer from the UK, Spain, Italy, Germany and Mexico. None of these countries do any thing like American TV.

      • Sheila Warner

        They sing “God Bless America” at your ballpark? Where do you live? At Citizen’s Bank Park in Philly, we sing “Take Me Out To The Ball Game” during the seventh inning stretch.

        • brickman

          Yankee Stadium and I believe, Citifield (haven’t been there yet). I used to go to Connie Mack Stadium as a kid but I’m a Mets fan and most of my friends are Yankees fans. There’s a Phillies farm team about 2 miles from my house but people here root for NY teams.

  • Acu-Vue

    Given the time allotted, I give O’Reilly an A+ on his questions, interruptions, and follow ups. He attacked and cornered Obama on every front. All of you out there giving your opinion on what you would have said at what point in time during the interview “Just Don’t Get It” — The man just plain will not answer, “Period, End of Story” — Sound familiar! I give Obama a ZERO on his answers. The sad part is due to this event or non-event as it turned out to be, Obama’s approval rating will rise. How sad.

  • JMax

    “The problem is no news came out of the interview.”

    That would be because Bill brought up no subject for which there was news to come out. If Bill had played to the Super Bowl audience instead of his Factor audience, he might have gotten something newsworthy.

    • veeper

      Yeah…he could have thrown obama the usual softball questions he’s used to getting so obama could play to the beer pong and head up the butt crowd.

  • Gloria

    The Big O’s meet! The bout between the egomaniacs….tuned in for less than two minutes and could see this love/hate/respect/disrespect fest would go absolutely nowhere except to where the pres wanted it to go. He got to take his swipes at Fox, plus deal out more lies & omissions. O’Reilly got to say he interviewed the pres again (big deal – the so called interview was nothing but a platform for the bigger O to say exactly what he wanted to say, regardless of what he was asked) and for Bill to toot his own loud brash horn.
    Waste of time! Just like the game turned out to be.

    • MarioG

      I don’t know what interview you were watching. The one I watched confirmed to anyone with an open mind that the president is a chronic liar and we have no way of knowing when he is telling the truth and when he is not. It also showed that the president is a chronic whiner, who, like a spoiled brat, cannot take any responsibility for anything and has a psychotic need to blame anyone but himself. This is BIG news for those who may have previously believed the pablum that comes out of the major liberal media.

      • Gloria

        If you noticed in the first line I said I watched for less than two minutes. Therefore, I didn’t really watch it! Why would I want to listen to that chronic liar spin some more yarns? I agree totally with what you said! Except for the part about not knowing when he is lying – that’s easy. It’s when his lips are moving and words are coming out. You are right about his being a chronic whiner who refuses to take responsibility for ANYTHING. It’s the blame game for him all the way all the time. So what I was saying is why should I watch it when I knew exactly how it would go, and I take every opportunity to snap off the tv when our esteemed leader makes an appearance, which is way too often. I figured Bill couldn’t lay a glove on him cause he is too smooth by half. It was a game of ‘can’t touch this’.

        • MarioG

          Gloria – you and I know Obama is a pathological liar, but the idiots, Gen Xers and millennials who voted for him TWICE do not. The previous scandals did not impress them because they believed the lies, aided and abetted by MSNBC and the liberal print media, Democrat hacks, NAACP, etc. and had no way to know what was the truth. Now, Obamacare is hitting them where it counts and they are paying attention. O’Reilly actually demolished what remained of Obama’s credibility because people who actually have cancellation letters in their hands and cannot get into the website are going “Whaaaa?!”

          • Gloria

            When the mainstream media, both broadcast and print, are soooo slanted toward the Democrat candidate, to the point now where they actually ignore the truth – shill for the president – it is not surprising that public opinion of the masses is tainted. Most voters do not take the time to actually think, weigh the FACTS, etc. They just go with the liberal flow, follow their celebrity heroes and hear only the views expressed by them. They do not want to be confused by the facts. Don’t know what it will actually take to turn that around or if it can be at this point in time. I hope I live long enough to see it shift back, but I have my doubts. Even the loss of coverage to many may not be enough for them to wake up. There are more takers than makers and those who gets, votes so they can keep getting it!

          • MarioG

            I’m glad people like you are out there. I hope you get involved in the political process and help to take back the Senate and bring the last two years of this failed experiment in affirmative action action at the presidential level to an ignominious end. Let’s send him to the dustbin of history crying and whining like the loser he is.

          • Gloria

            Hey Mario,
            I have been on this bandwagon opposing liberal media bias since I first noticed it in 1992. Guess what? I did get involved – my votes, my letters to the editor & opinion pieces in local papers, my contributions, etc. – all spitting into the wind. The force is too big and there are not enough like minded people to make a difference any more. The worst news is that our number is shrinking not growing. Time to throw in the towel? Feel bad for the mess my grandkids will inherit.

          • MarioG

            Hey, Gloria, What kind of crazy talk is “Time to throw in the towel?” Don’t you dare. Our founders faced much worse. We, too, shall prevail, because Obama’s lies are finally beginning to catch up with him as people are being affected directly by joblessness and Obamacare and Bush’s warranty has run out.

    • Sheila Warner

      Hell no, the game wasn’t a waste of time! Go Seahawks!

  • ksp48

    Everyone is focusing on the “smidgeon” . For me, the most telling lie was this:

    O’REILLY: OK. I got a letter from Kathy LaMaster (ph), Fresno, California. I said I would read one letter from the folks, all right?

    OBAMA: All right.

    O’REILLY: “Mr. President, why do you feel it’s necessary to fundamentally transform the nation that has afforded you so much opportunity and success?”

    OBAMA: I don’t think we have to fundamentally transform the nation…

    O’REILLY: But those are your words.

    • veeper

      Bill clinton still marvels at obama’s ability to lie so effortlessly and easily….

      • Lc Goodfellow

        ” … close, but no Cigar … “

  • ksp48

    You simply can’t be argumentative with the President. He wins if you do I too wish O”Reilly had been, but I think O’Reilly was probably correct. As it is, all but the blind could see Obama lying and lying (obfuscating, ignoring and lying).

  • BaldEagle

    Two thought: 1) Hindsight is 20-20; and, 2) describing the interview with one word – obsequious.

  • veeper

    Come on now Bernie……

    Get that jealousy under control…..

    Bill got an interview and you didn’t…..no need to get your panties in a knot……

    You’re better than this…….

    • legal eagle

      How would Bernie get an interview? For what show?

  • Wally C

    The President accused Bill of being unfair. Bill asked the President to give one example. He couldn’t or wouldn’t. That speaks more about the President than anything he actually said.

    • veeper

      obama has been thoroughly trained in giving responses and answers to his satisfaction…..

      Example:

      Q. Did you know Benghazi was a terrorist attack?

      A. My dog peed on the carpet this morning.

    • MarioG

      Wally, the president DID say what he felt was “unfair” – any question about any of the serious screw-ups by his administration.

  • John H

    “The problem is no news came out of the interview.” Not true. In fact, as Bernie goes on to say, we learned a lot of news. We learned that he is a liar (okay, most of us knew that already). And we learned that Mr. Øbama will not shoot straight with the American people.

    • legal eagle

      Maybe Bernie can tell us when is the last interview he did tat created “news”? What a nonsensical point by Goldberg…

  • wally12

    Bernie: I disagree will your after thought that O’Reilly’s interview was not effective. I did agree with some of your comments on Bill’s show especially your hinted suggestion that further follow up should have been Bill’s tactic. Bill should have had his entire list more flexible so he could have asked follow up questions for various replies from Obama. For instance, the issue of whether the IRS targeted the Tea Party and other conservative groups, Obama stated that not a bit of foal play existed even though the investigation wasn’t complete. Bill should have asked Obama when the public and/or investigators would receive all correspondence including emails and telephone conversations pertaining to the so called scandal. After all, it is only proper that the government be transparent as he promised in his many speeches to the citizens.

