Look Out Mexico: O'Reilly Threatens one of his Boycotts!

On May 17th of The O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly threatened to launch one of his little boycotts against Mexico if they sue the United States government over allegations that the National Guard is directly assisting with the detaining of people from Mexico trying to illegally enter the United States - if it turns out to be true.

O'Reilly, to Ernesto Derbez, Mexico's foreign secretary:

"If the Mexican government files one lawsuit in the U.S.A., one, pertaining to the National Guard, I will call for a total boycott of Mexican goods and no travel to your country."

A few years ago, Bill started a "little boycott" against France. O'Reilly thinks that his boycott has made a big difference, so he also said to Derbez:

"And if you don't believe me or you think it doesn't matter, Mr. Secretary, why don't you give the French ambassador a call? He'll fill you in."

But here is a newsflash! Since O'Reilly's "boycott"against France, their imports to the United States have actually increased. According to these stats from the Foreign Trade Division of the U.S. Census Bureau:

2002 (the year before O'Reilly's boycott): $28.24 billion
2003 (the first year of O'Reilly's boycott): $29.219 billion
2004: $31.605 billion
2005: $33.847 billion

As you can see, France's exports to the U.S. have increased by more than $5 billion since the beginning of O'Reilly's boycott.

But a boycott on imported goods from Mexico would largely damage our economy, as Mexico is one of the largested exporters of crude oil to the United States, more so than Saudi Arabia. We also import a ton of oil from Canada, another country that O'Reilly has threatened with one of his little boycotts. Canada and Mexico are actually our 2 biggest sources of crude oil.

Top 5 countries we import oil from, according to Gibson Consulting:
Canada: 18%
Mexico 15%
Saudi Arabia: 12%
Nigeria: 12%
Venezuela: 10%

So it looks like Bill is trying to destruct our economy, and further drive up the prices of gas. I've emailed Bill about this, from another email address and a different name. Next time you watch, look out for a Nancy Stewart from Birmingham, Alabama, because it might be me. :)

Transcripts from Sweet Jesus I Hate Bill O'Reilly:

Okay then, Mr. Secretary. Here’s a no-spin message right back to you. If the Mexican government files one lawsuit in the USA, one, pertaining to the National Guard, I will call for a total boycott of Mexican goods and no travel to your country. Now that might sound presumptuous and I don’t mean to be threatening, but enough’s enough. It is your government’s fault, sir, that there is border chaos. We in America have a right to security and a right to expect our immigration laws be enforced. So, once again, any action by the Mexican government that impacts border security in the USA will be met with a boycott call. And if you don’t believe me or you think it doesn’t matter, Mr. Secretary, why don’t you give the French ambassador a call. He’ll fill you in.

O'Reilly Blames NYC Mugging on "Mexican drug corruption"

On the May 17th edition of The Radio Factor, Bill O'Reilly described that his makeup artist "was mugged the other day; punched in the face" by "drug addicts desperate for money." He went on to blame the mudding on "Mexican drug corruption."

O'Reilly made this racist remark just one day after alleging that there was a "white power structure" and attacking the far-left for wanting to change this so called "white power structure", as we reported here.

O'Reilly seems to have a real racial vendetta against Mexico. During the broadcast, he claimed that "Mexico doesn't care about the United States." Other instances of O'Reilly's racism against Mexicans are:

• O'Reilly alleged immigrant protest "organizers" have hidden "hardcore militant agenda" to take back American Southwest
• O'Reilly claimed Mexican president has troops helping drug traffickers, falsely asserted central Mexican state of Jalisco is "on the border"
• O'Reilly claimed to have exposed the "hidden agenda" behind the immigrant rights movement: "the browning of America"
• O'Reilly's explanation for Cleveland Plain Dealer's opposition to Jessica's Law? City's "heavily minority, urban situation"
• Media figures attacked Mexican-flag-wavers, but not those waving Irish, Italian, or Israeli flags

This is just a few, as these only go back a couple of months. He has also referred to Mexicans as "wetbacks", a racial slur. O'Reilly will attack the "kool aid drinking left" for anything and everything, but he himself continues making racist remarks and downright lies.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

O'REILLY: You know, this immigration thing is very interesting because it -- it points out a lot of things, bigger issues that y'all should be aware of. You know, Mexico doesn't care about us. Mexico doesn't care about the United States. And, you know, it -- it -- we have to be friends with them. I mean, we just can't be enemies with them. But we're dealing with a country that is -- you know -- is so corrupt and so out of control that we -- you know -- we have to deal with them on a certain level. But we certainly can't let their corruption infect us, and it has, particularly with the drug trafficking.

You know, when you have the volume of narcotics, millions of tons of narcotics coming across the southern border -- if I'm the president of the United States -- that alone makes me put the [U.S. National] Guard on the border and not 6,000 guards. I would have 30, 40 thousand down there, because the damage that narcotics do to the fabric of society -- my makeup artist for the TV side -- I don't need makeup for radio, but some people say --

LIS WIEHL: Yeah, it would help.

O'REILLY: Yeah, thank you -- was mugged the other day; punched in the face in Greenwich Village. Now, who does that? Drug addicts desperate for money. So, this poor woman is walking down the street trying to support her little son, some guy walks up to her, punches her in the face and takes her purse. Now, nine out of 10 of these guys are drug addicts.

So, she is a victim of the Mexican drug corruption. And -- and -- and all you have to do is multiply that by 10 million and you see how all of this corruption in Mexico has infected our society. Yet, you have these pinheads in Congress -- see, they're not gonna get mugged. President Bush isn't' gonna get mugged. All right.

Understatement of the millenium: "Maybe I've been a little unfair to Mrs. Clinton"

On the May 15th edition The Radio Factor, Bill O'Reilly admitted that he's been "been a little unfair to Mrs. Clinton." How's that for the understatement of the year!

Media Matters has put together a compilation of O'Reilly's unfounded attacks on Hilary Clinton, which you can find here.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

O'REILLY: See this -- this is my whole thing. I don't have any emotion invested in President Bush. I'm not a Bush-hater. I think he's done some good things, and I think I've covered the man fairly in his five years in office. I think I've been very fair to him. Now, maybe, I've been a little unfair to Mrs. Clinton. Perhaps, I have been in the past. But I will submit to you, [caller], that you don't know, I don't know, and nobody listening knows where she stands on the border, how to win the war in Iraq, oil prices. We don't know. And that, to me, you can't -- you can't be giving somebody power if you don't know.

Guess What!? O'Reilly Once Again Olbermann's Worst Person!

On the May 17th Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Olbermann proclaimed: "Bill O'Reilly, now and forever, today's 'Worst Person in the World' " This time Bill O'Reilly received the honor for his remark that the New York Times and other "lefty zealots" think that "the white Christians who hold power must be swept out by a new multicultural tide," as we previously reported.

Olbermann said of Bill's remarks:
"Hold on. Bill, you're saying there's a white power structure that controls America and you're defending it? Does that opinion come with the sheet and the hood, or do you have to buy those separately?

You can view the video clip of Olbermann at Media Matters.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

OLBERMANN: But the winner, oh, the psychological end is near. Bill O. explaining that The New York Times and, quote, "many far-left thinkers believe the white power structure that controls America is bad, so a drastic change is needed." Hold on. Bill, you're saying there's a white power structure that controls America and you're defending it? Does that opinion come with the sheet and the hood, or do you have to buy those separately?

Bill O'Reilly, now and forever, today's "Worst Person in the World."

O'Reilly: New York Times and other "lefty zealots" think that "the white Christians who hold power must be swept out by a new multicultural tide"

On the May 16th The O'Reilly Factor, Bill O'Reilly claimed that the New York Times and other "lefty zealots" think that "the white Christians who hold power must be swept out by a new multicultural tide."