    • Lc Goodfellow

      The thing that has me worried about this Gov’t is the unknown number of Demies as’ Public Servants ‘ in our U.S. Government. You can’t call them ‘ Civil Servants ‘ not after 2013 and all the ‘ FiFth’s ‘ taken.
      That’s far from being ‘ Civil ‘ – F&F, IRS, NSA, AP, the Census Bureau and Benghazi ‘Lies’ on five networks.

      There’s enough here for a century of Presidents!

      • wally12

        You are exactly correct. It has me worried too. One must remember that FDR was the mastermind of this problem. FDR was responsible for the large number of agencies that have been created. When he did this, he made sure that only democrats were hired for all the important positions. These agencies have had democrat control since. JFK helped cement democratic control of government agencies by allowing public employees to be union membership and we all know where unions stand in the political arena.
        Nixon was smart enough to know that if he didn’t create the EPA , it would end up being run by the democrats since the country was demanding hazardous waste and better environmental controls. He was successful in staffing the original EPA with conservatives and placed a republican as the first administrator. That was the reason that Carter couldn’t get the EPA to do his bidding so at least the agency had some conservative control. The sad part is that the EPA has morphed into more extreme environmental ideas. Plus since the administrator is appointed by the president, the EPA will go with any and every program that Obama feels necessary. It is time to replace the president and to keep a lid on some of the EPA and other agencies.

  • PJJEPT

    Amen! Bernie, you nailed it. The White House spinmeisters knew exactly how this would go. Most people have not followed these scandals to the level of Fox viewers so the President’s comments are easily taken at face value. As much as it pains me to say this, the truth lost the interview. That’s no knock on Bill.

    • MarioG

      Bernie didn’t nail anything, except to confirm his own envy. Of course we got some important news out of the interview. It confirmed
      to anyone with an open mind that the president is a chronic liar and we
      have no way of knowing when he is telling the truth and when he is not.
      It also showed that the president is a chronic whiner, who, like a
      spoiled brat, cannot take any responsibility for anything and has a
      psychotic need to blame anyone but himself. This is BIG news for those
      who may have previously believed the pablum that comes out of the major
      liberal media.

  • allen goldberg

    A serial LIAR, Obama showed once again, he will never ever admit, even claim responsibility for anything….I am surprised that he did not blame Mr. Bush..but his base would believe anything he says about anything. Why should anyone actually care what liberals think? They collectively suffer from a mental disorder. And the evidence is as plain as the ten scandals, the lies about his responsibilities…the list goes on and on…last comment…I have asked liberals if this were a republican president, or a conservative, who had done all these things…would they be supportive? 9 out of 10 said….they would support Impeachment. True, not scientific at all…but look at the incredible lack of thinking they are guilty of!!!!!

    • firststater

      In response to your last question, all one has to do is look at the drubbing Governor Christie is taking over a traffic jam in, of all places, the greater NY City area. Not good if a political dirty trick but, come on man

      • veeper

        The real Christie bridge story……

        hillary the hags supporters set up the bridge lane closings to create a scandal for christie…..

        it’s from the old bill clinton campaign tactics playbook……

      • Ted Crawford

        Christie is simply experiencing the fate of every Quisling throughout History, Once their value has been extracted, they are quickly destroyed!
        Given his leap Left in October 2012, they might well have been concerned he would pull a Charley Crist and Primary Hillary and that is not in the script!

      • allen goldberg

        Firststater..You are right…I am giving people credit they do not deserve. Thanks for pointing this out!

  • firststater

    With his show of disrespect for the President and the Office, I believe, despite the President’s calm and cool, he quickly tuned OReilly out. If OReilly was pressed for time he should have requested more or limited his questions to one.

    • ksp48

      Ridiculous.

      • legal eagle

        Allen Goldberg must either be a pseudonym or a relative of Bernie Goldberg’s…..The only thing that has been diminished is the brain cells of the RWNJs who watch Fox News or listen to Limbaugh and Hannity.

    • allen goldberg

      Disagree. Respect is earned. And Obama has not done this at all. Allow me to point out that The President is an elected official, not ordained, or royalty. The respect of this office has been diminished greatly due to this Impostors presence.

    • MarioG

      Why would any sane person “respect” a chronic liar like Obama? Anyone psychotic prevaricator can appear to be “cool” while looking you in the eyes and piddling down your leg. It all becomes for naught when the Fact-checkers tell us that almost all of it was a lie or an evasion.

  • Lc Goodfellow

    The more educated you are, the harder it is to see the simple truths that are staring at you in the face. Obama is the new ‘Legend’ in his small mind.

    A social state by Saul Alinsky: Obama and Hillary are followers of these thoughts;
    There are 8 levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state. The first is the most important.
    1) Healthcare – Control healthcare and you control the people
    2) Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
    3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
    4) Gun Control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.
    5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income)
    6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.
    7) Religion – Remove the belief in God from the Government and schools
    8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

    Try this,
    Benghazi- more absurd lies than Obamacare, a possible arms deal with rebels gone bad, and the cover-up of murder.

    How could one leader be involved in this many lies, frauds, scandals, and cover-ups?
    There’s enough here for a century of Presidents!

    • wally12

      Very good listing and I agree fully.

    • veeper

      I have read Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals 3 times.

      Obama was/is a community organizer and student of Alinsky philosophy.
      That dictates his actions as Potus.

      Everyone should read Rules for Radicals for an insight into obama and his actions.

      • MarioG

        “I have read Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals 3 times” LOL! In that case you are ready to run for political office.

  • Karl S

    O’Reilly missed the opportunity to ask the president about things that the American people as a whole care about. Instead, he mostly asked about things viewers of the O’Reilly Factor care about (yes, the critics are correct about this).

    The prime example is Benghazi.

    Every week, sometimes it seems like every day, there are reports of Americans being killed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and on and on. People see home town soldiers returning from the conflicts in caskets or with their limbs blown off.

    Even though it involved an embassy, for most people, what happened in Benghazi is no more important than what I mentioned above. They don’t think that a dead diplomat is more important than a dead or maimed for life soldier.

    Benghazi wasn’t and couldn’t have been a factor in the last election, even though O’Reilly thought it could have changed the outcome. And it won’t be a factor in the next one.

    • Sam

      It’s not about what happened in Benghazi. It’s about lying and covering up about how it was precipitated. Maybe it wouldn’t have effected the election either way but that’s not really the point, because someone in the Obama administration must have thought so.

      • Lc Goodfellow

        Only in your Dreams.

      • JMax

        There was no cover up. There was nothing to cover up. There was an attack. It was not a bomb or a suicide bomber or an IED. The purpose of a terror attack is instill terror in civilians due to its mayhem and apparent randomness. There were no actual “civilians” in Benghazi, it was thousands of miles from any American civilians, it wasn’t random, and it wasn’t meant to strike terror. It was meant to capture or harm the Ambassador.

        Prior to the attack, was there anyone in the US who actually thought that terror was no longer a problem for the US? Did the administration ever claim it was no longer a problem?

        The answer is no. Therefore the idea of a “cover up” of how it was precipitated is meaningless and absurd.

        • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

          >>There was no cover up. There was nothing to cover up

          They made up a story about a YouTube video and a spontaneous mob being responsible for the attack when the administration knew almost immediately that terrorists were behind it. Then, they stuck to that story for many days, sending out Susan Rice to peddle the lies on national television.

          If that’s not a cover up, I don’t know what is.

          • JMax

            The CIA was the source of the “made up” story. This is a well-known and fully vetted fact. The reasons for that are also well known and have nothing to do with a cover up except to keep some intelligence from the perpetrators.

          • MarioG

            Obama was told by Panetta that it was a terrorist attack withing 30 minutes of the attack according to the Senate Intelligence Committee.

          • JMax

            Can you provide a link to the report that actually says that? That Panetta told the president that it was a terrorist attack?

            And then can you provide some reason why telling the president simply that the consulate was under attack was somehow inadequate without the word “terror” attached to it?

          • MarioG

            When O’Reilly told the President that Gen. Ham and Leon Panetta went in to see him right after Ham told Panetta that a terrorist attack was in progress, Obama said they told him there was an attack but not a terrorist attack.

            Why would they NOT tell the President that it was a terrorist attack when Gen. Ham testified that he told Panetta that it was a terrorist attack?

            How do you decide when to believe anything that Obama says and when not to, given he holds the record for WaPo Pinocchios by the Washington Post?

            Then they all left Susan Rice to make a fool of herself for all eternity. Talk about a war on women.

          • JMax

            “Why would they NOT tell the President that it was a terrorist attack?”

            Because it was immaterial. It was an attack. Whether or not it was a terrorist attack would have made no difference in the reaction and actions of the military whom Obama told to do everything they could to assist the consulate.

            I don’t have to rely on what Obama said about this. It has been vetted and verified by every committee and investigative report.

          • MarioG

            Spoken like a real Obama hack. 4 Americans were killed and this administration went into full Pinocchio mode, and you don’t care. Had it been acknowledged as a terrorist attack the response would have been far more urgent and forceful.

            While our people were being killed the rescue force was told to stand down and Obama left on a fundraiser. Then a female KoolAid drinker was sent out to be a lying sacrificial lamb as part of the Democrat war on women.

            This president has lied to the American people and the world in order to fool them and get elected based on affirmative action thinking. His lies on Benghazi and Obamacare were just enough to fool enough liberal hacks to get him re-elected. Now he will be held accountable by the friends and families of the 4 dead Americans and by history.

          • JMax

            “Had it been acknowledged as a terrorist attack the response would have been far more urgent and forceful.”

            How? Why? An attack is an attack. There is not one shred of evidence that Obama ordered a stand down. None. Zip. Nada. The suggestion that there was defies all logic.

            Affirmative action thinking? And you wonder why people say (some) critics of Obama are racist?

          • MarioG

            Sorry, but your callous disregard for the truth and common sense to support a grossly incompetent administration that should never have been re-elected based on their record is part of the problem.

            An attack by some rowdy citizens inflamed by a video they had only heard about is a lot different from a highly organized by trained terrorists using RPGs. The former would lead to some reluctance to send in heavy reinforcements with full force, whereas the latter would warrant pulling out all the stops to rescue the compound.

            Obama doesn’t do squat. He is embroiled in scandal after scandal and yet denies either knowing what any responsible president would have known or he blames others. We saw this during the interview with O’Reilly on Super Bowl Sunday, which should teach the Independents a lot about the complete lack of character and veracity in the current White House..

            He puts others on the hot seat to cover his ass and create plausible deniability in case things go wrong. We saw this with the attack on Osama which was set up so the Seal commander would take the blame if things went wrong.

            Nothing racist about a brown-skinned immigrant like myself observing that Obama was clearly elected based on affirmative action thinking. We can see this based on his lack of any qualifications or experience. He hasn’t worked a day in his life for any private sector enterprise, and so we see the threats of higher taxes, the blizzard of regulations, taunts that businesspeople did not build their own businesses, the lowest start-ups in history, and 70% of new jobs since 2009 being part-time, to prove it.

            He lied constantly, aided and abetted by the major liberal media, about everything possible to fool enough people to vote him in and his strongest supporters – black Americans – are paying a horrendous price for their loyalty. He has thrown the poorest Americans and the poorest blacks under the bus and made them wards of his government which is the worst thing possible for Americans who need jobs to climb the economic ladder.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly
          • JMax

            This refutes nothing I wrote.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            Read it again then. The CIA knew it was a terrorist attack and reported that to the White House even before the email referenced in the piece was sent.

          • JMax

            It’s immaterial. The reaction of the president and the military would have been no different with or without the word “terrorist” attached to it. “Terrorist” in this case is just an adjective that seems to be important to you.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            I’m not talking about the reaction of the military. I’m talking about the administration lying to the public and families of the 4 murdered patriots for political purposes in the run-up to a presidential election. They covered-up the truth about who the attackers were because Obama was running in part on his anti-terror record.

          • JMax

            Well that’s the Fox version of it.

          • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

            The Fox version of what? It’s already been established that the administration knew Benghazi was a coordinated terrorist attack almost immediately, yet went on for many days claiming that it wasn’t. That’s a fact. That’s not spin.

        • MarioG

          So, Susan Rice, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton lying about what happened to take the lives of 4 Americans including an Ambassador in not a cover up?

          And, lying about why the security requested before the attack was not provided and the requested help during the attack were not sent is not a cover up?

          How gullible or intellectually blind ARE you?

          If there was nothing to cover up then why did Susan Rice, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton all lie about what happened?

          Even the Democrat led Senate Intelligence Committee said so.

          • JMax

            I’d be more than happy to read the section of the Senate Intelligence Committee report that said any of them were lying. Good luck with that, but I’ll wait.

            That same report noted that Ambassador Stevens twice refused extra security that was offered.

            There is no evidence that the military did anything different from what they were told to do by the president which was to do whatever they could to help. Or you can show me the part of the report that says that’s a lie, too.

          • MarioG

            You need to stop drinking the Kool Aid that gave us the clueless Obama administration that is destroying the US economy and respect for the US among friends and foes alike. You elected the new hire in the Mail-room, right out of college, to be CEO of the company, and the results are about what we should expect.

            The Senate Intelligence Committee said that Gen. Ham told Leon Panetta within 15 minutes of the attack that it was a terrorist attack, and they then both went in to see the president. You have to be deaf, dumb and blind to think they did not tell the President the same thing. Yet Susan Rice was allowed to go out and ruin her career by lying to the whole world that it was some cockamamie video that no one had seen that caused the attack, and Obama lied about it in the Rose Garden as well as in a presidential debate as Fact-checkers have confirmed.

            The State Department refused numerous requests by Amb. Stevens for additional security. The one he refused was from the Army which would have put him at odds with his own Secretary of State.

            The Committee said the attack and deaths were “preventable”.

            Quote:
            The attacks were preventable, based on extensive intelligence reporting on the terrorist activity in Libya — to include prior threats and attacks against Western targets — and given the known security
            shortfalls at the U.S. Mission,.
            Unquote.

            Here a report of what was happening during the attack by a survivor:

            http://hotair.com/archives/2013/04/30/benghazi-survivor-help-was-close-enough-but-never-sent/

          • JMax

            I don’t drink Kool-Aid.

            GDP is rising. The deficit is rapidly decreasing. Private sector jobs are growing. The US imports less energy than it has in years.

            It doesn’t matter if Ham or Panetta told the president the attack was a terrorist attack. It was an attack. The military reaction to the attack would have been no different either way.

            The Rice talking points were written by the CIA.

            Nobody disagrees with the finding that the deaths were preventable. Most if not all of the deaths on 911 2001 were preventable. Mistakes were made. It happens. It happened a lot more under Reagan.

            Most rational people understand this. The investigations have been done. The reports are in. The election is over. People have moved on.

          • MarioG

            You are drinking the KoolAid and then some. Otherwise you would not try and spin a stagnant economy after 5 yesrs of a failed experiment in affirmative action at the presidential level that ha gone horribly awry. We now have 91.8 million Americans not working, a labor force of 62.5% the lowest since the second worst president in history, Jimmy Carter, business starts are at record lows, and a national debt that is now larger than the GDP in a trajectory that leads right to Greece.

            The deaths on 9/11 could only have been preventable had Clinton not been president – who emboldened Al Qaeda and hampered our intelligence apparatus by preventing the CIA and FBI from sharing intel freely. There was nothing Bush could do in 7 months to reverse the damage Clinton had done.