O'Reilly has believed that there are attacks on Christianity many times before, this is nothing new for Bill. Remember his "War on Easter"? He also claims to have exposed a secret immigrant agenda, the so-called "the browning of America", he's claimed that "there is a movement in this country to wipe out 'white privilege,' " and claimed that the immigrants are trying to take back the Southwest through mass immigration.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

O'REILLY: Now in 1986, President Reagan thought he could solve the [immigration] problem by granting about 3 million illegal aliens amnesty. The New York Times was in heaven, editorializing back then, quote, "The new law won't work miracles but it will induce most employers to pay attention, to turn off the magnets, to slow the tide." Of course, just the opposite happened. But the Times hasn't learned a thing. That's because the newspaper and many far-left thinkers believe the white power structure that controls America is bad, so a drastic change is needed.

According to the lefty zealots, the white Christians who hold power must be swept out by a new multicultural tide, a rainbow coalition, if you will. This can only happen if demographics change in America.

An open-border policy and the legalization of millions of Hispanic illegal aliens would deeply affect the political landscape in America. That's what The New York Times and many others on the left want. They might get it. And that's the "Memo."

Read: Media Matters

O'Reilly Once Again Olbermann's 'Worst Person' for Al Franken Remarks

On the May 15th edition of Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Olbermann once again named Bill O'Reilly the 'Worst Person in the World' for comparing 'internet assassins', cable television, and Al Franken to New York City radio DJ Troi Torain for the remarks he made, as we previosuly reported.

Troi Torain had said on his program that "I would like to do an R. Kelly on your (a rival DJ's) seed." "To do an R. Kelly" refers to a sex scandal involving famous R&B singer R. Kelly, when he was charged with 21 counts of child pornography after a "videotape allegedly shows him having sex with an underaged girl. " (see http://archives.cnn.com/...)

O'Reilly also said on his radio program that News Corp had made a mistake in trying to sue Franken because the name of his book was Lies and the Lying Liars who Tell Them: A Fair and Balanced Look at the Right, and as we all know, Fox News falsely prides itself on its slogan "Fair and Balanced", so they claimed copyright infringement on Franken's and the publisher's part. O'Reilly called the lawsuit a mistake because he claimed it helped Franken's book sales. The judge seemed to feel the lawsuit was a mistake on News Corp's fault, stating:

There are hard cases and there are easy cases. This is an easy case, for in my view the case is wholly without merit, both factually and legally. Accordingly, the motion for a preliminary injunction is denied.

These transcripts are from Al Franken's website, where he also notes: "Because this is a court transcript, the 'official' record does not note laughter in the courtroom, though there was much."

I suggest that you read over the transcripts, part of them are very entertaining. Here's a selection I found humorous, that O'Reilly also uses plays on trademarked phrases in his titles of his books:

THE COURT: Do you think the use of the phrase "lying liars" can be a joke?

MS. HANSWIRTH: It can be, but it isn't necessarily. I mean, look at the title of Mr. O'Reilly's book "The Completely Ridiculous and American Life."

THE COURT: Let me ask you about that: Mr. O'Reilly uses in his book "the good, the bad and the completely ridiculous." Is that not a play on "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly"?

MS. HANSWIRTH: I don't know.

THE COURT: You don't know whether that's a play on "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly."

MS. HANSWIRTH: I don't know.

THE COURT: Well, assume that it is. Is that not a play on a trademarked phrase?

MS. HANSWIRTH: That's a title of a movie.

THE COURT: Yes. And I assume there's some kind of protection for the title of the movie "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly."

MS. HANSWIRTH: Your Honor, there generally --

THE COURT: I think that I have in some of the papers, it might have been the amicus brief, a representation that the phrase "the good, the bad and the ugly" is a trademarked phrase.

MS. HANSWIRTH: I don't know that that's the case. And I don't know --

THE COURT: Well, I mean, isn't Mr. O'Reilly doing exactly the same thing using a trademarked phrase in the title of his book? The good, the bad --

MS. HANSWIRTH: He's not doing it to confuse. He's certainly not using it to sell the product.