            The deaths in Benghazi could have been prevented if another Clinton had not learned bad attitudes from the previous one and had granted the additional security that had been repeatedly requested and then sent in the cavalry who were ready and waiting until ordered to stand down.

          • JMax

            Affirmative action? And Obama haters wonder why they are called racists?

          • MarioG

            I think I already disclosed that I am a brown-skinned immigrant. We tend to be a) meritocrats, and b) impervious to false charges of racism, which terrify Caucasians and are deliberately intended to chill further discussion.

            Obama meets every standard of an affirmative action candidate at every stage, Columbia, Harvard and finally the presidency. This is why his college records have been sealed and the entire country, in fact the world, is paying for his election as the most unqualified, uninformed, dishonest, divisive and incompetent president in US history.

            The US economy is in shambles and he is destroying the fundamental principles that made our economy vibrant and creative and productive. He has also made the world a more dangerous place by his apologies and appeasement of Islamic radicalism, his “leading from behind” and his relentless pressure on our ally Israel to compromise with the Palestinians who have sworn to wipe them off the map.

            According to his own standards, which he applied to George W. Bush, Obama is also unpatriotic and irresponsible for running up the national debt to over $17 trillion with no end in sight.

          • JMax

            Well everyone is allowed to have an opinion.

          • MarioG

            That’s true, but not their own facts. The most useful opinions are based on facts that can be observed and verified. For example, the condition of the economy, the growing unemployed and underemployed, the deteriorating plight of the poor, the stifled and frozen small and medium sized businesses where 80% of our jobs traditionally came from, the mushrooming national debt which will be an economic drag for our children and grandchildren. Overseas, we have to only look at the inflamed middle-east, the Iranian defiance which contradicted what our government had told us, and the growing threat to the security of Israel.

          • JMax

            And which of Obama’s policies are responsible for these?

          • MarioG

            Here’s just a short list:

            1. The apology tour in 2009 when he said the US was one of the foremost Muslim countries in the world.

            2. Allowing the Muslim Brotherhood to infiltrate the highest levels of our government.

            3. Supporting the Muslim Brotherhood, the umbrella terrorist group in the middle-east, under the pretense of democracy.

            4. Pressuring Israel to compromise with the Palestinians who have refused to even accept Israel because their founding charters require them to wipe Israel off the map.

            5. Failing to support pro-democracy insurgents in Iran in 2009 – 2010.

            6. Pretending to control Iran’s nuclear ambitions – falsely, as the Iranians were quick to tell the world.

            7. Leading from behind in Libya and allowing 4 Americans to die without help as he left on a fundraising trip.

            8. The colossal waste of almost $900 billion dollars in stimulus money to buy votes, while lying that they had shovel-ready jobs.

            9. Lying repeatedly from all 300 million Americans that they could keep their plans and doctors to Bart Stupak that Obamacare would exempt religious organizations from covering re-productive services that they object to on religious grounds.

            10. Stifling the economy with a blizzard of useless regulations leading to the lowest level of business start-ups in history.

            11. In addition, threatening small and medium sized business owners with higher taxes and sarcastic public ridicule that they did not build their businesses.

            12. In addition, creating massive financial uncertainties among those same businesses where over 80% of our jobs have traditionally come from.

          • JMax

            Clearly you are on Glenn Beck’s mailing list. Of course all of these are totally true except for #1 though #12. They are absurd and false. Every one of them is a hoax and a delusion.

          • MarioG

            Calling my certifiable points false doesn’t make them false – it only makes you deaf, dumb and blind, with all due respects to people who are really deaf, dumb and blind. You are probably one of these white guys with a humongous guilt trip over slavery for you to be such a craven Obama sycophant..

            You must get all your information from one of the Soros funded propaganda sites since you don’t have a clue about what is going on around you.

    • Ted Crawford

      I would hope that Americans aren’t really that naive! As a Soldiers, we always knew that the possibility of death or worse was simply in the Job Discription! Every Mission Briefing I even attended included the projection of expected casualities!
      That’s not true of State Department Personnel, We, or at least I hope my compatriots did, understood that we were expendable, in proportion to the value of the mission!

    • veeper

      It was enough of a factor to the obama campaign and liberal media to immediately attack Romney when he first brought it up……the day after the attack happened……

      they sought to squash it from the very beginning…..

    • ksp48

      As we have no soldiers in Iraq or Libya or “so on” , its odd that you want to ask the President about them coming home every week or every day in caskets or with their limbs blown off. Afghanistan would at least be relevant, but what exactly would you like to know from Obama that he hasn’t already told you? Actually, some of us do care about 4 dead Americans in Benghazi and why this President lied about it?

    • MarioG

      Benghazi and Obamacare were both factors in the last election and Obama was able to escape being held accountable for both by brazenly lying about both – right to our faces. Wise up. Watch Benghazi eat Hillary Clinton up, even if she has the stones to run.

  • Sam

    We are living in a world where people on both sides of the political fence are so steadfast in their beliefs, that they don’t really care if their guy is lying because it’s always justified by the perceived grater good. I know many that believe Obama is lying but think he should because he can push fourth his agenda unencumbered by potential scandals.

    • Will Swoboda

      Sam, you have put it as close as anyone can get it. And the the dems called Reagen the Teflon president! Obama gives Teflon a whole new meaning.

  • larryl212

    The sad part? Boehner. Why did OReilly go with Obama? We know what he’s going to say. But this Boehner character. The real story… in fact an historical story… in fact one for the ages… why Boehner won’t go for the “kill shots?” Fast ‘n Furious… IRS… Benghazi… Unconstitutional executive orders… et al. Yup. Boehner will whistle right by these train wrecks. But as for legitimizing millions and millions of illegal aliens… people who willfully broke our laws… dear John can’t wait to make these “Dems in waiting” his friends. If you ask me… Boehner is where the historical interview resides. Historians decades from now will ask where the “loyal opposition” was when this Constitutional Republic was being dismantled. Boehner needs to go on record. I’m not counting on it. But it should would be nice. RIP America.

    • Wally C

      O’Reilly didn’t “pick” Obama. The President gives whichever network has the Super Bowl an interview.

      • larryl212

        I know. My wording was awkward…”Why did OReilly go with Obama?” I was not hinting OReilly picked anyone. I was saying the interview was a waste of time historically. It was pure show biz. OReilly gets ratings and more name recognition for his books and shows. Obama gets to look “ruff ‘n tuff” to his loyal “Kool-Aide drinkers.” My point was the most important interview today should be Boehner… NOT Obama. Obama has played his cards. We all know where he stands. We know his world views. The real question? If Boehner represents the loyal opposition… where does he stand on all the big issues OReilly touched on? Now… can you imagine Boehner sitting still for an OReilly grilling? Will NEVER happen. And unfortunately for the great unwashed… we’re sitting here… slowly twisting in the wind. Shameful.

  • Rarin Togo

    I agree with you Bernie. I feel as though; if a job is worth doing, it is worth doing well. O’Reilly is a Harvard graduate. Did they teach him to do “dog & pony” shows there?
    Glad you mentioned what little could be accomplished in 10 minutes. I delivered a child within 10 minutes, during the half-time of a Super Bowl. That’s what a woman can do in 10 minutes on Super Bowl Sunday.
    If Bill would have used his mind instead of his calculator, just imagine what he could have accomplished!

    • Ted Crawford

      It’s actually much worse than that Rarin!
      As you so acurately pointed out Mr. O’Reilly is well educated, in addition to that he has been a political commentator for decades, yet he gave, with what he didn’t say, Progressive Congressional Candidates several valuable sound bits for their campaigns!
      The one that Bernie mentioned, will, of course allow them to claim that there are and were no scandals, except for the disingenuous Fox News !
      The second one, that will probably be coming soon, is one that they won’t even need to edit! The place where O’Reilly ask about his “Fundamental Change” comment! O’Reilly allowed Obama to declare “I don’t think America requires Fundamental Change”! O’Reilly’s lame response? “your words Mr. President” ! Are you kifdding me?
      The interview was about what I expected, given that O’Reilly, McCain, Rove, Even Mr. Goldberg himself, have decided to side with The RMSP(the organization that destroyed Gingrich), to aid the Progressives in defeating their fellow Republicans!
      I’ve, in the past at least, always considered the NWO contingent as radical Conspiracy Theorists. Given these facts , perhaps I should have given them more credit!

      • Rarin Togo

        Agreed.

    • ksp48

      He’s not really a Harvard Graduate. He was a journalism fellow at Harvard. Quite prestigious but not a graduate of the University.

      • legal eagle

        Don’t burst the fool’s bubble…..O’Reilly, a punter, also claimed to be a rough tough football player…

        • Jeff Webb

          >>O’Reilly, a punter, also claimed to be a rough tough football player…<<

          Got a link to him actually bragging like that? It seems like you're jealous of Bill. Perhaps you lack his athletic skills and are a little bitter. One thing's for sure: you're pretty ignorant about football players.

          True, BOR is technically not a graduate of Harvard University. Sorry to burst your left-wing fantasy, but he did receive an MPA degree from HU's JFK School of Government. Would you be more tolerant if he'd been a HU undergrad who got kicked out for cheating?

          • legal eagle

            even you could get MPA from JFK School pf Government….

          • Jeff Webb

            Hmm, appears the answer to my question is “yes.”

          • legal eagle

            A Harvard student who got kicked out for whatever reason would not have a degree….What are you talking about?

          • Jeff Webb

            Meh, it went over your head. Tends to happen with left-wing bitter old white cultists in need of meds longing for the good old days.

          • legal eagle

            Some of the crap you write about is way over my head…thank goodness….Guess I haven’t figured out all of the RWNJ code words/dog whistles yet…

          • Jeff Webb

            >>Guess I haven’t figured out all of the RWNJ code words/dog whistles yet.<<

            Of course you haven't. You're too distracted, with all the yearning for the gold old days you bitter old white left-wing cultists always do when you fail to take your meds.

          • legal eagle

            You’re stealing my material….LOL
            Find something original to use instead of repeating my stuff day after day…

          • Jeff Webb

            Yeah, seeing your talking points get repeated day after day is pretty annoying, isn’t it?

            Don’t get bitter now, old white left-wing cultist. You’ll feel better after taking your meds.

    • legal eagle

      I hate to burst your right wing fantasy but O’Reilly is not a Harvard graduate…

  • Buzzeroo

    First and foremost is the indelible fact that Obama is an untrustworthy liar whose falsehoods and crass double crossing behavior, domestically and internationally has been either ignored or obfuscated by all media outlets with the exception of FOX. Therefore, all suckers who eschew FOX are either unaware of his incessant perfidy or suffering from the lack of all facts underlying any accusations against him. O’reilly had a rare opportunity to force that slick poppinjay to spout his lies,decptions , evasions and childish misconceptions to an audience who does not make it a practice to listen to FOX ergo has never seen his bullshit in action-up close and personal——which is why the whole ‘dog and pony show was a good thing. If O’reilly garnered some new fans for himself and FOX it was little enough payment for having to sit there and watch that grinning phony spout his nonsensical drivel………such as HE being the source of Fox’s success when it is an indisputable fact that bested their competition for the 84 months PRIOR to his poisonous arrival on the scene.

  • Barancy Peloma

    i pretty much figured it was gonna be a waste of time and didn’t bother watching it. i knew time was going to be in very short supply and obuma would run out the clock. tough, embarrassing question he doesn’t want to answer? just bloviate and dodge.

    it was funny though to see how much the president thinks of himself. he actually thinks HE is the driving force behind the success of fox. when he asked bill ‘what will you guys do without me’?
    was quite amusing.

    • firststater

      Could have been worse actually, a love fest with one of the hacks from MSNBC

      • Ted Crawford

        Actually, the fact that it was with a suposed strong Conservative like O’Reilly, gave the Progressive Candidates much more effective sound bits!

        • Lc Goodfellow

          “If it ain’t broke, a progressive will fix it until it is”

          Why are so many of today’s followers’
          ” …. educated beyond their intelligences … ” ?

      • Barancy Peloma

        yep, chris mathews would probably keep trying to hump his leg and lick his face like a lost dog.

    • Will Swoboda

      O’Reilly’s answer to Obama should have been, ” Fox will just as successful after you’re gone as it was before came”.

    • legal eagle

      Fox News is attempting to distract us, [and] rather than being a news organization, they are a spite-driven anger machine rooted in a fear that any change in the status quo will inevitably erode our nation’s traditional power structure, leading to internment camps for ‘real Americans,’ powered by solar energy and tacos. Wait! Hard-shell, gay tacos.”

      • http://johndalybooks.com/ John Daly

        How would you know? You never watch the network.

  • EddieD_Boston

    Any other “journalist” would have done the interview on his/her knees.

    • Ted Crawford

      If it had been my choice, I would have chosen Megan Kelly! She achieved her current position, at least in part, and of course aside from, her obvious skill, by not ever backing down from O’Reilly! If it was deemed necessary that it be a male, I probably would have chosen Brett Baier

  • savage24

    I agree that O’Reilly should have passed on this interview, all it did was inject this narcissistic president into the festivties of Super Bowl Sunday. Nothing was forthcoming from Obama that almost everybody did not know already, and really did not need to hear or see again. Call me a racist or whatever you want, but the less I see and hear this guy the better.

  • greatj

    Lois Lerner never went after Obama’s enemies by herself. Ask Axelrod, Burton, Cutter, Dunn, and the rest of the committee to reelect Obama 2012 and you will get all the answers.

    • firststater

      don’t forget Pflough and Massena

      • greatj

        I said ‘and the rest of the committee’ Sorry I cant name all of the Obama toads. Plouff and Messina are now with Hillary Clinton and covering up all of her her mistakes.

        • Lc Goodfellow

          You want to look for them, the new Bumper Stickers on the Obama clunkers,
          ” Monica Lewinsky’s X-Boyfriend’s Wife for President 2016 “

      • legal eagle

        Do you mean Loggins and Messina?

        • firststater

          plouffe and messina

  • john

    Bill O’Reilly does a lot of good for Wounded Warriors and for that I will be eternally grateful to him, Having said that, I can also recognize that he is an egomaniac. The fact that the white was big enough for both Obama and O’Reilly’s egos is a testament its builders, O’Reilly is turning the interview into a solid week of retrosoecives for his and the other Fox opinion programs. I understand that, but when is it going to be over? Obama did not answer any direct question with a direct answer and his minions are all saying either that O’Reilly was disrespectful or that Obama put him in his place. I agree with you Bernie, O’Reilly should have passed on the interview.

    • firststater

      OReilly is a very needy and insecure person thus the weeklong validation of his performance

    • Ted Crawford

      I’m in full agreement with you on his outreach through billo’reilly.com, and as a disabled veteran I’m especially thankfull for his efforts through Wounded Warrior Project!
      I only hope that whatever has caused his timidity, with respect to Congressional Candidates, that has caused him to side with John McCain, who apparently honestly believes that Surrender is an honorable and winning strategy, will quickly pass!

  • ted

    When Obama complained about the one-sided viewpoint of Fox, O’Reilly should have asked him if he’d rather have one voice — his — in the mass media that is America? O’Reilly is pretty much a self-promoting loudmouth “I’m a simple man,” he says expecting a pushback from the listener saying, “No, Bill, you’re the most powerful man in the universe.” Obama answered Bill’s questions as expected except for the Keystone where Bill really did press the president and wouldn’t get an answer, but set it up where Obama has to approve it. That, and that alone will do more for America than most anything Obama has done, not “accomplished” so far. Thanks, Bill.