THE COURT: Do you think that Mr. Franken and the publisher are intending to confuse buyers into thinking that he, Mr. Franken, is somehow associated with Fox?

You can view a video clip of Olbermann's show at Media Matters.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

OLBERMANN: Back to immigration. Are there solutions here? Maybe, maybe not. But there is a unique perspective from commentator and comedian Carlos Mencia; he's next. But first, even amid the press and urgency of the speech, there is still time for Countdown's latest list of nominees for Worst Person in the World.

The bronze to the police in Orlando, who appear to have overreacted just a tad to a senior prank at Edgewater High School there. After the officers sent to monitor the traditional event called for backup, the department sent a heavily armed patrol with helicopters and arrested and handcuffed five of the 30 or so seniors who were armed with shaving cream, toilet paper, and Hershey's syrup. But the kids were brandishing the toilet paper.

The silver: From the "I know where you were coming from, but ..." file, Michael Maxwell, a teacher in St. Joseph, Missouri, he gave his seniors a creative writing essay: "Who would you kill and how would you do it?" He's apologized.

But the winner: Oh, Bill O. Not only did he compare Al Franken and some of the people on the Internet and cable TV -- guess who he meant -- to, quote, "assassins." But worse, he's rewritten history, quoting, "When he attacked me a couple of years ago," Bill O said, "News Corporation made a mistake in actually trying to sue the guy." Uh, Bill, who made the mistake in suing, the one mistake big enough that the judge literally laughed out loud in the courtroom? Bill O'Reilly, today's Worst Person in the World.

Bill O'Reilly Cartoon

I found this cartoon and think it sums Bill up pretty well. I found it at http://www.onsecondthought.net/humor.htm There are some other editorial cartoons there that you may find funny.

Have Dinner With Bill!

I just saw this auction at Boston University:

Sit down for a private dinner with Bill O'Reilly, host of The O'Reilly Factor, the most watched news program on cable television. Winner and a guest will enjoy a private dinner and "no spin" conversation with Bill O'Reilly in New York City. Winner will be notified by the College of Communication Alumni Office with details regarding the dinner. Priceless. Online and Live Auction. Please see rules for highest online bidders to participate by proxy in the Live Auction on May 22, 2006 at www.bu.edu/com/golfclassic/auction.html.

The price is currently at $525, but the reserve has not yet been met. I wonder how much somebody will actually pay to have dinner with Billy O. You can check it out at: http://www.bu.edu/htbin/auctions/golf/auction.pl?....

O'Reilly Compares Al Franken to a New York City DJ

On the May 10th edition of The Radio Factor, Bill O'Reilly compared Al Franken, internet assassins, and cable TV to a NYC DJ who said that he wanted "to do an R. Kelly" on a rival DJ's 4 year old daughter. "To do an R. Kelly" is referring to a R. Kelly scandal where there was a videotape that allegedly showed R. Kelly having sex with an underage girl. The DJ, Troi Torain, was fired by Clear Channel Communications on Wednesday after offering his listeners $500 for information on where the rival DJ's daughter went to school, and saying "I would like to do an R. Kelly on your (the rival DJ's) seed."

I agree with Bill that this DJ was far out of line and definitely should have been fired. But that's not what this is about. The issue here is O'Reilly comparing Al Franken to this DJ. That is completely uncalled for. Franken, a liberal radio show host, could be seen as O'Reilly's rival radio announcer. So instead of threating "to do an R. Kelly" on his rival's daughter, he simply compares his rival radio talk show host to this despicable NYC DJ. O'Reilly, on Franken:

You know when that -- when that vile Al Franken, that disgusting human being that's failing in every way he can. The -- Air America just lost their New York City affiliate. When he attacked me in his book a couple of weeks ago -- not a couple of weeks ago, a couple of years ago -- News Corporation made a mistake in actually trying to sue the guy, and, of course, that helped his book sales.

Now, his last book bombed, nobody bought it, because we all ignored it. So, that's what I'm saying to you. If you give these people any publicity, if you mention their name, if you take them to court, then they prosper. That's what they want, these assassins.