  • Drew Page

    Bernie — You may be right about the majority of the listening audience not getting anything out of the interview. Those who support Obama will criticize O’Reilly and Fox News for being disrespectful and remain convinced that Fox will try to “make a mountain out of a mole hill” over issues like high unemployment, the growing national debt, Fast & Furious, the Benghazi massacre, IRS targeting conservative groups, NSA spying on Americans and Obama Care. Those who are critical of Obama’s policies, his actions and his inactions will remain convinced that Obama will dismiss these issues as non-problematical and ‘phony scandals’. Put me in the second category.
    I learned nothing new from the interview, but wasn’t disappointed because I didn’t expect President Obama to vary from his usual script. Unless Obama says something is a problem, it isn’t a problem, only an unfair political attack on him. Those of us who see the aforementioned issues as problems are either racists, “the undeserving rich”, or unsophisticated hillbillies clinging to our guns and Bibles, being led by
    propagandists like Fox News. If it weren’t for Fox News Brian Terry would still be alive, as would Ambassador Stevens and the three other Americans killed in Benghazi. If it weren’t for Fox News, no one would care about IRS targeting, NSA spying on Americans or Obama Care. If it weren’t for Fox News, unemployment would be below 5%, there would be no national debt, no global warming, “peace would guide the planets and love would rule the stars”. None of the other TV networks and major newspapers feel the need to report on these things, Fox is just trying to stir up trouble where none exists.
    While I truly would have loved to see O’Reilly react in the way you suggested, the Left would be screaming that O’Reilly should be fired and/or committed to a mental institution.

    • Rarin Togo

      Oh please. POTUS mentioned Benghazi & “fumble” in the same sentence. So, what does it matter, that he referred to Benghazi as a “bump in the road”, on ABC?
      Another issue is that all of the media, without exception, refers to major issues in America, as “scandals.” So, in other words they reduce them to nothing more than unfounded gossip. The facts, have been well vetted, in the Congressional hearings.
      If the media does not take POTUS seriously, how can one expect the free world, to take him seriously?

  • trailbee

    Definitely didn’t watch the interview, or listen. I figured it would be a waste of my time. Remembered from past experience when this president’s lips are moving, he’s either lying or trying to figure out a weasely way to say something so he doesn’t have to lie so he can’t be held responsible. I was right.
    Game was worth a listen, though. :)`

  • Ed I

    What stood out most to me was just how arrogant and egotistical President Obama really is. O’Reilly has a huge ego and shows it most of the time, but it paled in comparison to Obama. In fact Bill almost came off as humble. Yet for me there were no surprises, no news, etc. Obama was not going to answering any of Bill’s questions; he was going to pull an Alinsky on him. If everyone hasn’t gotten the memo as yet let us be clear, Obama and his minions did what they did in 2012 to get him re-elected. This is all a “game” of power and control. Maintaining control to have the power to run the richest most powerful country in world history. Throughout history people have done far worse and more to gain or retain power. The single worst thing Congress is doing, both parties, is allowing Obama to work without Congressional approval as specified in our Constitution. For those that believe he should or could be impeached you really must study the impeach process and history carefully,

    • Lc Goodfellow

      Ed Klein said, “I’ve been a reporter for 50 years and I decided that this was a phenomenon I needed to investigate. Here’s a guy that came out of nowhere, an African-American senator who had accomplished nothing, had no experience, somehow hypnotized millions of people into voting for him and then gets into the White House and it’s the first time we’ve ever seen anything like this: an amateur in the White House.

      “To me it was a great story, a story that need to be told because it had a direct impact on the future of our country.”

      • legal eagle

        Ed Klein? This is the guy you are quoting? LMAO…

    • firststater

      With respect to humbleness, I think you have Bill OReilly confused with Joe Namath

  • Michael McPherson

    Once again Bernie you nailed it. I was thinking the same thing so it was nice to see someone else with the same thought. As Bill said, “I can’t make him answer the question.” Obama’s deflection and change the subject tactics worked perfectly for him. His answer regarding Leon Panetta is evidence enough of that. So Bill, as smart as he is, was duped into being a puppet in Obama’s play. Sad but true.

  • 1940voter

    Obama is the only kid in the room that has done nothing he should be accountable for. The audience got to see a glimpse of the real Obama, a fraud who has been put on the backs of Americans by an uninformed, free stuff class of plantation residents who contribute nothing to this country.With the msm ratings and viewership lower then death valley Fox put a spotlight on the lies of Obama.

    • Lc Goodfellow

      I give a **** who wrote this. the LOinFomVoter is the Cause.
      Politics is the new Religion.

      “Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed and adored him and rejoiced in their loss of freedom and danced in his path and gave him triumphal processions. Blame the people who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of the ‘new, wonderful, good society’ which shall now be Rome’s, interpreted to mean: more money, more ease, more security, more living fatly at the expense of the industrious.”
      This is from one of my Roman History books and it almost reads like today.

  • GhostWriter

    I think Bill O’Reilly and Fox looked looked like what they really are. An extension of the Republican Party. Republicans are the enemy of the middle class. I can’t see why any middle class voter would vote against their best interests. A vote for a Republican is a vote for the destruction of America.

    • wally12

      It is good to know that liberals believe that only one party is responsible for the condition of the US morals, economy, economic freedom, etc, etc, etc. Their thought process says that government control of all facets of the citizen’s life is the ultimate achievement. Communism is of the same mind set. I’ll agree with you that the Rinos have contributed to the destruction of the US. However, Rino means they are really liberals.

    • ksp48

      Yada Yada yada

    • Lc Goodfellow

      If this is genius, it’s clearly not of the political type. Or the foreign policy type. Or the economic type.
      It’s not so much that he hasn’t lived to up to the hype as Messiah, as he hasn’t lived up to ordinary expectations for a fallible, human president.

      What does “I take full responsibility” really mean when the words come out of the mouth of a politician? Funny replies wanted

  • Stephen

    I agree completely with your take Bernie. It would have made news
    if Fox news and their man: Bill O’Reilly took a pass on the interview.

  • lark2

    I like Bill O’Reilly generally but, he has a huge ego and could not pass up this “interview”. It was a dog and pony show but it seems every “Obama Interview” is similar. The forums that count ARE his press conferences, the daily briefings conducted by the paid liar, and the day to day coverage journalist should be providing. They ALL are a dog and pony shows as well. The one thing I am critical of is that the Super Bowl is NOT the proper scene for a presidential interview and 10 minutes … is absurd. It is all meaningless as ALL sessions with Obama are. I don’t know what it is with this man but, so many people seem so blinded by his Race. I look at it as Racism by guilty whites. Are we headed toward another eight years of being blinded by Gender … if so, we are LOST!

    • ce

      93% of blacks voted for Obama. There’s racism for you.

      • Steve

        They also voted for as man that is 50% White….shhhh…don’t tell them though…..we don’t need another “It’s white mans law” statement from some person of color to stupid to figure out the POUS is half white.

    • wally12

      I disagree. O’Reilly did a good interview even though he didn’t get straight answers. Only a portion of the country gets to watch any of the cable networks. Therefore many have no idea of what is offered and thus they get a skewed view of Fox news. O’Reilly was able to show some of Fox news and their approach and to get a small example of Obama’s weak answers to harder ball questions. It is too bad that the news media doesn’t have a skeptical view of all presidents and ask questions that put the presidents in true defensive positions. At least there are Fox news reporters are skeptical and ask the harder questions. If more of the other news networks don’t wake up and start to hold all of government, this country will go the way of the old Soviet Union.

      • lark2

        Wally, for the record … Fox is the only network I respect and trust. I guess I was just saying that the Super Bowl is a great venue for beer, nachos, and chicken wings .. it is NOT a venue for a serious talk with the POTUS …. particularly, this one.

  • Jenn

    Obama is the face of evil….he needs to be impeached…

  • gbandy

    Deflection, blaming others(FOX for one), and outright lies is all I got from the interview. Obama works for the People and certainly not the other way around. His answers on Benghazi were laughable and obviously too obscure to be believable. I guess those who still worship the guy will continue to worship and those of us who know he is called the Liar of the Year will continue not believing anything he says or does.

  • lemonfemale

    I have to disagree with Bernie Goldberg. When you wear a wire, you let them talk. Bill O’Reilly wore one heck of a wire. Now we have all kinds of lengthy sound bytes. Obama has talked himself into a hole and we got to watch.

    • nickshaw

      I tend to agree, LF.
      The “smidgeon of corruption” and ObamaKare smelling like roses will come back to haunt him.
      Heck, both things already have, what with the ongoing investigation into the IRS flying in the face of his bromide. How does he know?
      And the CBO numbers yesterday on the latter.

  • Brian1899

    We still don’t know why the Administration deflected blame for Bengazi? Really Bernie???

  • Kevin Hubble

    I listened to Bill O’Reilly’s “Talking Points Memo” on the Monday after the Super Bowl when he gave his own assessment of the interview. I wondered if he had reviewed the tape of some other interview previously conducted with some other person that resembled the president. He let Obama get away with non-answers to questions that weren’t the questions most people wanted asked. He seemed afraid of looking rude and obnoxious toward the president. There was a lot of “spin” in his zone during that interview.

  • beniyyar

    Anyone who still believes anything Obama says will never be convinced otherwise, and those of us who doubt everything Obama says were unimpressed by the O’Reilly attempt to interview him.

  • Seattle Sam

    So if reporters can’t demand answers from the President at his infrequent press conferences, and Jay Carney ducks them every day, and O’Reilly can’t get answers when he’s sitting across from the President, from where exactly does the public get its answers?

    • nickshaw

      From congressional hearings.
      Sadly, the public would rather be calmed by soothing words from a proven liar.
      Go figure.

      • PJJEPT

        Unfortunately, most of the public gets their information from entertainment… Network news, television shows, movies, celebrity magazines… We’ve become a victim of our success. Even in our current tough times we have so much and people don’t realize just how bad it can truly get. We have poor (?) people that think a cell phone is a right. If we don’t wake up and start paying attention we are going to ruin the future of the ones that follow us.

    • Drew Page

      Maybe we will find out after the next election.

  • Jarob54

    Nothing spectacular about the interview. O”Reilly asked questions, and Mr Obama danced around them. It was a song and dance performance worthy of Soul Train, or American Band Stand.

  • chopkoski

    When you have a Warren G. Harding Wannabe as Prez, (which Obama is…) these are the expected results.

  • jazzdrums

    Bernie could have written this article the day before the interview. He is right on. It was a total waste of time except in Bill O mind and the universe he lives in. He is entertainment, not news. …and all the while Martin Dugard works on the next book.

    • Lc Goodfellow

      ” .. have you checked for diaper rash …? “

  • stelew

    In an interview, the question is what is important. Most, if not all politicians, rarely answer properly. I don’t know if O’Reilly couldn’t or wouldn’t ask a meaningful question. I turned it off when O’Reilly asked the president if he was tough on him. That set the tone for me.

    • chopkoski

      The sagacious sycophant….in a way.

    • Drew Page

      That was the part I enjoyed most. When O’Reilly asked Obama if he was being unfair to him and Obama says “of course you are being unfair, but I like you anyway.” The look on Bill’s face was priceless. I think Obama’s answer stunned O’Reilly because Bill bends over backwards to give Obama the benefit of the doubt on most everything and often criticizes those on the right for “hating Obama for everything”.
      My second most favorite response from Obama came when he denied wanting to fundamentally transform America. If you want to be a good liar, you have got to have a good memory. I think Obama has Alzheimer’s when it comes to remembering what he said.

  • Debdeb

    Good thoughts, Bernie. It was however refreshing to see an interchange with respect. The president lost my favor at the end when he launched into his stereotypic, general bad mouthing of an entire media outlet (nothing like trying to grab power by cutting down hard working, conscientious people whose ambition is to find truth). Media’s job is to search for facts, even when the facts are inconvenient. Next time maybe Bill can be the wise mentor allowing another shining star reporter to do the interview.

    • Drew Page

      Good idea. I think Shepard Smith would do a good job in such an interview as would Bret Bair.

  • Rodeck

    I gave that one to Obama. Clever to schedule for the Super Bowl. Who wants to hear about the IRS and such negativity at a festival or on New Year’s Eve?

    • Drew Page

      When would be a good time to hear such negativity? My suggestion would be during the 24 hours prior to the polls opening on election day, non-stop on all radio and TV stations.

  • gold7406

    the administration gave the false impression that everybody loves them, agrees with them and supports them, except Fox. with this administration the distance between reality and truth is quite vast.

  • Josh

    I don’t see what this interview accomplished for anyone other than reinforcing the polarization in America. Every blog and YouTube channel and FB page I see this interview on, the comments are predominantly very pro-Obama and anti-Fox or pro-Fox and anti-Obama. And, of course, I mean things like, “OMG Bill interrupts the President! Disrespectful racist!” and, “The usurper doesn’t answer anything! Ask him about Bill Ayers!” and suchlike.

    And as for football people who aren’t very political in the first place, I think all they learned is that O’Reilly wanted a shot to ask old questions the President has had plenty of practice dodging, and Obama is the master of the rambling non-answer answer.

    Pretty mild stuff, IMO. A lot more predictable than the outcome of the Super Bowl, that’s for dang sure. But at least it wasn’t a love fest where instead of asking actual questions, an interview asks ridiculous stuff like, “How enchanting is it?” or “What’s your favorite part about being President?”

    MSNBC’s 17 viewers were vindicated and had their chests puffed out. Everyone else, I suspect, yawned.

  • brickman

    Was the interview any worse than the one George W. Bush did with Rachel Maddow on MSNBC during his Presidency?

    • Drew Page

      Did anyone watch it?

      • brickman

        It was a joke. No Republican President would have the guts to be interviewed by Maddow.

        • Josh

          That may be true. I can’t call it. Though I’m not sure Bush is the best example. Maybe he did these sorts of things, but I don’t recall him popping up like James Franco in everything the way Obama does. Say what you will about the policies of the men, but their lust for the limelight was on totally different levels.

          I could be misremembering and Bush may have actually been out there everywhere accepting interviews from opinion-mongers, but the only time I remember it was in the early 2000s in a film spot from the WH lawn or something.

          • brickman

            Bush will have to be the example. He’s the only Republican President of the last twenty years.

          • Josh

            So, then, Bush was just gutless?

            Out of all the criticisms I’ve ever heard about the man, many of which I gladly hold my seat on the bandwagon for, his courage called into question is new to me.

            Rathergate and those particular hangers-on notwithstanding.

          • brickman

            Rove wouldn’t have allowed it. I’m sure the offer was made by someone at MSNBC if not by Maddow. He never took it. I let actions speak for themselves.

          • Josh

            Yeah. Good luck with all that. Broaches a little too far into conspiracy territory for my personal tastes.

            Looking back, though, one of the things I admired about Bush was that he wasn’t competing with the celebrities of the world for attention. If that’s because he was scared, grounded by Rove, locked in the bedroom by Cheney, or simply didn’t feel a need to plead his case every three days, the known outcome remains such.

          • brickman

            Yeah, flying by a jet on to an aircraft carrier deck was in his job description. All pols go public when they think it can help them and hide when they think it can hurt them.

          • Josh

            Sure. It’s vague and general enough to be true enough. Though if I had to give a Letterman-like top 10 on why Bush never sat down with Maddow, fear wouldn’t make the cut. If it does for you, good on ya.

        • Jeff Webb

          >>It was a joke. No Republican President would have the guts to be interviewed by Maddow.<<

          Nor would he be a whiny little pansy who blames his failures on media outlets and pundits who challenge him.