This sounds to me like a personal attack to me, but O'Reilly claims that "I don't do personal attacks here." He only called him a "disgusting human being" said that he is of "failing in every way he can", accused him of using lawsuits against him to help book sales, compared him to this despicable DJ, and called him an "assassin." I don't know, if that doesn't qualify as a personal attack, than what does?

Transcripts from Media Matters:

O'REILLY: Clear Channel is a big radio company. It employed a DJ named Star in New York City . Here's what this guy said. Go.

TORAIN [audio clip]: Yes, I've disrespected your seed. Where -- where does kid go to school? I've got 500 bucks for that -- for that information. If you didn't hear me, I said I would like to do an R. Kelly on your seed.

O'REILLY: OK. So this vile individual who, again, works for a major media company in this country has a feud with another DJ on another channel in New York City and -- and wants to attack his four-year-old daughter. By that -- that's what an R. Kelly is.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: That's disgusting.

O'REILLY: OK. So, he asked his listeners to tell him where the little girl goes to school and offered $500 for that information.

Now, the guy's been fired. He's been fired. OK. But he wasn't fired until a local New York politician brought it to the media. Clear Channel didn't fire him the moment he said it. They kept him there. So, this, ladies and gentlemen, is a -- a very troubling aspect of American society -- extremely troubling. It started on the Internet where you have a bunch of people there who assassinate people; say vile things about people; threaten people every single day. Then, it morphed into radio. And you know who these people are. I don't have to -- I don't have to name them for you. You know who they are. Where everyday , they just spew hatred, vitriol, defamation on the radio. And now, it's in cable television. It's in cable television.

You got a couple of people on cable news programs that do this every night of the week, and the big companies that employ them are the companies that should be held accountable. OK.

Now , if you are a famous person at all, you cannot sue. If you have any notoriety at all, if anybody knows your name, you can't sue. And if you do sue, then you empower the person who's attacking you. You see, you give them more publicity.

You know when that -- when that vile Al Franken, that disgusting human being that's failing in every way he can. The -- Air America just lost their New York City affiliate. When he attacked me in his book a couple of weeks ago -- not a couple of weeks ago, a couple of years ago -- News Corporation made a mistake in actually trying to sue the guy, and, of course, that helped his book sales.

Now, his last book bombed, nobody bought it, because we all ignored it. So, that's what I'm saying to you. If you give these people any publicity, if you mention their name, if you take them to court, then they prosper. That's what they want, these assassins.

O'Reilly Spins the Facts on Iraq War and Terrorism

On the May 8 edition of The Radio Factor, Bill O'Reilly spinned the facts on information about the Iraq war and on terrorism. Media Matters has put together a nice compilation of Bill's lies and the truth, which can be pretty far off.

O'Reilly spinned the facts on

• Mary McCarthy
• Warrantless spying
• Nancy Pelosi
• McGovern-Rumsfeld exchange

Check out Media Matter's report at: http://mediamatters.org....

Olbermann's "Factor Fiction"

On the May 9th Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Olbermann refuted O'Reilly's false claims about his ratings. See here and here for our two earlier stories about O'Reilly's false claims and his declining ratings.

As Olbermann noted, despite O'Reilly's claims that his ratings increased from April 2005 to April 2006, they actually declined 3%.

Olbermann also refuted O'Reilly's claims that his ratings for the 4:00 AM ET rerun were higher than Olbermann's 8:00 PM ET original, that that they actually had 85,000 more viewers.

Olbermann also refuted O'Reilly's claims from May 8th that MSNBC's 'smear guy', referring to Olbermann, "was doing nothing" in terms of ratings. In the same period that Olbermann's numbers increased 28%, April of 2006, O'Reilly's declined 4%.

And while the "money demo", viewers aged from 25-54, Olbermann's ratings increased 37% while O'Reilly's declined 12%.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

OLBERMANN: Speaking of somebody who also lives in a bubble and is also all wet, there's Bill O'Reilly. Back in the news for playing fast and loose with the ratings, again. So, once again we're in the position of having to address the third thing Bill O. shares with David Blaine, the ability to misdirect your attention. You know the drill, I will read Mr. O'Reilly's on-air remarks from the other broadcast, then translate and/or correct what he said in a little segment we call "Factor Fiction."

"The ratings for April are in, and for the nights I anchored the Factor, we improved our total audience over April 2005."

Unfortunately none of us gets to fudge the ratings like that. Geez, Bill, why not just subtract the time when you're playing the commercials. Those ratings are probably fantastic.

"A nice achievement ... so we thank you all very much."

Thank you for dropping The O'Reilly Factor ratings by three percent last month compared to April 2005. You can't just count the nights you're on. To try to finesse it that way is, well, let's just say on the schoolyard it would be greeted by chants of "Here, kitty, kitty, kitty." Well, let's return to Bill's ego already in progress.

"If you read some of the Fox-hating print press --"

Print press? As opposed to what other kind of press? Wine press? Bill Press?

"If you read some of the Fox-hating print press, you'd never know how well we're doing actually."

That's because you're not doing well, actually. Last month's audience was smaller than March, which was smaller than January, which was smaller than December, which was smaller than October -- the smallest since May of last year.

"The writers in the Los Angeles Times and Rocky Mountain News, among others, want to prop up our competition."

Props. Never mention props. Reminds people of loofahs and falafels. The audience for the competition -- that'd be us -- was up by a third from last April.

"And here's more truth. Last Thursday evening, the Factor's third rerun at four in the morning actually beat MSNBC's 8 p.m. original."

Well, here, when Bill O. says, "Here's more truth," what he means is he's lying. Last Thursday our 8:00 p.m. original had 85,000 more viewers. And by the way, thanks for calling us original.

"So, the next time you read nonsense about cable news ratings, please understand it is disseminated by people who despise this network."

Like the A.C. Nielsen ratings company or Fox News media relations.

"What counts is that millions of Americans continue to choose Fox News over the competition."

None of them under the age of 70. Bill O's average viewer is now over the age of 70. Ours just dropped to under 60, and here's what actually counts. The little secret Bill O. would pay to keep you from knowing. Not like he paid Andrea Mackris, but you know what I mean. In what Fox itself calls the "money demo," ages 25 to 54, The O'Reilly Factor averaged 412,000 viewers last month. Down again from March, the 13th month out of the last 17 months it has dropped, and that counts the month everybody went up when the hurricane hit. His ratings are the lowest they have been since August of 2001. Here, kitty, kitty, kitty.

-------------------------------------

You can view the video clip of Olbermann at Media Matters.

O'Reilly Lies About CA Bill to Recognize Historical Gay Figures

Bill O'Reilly claimed that under a California bill to require history textbooks to recognize the sexual orientation of historical figures, that a teacher would not "be able to say bad things about Jeffrey Dahmer" because he is a "gay cannibal." He said that "teachers would not be able to cast aspersions on even villains if they were homosexual." Bill also claimed that he "looked at this bill over very closely, and it is a very radical, very extreme, dangerous bill." Obviously he didn't look over it very well, because, as put by the SF Chronicle, the bill would require textbook writers to note the sexual orientation of historical figures who contributed to "the economic, political and social development of California and the United States of America, with particular emphasis on portraying the role of these groups in contemporary society." I don't see anything "extreme" or "dangerous" about that, nor anything that wouldn't let a teacher say something bad about Jeffrey Dahmer.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

MALKIN: Well, this is much more radical than ensuring that homosexuals and other people of minority sexual orientation status are respected in the schools. It's already against the law in California to discriminate against anyone based on their sexual orientation.

I looked at this bill over very closely, and it is a very radical, very extreme, dangerous bill. It says that no teacher can even say anything that would, quote unquote, "reflect adversely" on anyone, a historical figure, whatever, based on their sexual orientation.

And so, now, there are real concerns that this could be interpreted broadly in the liberal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and other liberal courts, as saying that you can't even have sports teams, for example, that discriminate based on gender. And this is pure political propaganda.