          As to your "joke," unless you can point to where Obama let Sean Hannity interview him, it's apples-to-oranges.

          • brickman

            Sean Hannity never interviews anybody. He asks a question and when the person gets to the third word, Sean interrupts him and starts with his memorized rant going non-stop for 4-5 minutes. There was a reason his partner was Alan Comes. I will give Sean some credit, he has breath control. He delivers his speech without taking a breath.

          • Jeff Webb

            The point is, Maddow is a hard left pundit, as Hannity is hard right pundit. (They’re both schmucks as far as I’m concerned.)

            It would take guts for Obama to let the latter interview him, but it isn’t exactly news that Obama is a pretty gutless dude.

  • Tim Ned

    Perhaps the pre-game audience who may have less interest in politics may give the issues Bill brought up a little more thought.

    Those of us active in politics know that the war on Fox, war on women, the old white republicans, the racial accusations are strategies defined by the Democratic leadership and carried out by their cooperative left wing news organizations and websites. It has been effective PR campaign and it worked. But I believe that tide has gone out and hopefully people are waking up. Those of us who look at issues more objectively can’t ignore these comments anymore. We need to question those comments and ask for the evidence. Even when they come from friends.

    • Debdeb

      Ted, it is difficult to be brave (or stupid) enough to NOT ignore the comments. There is such an ingrained brainwashing that one will be run into the ground if one dares to question the propaganda. During the state of the union speech watching on my daughter’s favorite station, MSNBC, I was trying to keep my mouth shut. I made one little comment about the bizarreness of highlighted text on the screen stating “It is a FACT that there is climate change”. [It was impossible to not say anything. They have changed the verbiage from global warming to climate change. No other part of the speech had flashed text. Nature is about a continuous process of change so climate change, by itself, is a natural and obvious fact. It needs more specifics.] It seemed like a neutral topic. One statement in humor resulted in me receiving a barrage of liberal-minded PR put-downs covering the entire spectrum. I had to walk away and miss the rest of the speech. And on top of it all, I am a big fan of the “green” and I have a wonderful daughter. It is impossible to erase the brainwashing. It is oblivious to the humor.

      • Bob Olden

        This is what mystifies me: My adult children who are intelligent and who were raised to value conservative principles are so under the spell of the liberal party line that they seem incapable of seeing through the smokescreens and the evasiveness Obama and all of his defenders. If I make any mention of something like the miserable failure of Obamacare, I am met with coldness if not outright hostility. I keep thinking they will see the light eventually, but the waiting is very hard.

        • fjwalker1959

          “who were raised to value conservative principles” maybe that was what drove them to it? Those rebellious little whipper snappers!

    • Drew Page

      Most people really don’t care about gay marriage, abortion, illegal immigration, free condoms, the national debt, Fast & Furious, Benghazi, the NSA spying or even the IRS targeting. Unemployment is only a problem for those who aren’t working and want to. The thing that is going to affect most people negatively is Obama Care. It’s only just getting started. Wait until the extension of the mandate for businesses terminates and millions of people lose the health insurance their employers used to provide. If they think their employer’s health plans were expensive and had high deductibles, they are going to faint when they see what’s available to them on the exchanges.

      • Lc Goodfellow

        This American cares!

        All of these tragedies were set in motion because a CEO lied and misrepresented. If this happened to one single American family, any private sector CEO involved would go to prison.

        Well it’s happening to millions of Americans. And that CEO conman is Barack Obama.
        But wait, there’s more. Has anyone noticed the nonstop scandals? Any one of these scandals would force a Republican President like Richard Nixon out of office. Obama owns all of them.
        Benghazi- more absurd lies than Obamacare, a possible arms deal with rebels gone bad, and the cover-up of murder.
        Fast and Furious- another government arms deal gone bad, responsibility for the murder of a U.S. border guard, another blatent cover-up.
        The NSA scandal- Obama listens into all of our calls. I hope he’s listening to mine. He’ll hear the word IMPEACHMENT come up in every sentence.
        The AP scandal- Obama and paranoid buddies like Eric Holder are even illegally spying on their adoring Kool-Aid drinking friends in the media.
        The IRS scandal- To get re-elected, the Obama administration sicked the IRS on Tea Parties, conservative fundraisers, and outspoken critics of Obama (like me). Their goal was to kill the political opposition, silence free speech, and intimidate critics. These guys put the “thug” in Chicago!
        The Census Bureau scandal- It appears government employees faked the unemployment numbers in the weeks leading up to the election to re-elect a President who wouldn’t know what a job looked like, if it hit him in the face.
        How could one leader be involved in this many lies, frauds, scandals, and cover-ups? There’s enough here for a century of Presidents!

        Socialism is like a beautiful woman with VD. No matter how many guys suffer from an encounter, she always has new takers among the young.

        • Drew Page

          Goodfellow, this American also cares about those scandals I mentioned. But it is my feeling that a majority of Americans who were not directly affected by these scandals aren’t upset enough to vote any differently than they did in the past. I do believe that a majority of Americans, regardless of party affiliation, will be hit in the wallet by Obama Care and will let their feelings be known at the polls.

  • Brian Fr Langley

    Bernie, Bernie, Bernie, Bill and fox got a lot more than just a little fluff. They got, what Obama claims they didn’t have. Legitimacy. Just the fact he’s there, (while claiming they’re less than legitimate), makes them look, well, legitimate. That a President should be interviewed around an event as auspicious as the Superbowl, says you and your audience are important. Like a lot of what this President says and does, his actions often belie his words.

  • helplessinil

    Sorry Bill, but not much of an “interview”. He let him slither out of the facts on most of the issues. I honestly don’t believe more than 20% of Americans (including Hilary) know or care about Benghazi. He could have asked him about his “transparency”, how he is going to “get to the bottom of this issue”, or how he is “going to find the persons responsible and they will be punished”. Those were his words like the “Fundamentally changing America”, but that would have him squirming and probably refusing any further interviews with those mean guys at Fox. Who cares, 3 more and he is gone. He played you Bill like he has millions of Americans.

  • Kathie Ampela

    The interview wasn’t for news junkies, elite journalists, pundits or political activists, it was for driveby America. As a recovering driveby myself, I understand how they think. I can’t tell you how many exactly were impacted by this interview but I’m sure it will draw in many more Factor viewers. In turn, there may be more who tune into Fox News and the counter narrative they don’t know anything about. Really, I don’t understand why conservatives are whining about this. If you didn’t want to be bothered with politics on Super Bowl Sunday because you live and breathe it, you were free not to watch. I didn’t watch it live because I pretty much knew nothing would be gleaned from it for me personally. I saw most of it online. You have to stop thinking like the elites over at CBS Bernie, and start thinking like the commoners to get it ;-)

  • Jerald Preston

    Mr. Perfect only needs to look to the future he doesn’t have to look at the past because he’s perfect.

  • Ken Heyl

    Yes, I understand your feelings, and I think you are right.
    Additionally, do you think there are maybe some people who have been turning away from Obama in the last couple of years and who might be finally ready for Fox? Maybe Bill will get them to tune in once and get them hooked?

  • C.Deniston

    Maybe 10 years ago O’Reilly would have done exactly as you suggested. Not today. He doesn’t need to be a shill for Republicans but he’s always talking about looking out for the “folks” we don’t believe that anymore. It’s not unpatriotic to believe that Pres. Obama has lied about Benghazi but it will never come out.

    • Lc Goodfellow

      Maybe, when someone writes another book for “That One” he’ll tell how he has ‘Stuck It to the Honkies’ for ten years. And “Dam !” it sure cost a bundle and almost broke the bank.
      ( any hope left, ’cause I’m out of change. )

      He’s certainly the type of individual that our Founders attempted to prohibit from ascendancy to the presidency.