O'REILLY: Well -- and also, if you are a teacher, what are you -- you're not going to be able to say bad things about Jeffrey Dahmer? He's a cannibal, a gay cannibal, and you can't say, "Well, that's wrong." I mean, if what you're saying is true, teachers would not be able to cast aspersions on even villains if they were homosexual.

MALKIN: Yeah, that's right. And in any case, I think school teachers in California and everywhere else ought to be paying more attention to whether or not third graders can find, oh, Sacramento or Washington, D.C., on a map than what the sexual orientation is of historical figures in America.

It's actually kind of hypocritical, because I thought that the gay rights lobbyists were all for privacy and keeping things in the bedroom. And here they are on this crusade to out people in some sort of weird, twisted way to boost the self-esteem of gay students? I don't get it.

O'REILLY: All right. Kirsten, maybe you do.

KIRSTEN POWERS (Democratic strategist): Well, I think -- I understand the impulse behind it, and what Michelle was talking about, about not being able to say anything negative about someone who is gay is just -- it's completely ridiculous, and it's -- it goes against, I think, every, you know, value we have in terms of free speech.

[...]

O'REILLY: Isn't it a form of fascism -- and I don't use that word lightly -- for California or anybody else, any other state, to be mandating that a certain lesson pattern be embraced by teachers? In the sense that you have to say good things about this group. That's not intellectual freedom, is it?

POWERS: Well, it's not intellectual freedom. But it's not only liberals or Californians --

O'REILLY: But isn't that a form of fascism? Government's not in the business of telling teachers to say good things about a group, is it?

You can view a video clip of this at Media Matters.

O'Reilly is Olbermann's 'Worst Person' for NYC Public School Remark

Once again, on the May 5th Countdown with Keith Olbermann, Olbermann named O'Reilly the 'Worst Person in the World' for his comment that NYC public school "teachers are instructed not to say a word" if a 6 year old says "F you, you mother-F'er." As we reported here, according to the discipline code for public NYC schools, profanity is a level 2 offense and carries a punishment of possible principal suspension. You can view the video of Olbermann at Media Matters.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

OLBERMANN: But first, time for Countdown's latest list of nominees for the Worst Person in the World. The bronze: David Morris, one of the directors of the British soccer team Queens Park Rangers, QPR. He's been accused of forcing one of his fellow directors to quit. No, I mean forcing -- hiring a bunch of thugs to take him into a room and threaten him with a gun until he wrote out a letter of resignation.

Today's runner-up: Prince Henrik, the father-in-law of Princess Mary of Denmark. Prince Henrik is honorary president of the Danish Dachshund Club, noted dog lover, and now we know why. He's told a Danish magazine that he loves eating dogs, that they taste like rabbit or veal. Now, Prince Henrik is a great Dane, after all.

But today's winner: Bill O. His latest sign of the apocalypse, the one going on in his own head: How New York City school teachers have been, quote, "instructed not to do anything even if a 6-year-old says, 'F-you, you mother F'er,' in school." Quoting Bill there. Actually, New York City schools' discipline codes call language like that a Level 2 infraction, which requires at least a conference, maybe a suspension. Maybe the teachers have just been told to look the other way if a 6-year-old says "F-you, you mother F'er" to Bill. Bill O'Reilly, today's Worst Person in the World.

O'Reilly's Declining Numbers

Bill O'Reilly's numbers have been steadily declining since their peak in August of last year:

(from Media Bistro)

Range             Overall  25-54 (key demographic)
08/29/05-09/25/05  3723  1115
09/26/05-10/30/05  2678  518
10/31/05-11/27/05  2552  468
11/28/05-12/25/05  2573  460
12/26/05-01/29/06  2327  472
01/30/06-02/26/06  2235  458
02/27/06-03/26/06  2266  415
03/27/06-04/30/06  2102  412

Numbers are in thousands

It looks like Bill is losing touch with the "folk." And remember, despite the fact that he's barely getting 2 million viewers, he claims he has "6 million people watching me every night."

Smear merchants never prosper!

Bill O'Reilly once again declared tonight on The Radio Factor that "Air America Radio" had been taken over by the left wing media. Then King Bill declared that "Smear merchants never prosper!"

He just doesn't get it. He thinks that everybody except him is a "Kool-Aid drinking loony liberal", and that anyone who disagrees with him is a "left-wing smear merchant." Bill, you're the "right-wing nut job" who "spins the facts."

O'Reilly Spins the Facts of NYC Public School Rules

On the May 3 edition of The Radio Factor, Bill O'Reilly claimed that in New York City public schools, "teachers are instructed not to say a word" if a 6 year old says "F you, you mother-F'er."

According to the NYC Department of Education Discipline Code, "using profane, obscene, vulgar, lewd or abusive language or
gestures" is a "level 2 infraction" and carries anything from a parent conference to suspension. A level 2 infraction is pretty heavy, as it includes infractions such as smoking or gambling.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

O'REILLY: Hey, I wouldn't even play the Village People to second-graders. Give me a break, OK. They're not getting "YMCA" until they're in the fifth grade. All right. We know what those Village People are up to.

Um, I'm not gonna send any kid that I could, you know, help to a public elementary school for one simple reason: the conduct outside of the classroom. The, what is tolerated in the public-school hallways and campuses is, to me, intolerable. For example, there are in New York City public schools, 6-year-olds going, "F you, you mother-F'er," in school, in the hallway. And the teachers are instructed not to say a word. You aware of that?

LIS WIEHL [Fox News legal analyst]: I wasn't aware of that.

O'REILLY: OK. That happens every day, all day in the public schools here in New York City. And I know it happens in Chicago and Los Angeles and Boston and Washington, D.C. In any major urban center. It doesn't happen in the small towns; it happens in the cities. I live in New York. I'm not gonna have my 6-, 7-, 8-, 9-year-old go to a school where they're saying that stuff in the hallway and the teacher doesn't do anything about it. You know, private school, that does not happen.

Now that's the most stark illustration I can give you, that even the smear, left-wing websites can understand that example that I just gave you. Something as simple as that. Language. Acceptable in the public school. And you know why it's acceptable? Because they don't want to deal with it. They don't want to haul the kid in, call the parent, have the parent come down, sue them, scream and yell, all of that. They'd rather have the kid say, "Blank you, you mother-blanker." And that is what's going on in public elementary schools in the major urban areas of the United States of America.

O'Reilly Lies About His Viewership

On the April 27th edition of The Radio Factor, Bill O'Reilly falsely claimed that "I already got the 6 million people watching me every night." Sorry Bill, but not that many people like you. The statistic from Nielson Media Research put the figure at 2,274,000 a night in Q1 2006. And Bill's key demographic, 25-54 years old, saw a 24% decline in Q1 2006, down to 406,000 viewers.

Transcripts from Media Matters:
O'REILLY: It doesn't matter what my percentage of gain is at The Factor in the world of cable news. I am so far ahead of everyone else, if I grow 1 percent or lose 1 percent, it doesn't matter. I already got the 6 million people watching me every night. If one of my competitors adds 200,000 viewers, they can run around screaming, "Oh, look at our percentage. Look how high we're up." And it's nothing, it means nothing, because they have nothing.

O'Reilly: Immigrant protest organizers have "hardcore militant agenda" to take back American Southwest

On the May 1st edition of The Radio Factor, O'Reilly declared a secret agenda of pro-immigrant protest organizers, a "hardcore militant agenda" to take back the American Southwest.

Transcripts from Media Matters:

O'REILLY: And then there's the hardcore militant agenda of "You stole our land, you bad gringos." This is the organizers of these demonstrations: "The border -- we didn't cross the border, the border crossed us." That is their slogan. That you stole our land, and now, we're going to take it back by massive, massive migration into the Southwest. And we're going to control those places, because you stole it from us, and that's the agenda underneath.