So the big concern is not whether the country would be in any danger if Homeland Security is not funded, but who would be blamed for it.

It is also true that there are a number of Americans who simply will continue to watch Bill O’Reilly, no matter how ridiculous his commentary becomes. Congrats to you, Bill, on continuing to search for new lows in whatever it is that you do.

Our military protect us in many important ways to be sure, but it’s hard to see a direct connection in which the military protects individual liberties such as the first amendment. It is more accurate to see the protections of free speech coming from those who actually engage in free speech which challenges the status quo, such as protestors who stand up to our own government and other entitities, at risk of their own lives and freedom. Ironically freedom of speech is not an absolute right of those currently serving in the military.

So the Vermont segment was a joke segment!?! And in right wing world, the way you make a joke is to humiliate and insult other people. But how do we differentiate the insults that are jokes from the insults that are O’Reilly’s usual ‘news commentary’? Hmmm I’m getting the impression that it’s all a joke to O’Reilly.

Like Islamophobia, Christianphobia would be caused by the backlash to radical ideas among the faithful. Islamophobes keep telling us “good” Muslims should shout down the “bad” Muslims at every opportunity.

If Republi-Christians feel their beliefs are under attack, they should probably look in the mirror, they will see some crazy sh*t staring back at them. Indeed it is every moderate citizen’s duty to try to shout down the crazy and stupid that gets a pass because it is called ‘religion’—of any faith.

For the Christians the radical ideas are the anti-science attitudes toward women’s reproduction, evolution and the environment, scapegoating of the poor, sanctification of the wealthy, gun fetishizing, warmongering…Their radical religio-politics deserves all the scorn we can muster.

Hmm. Bill O’Reilly, while discussing how he had no part in spreading a lie about France, tells a different lie about France. Fox and O’Reilly -they just couldn’t tell so many lies without intending to.

Bill surely wasn’t looking for dialogue here. In fact, I’m sure his audience would prefer to see Bill engage in a sword fight with his Muslim guests. But Bill is old and has to maintain a facade of having a ‘news’ show so Bill’s verbal attack will have to satisfy the blood lust of his audience for today.

Attempting to reframe the conversation from a fight for minority civil rights to “protesters dislike America” and making the case that since black people and neighborhoods aren’t perfect, they simply cannot complain about anything – these are hallmark of O’Reilly and Fox. They are the lowest form of commentary.

But I would love to ask O’Reilly if a ‘noble’ nation tortures its enemies, what makes it noble?

“On this show and this channel, unlike any other, you get both sides”-if the guest is loud enough or talks fast enough.

Fox appears to know nothing about hungry people in this country. Their attempts to promote filling kids with junk food are simply desperate, brainless political drivel.
Kids whose families can’t afford to pay for their lunches are not going to have healthy food choices at home. They are going to be eating the cheap junk food (like pizza) that their parents can afford, and will not be getting expensive fruits and veggies.

Odd that Kimberly doesn’t wish for the return of Bush & Co (who started this whole mess) to come back and “get it done right.” This woman should be encouraged by the State Department to emigrate herself into Putin’s arms ASAP.

I agree, Richard Peterson, that Fox elevated the negative over the past several months. I think they have reached a feed back loop about the size of an exploding moon. I can tell by the number of survival meals my frantic parents have purchased recently.

If only Hannity wanted to talk about solutions to Chicago’s crime and homicide problem perhaps he would mention that the loss of millions of manufacturing jobs in this country since the 70s has resulted in 2 generations of Americans that can’t find jobs with a livable wage. And perhaps he would also mention that drug prohibition has filled in the gap left by those missing jobs, allowing men to earn a living although they daily risk their lives and their freedom in the drug trade. And that if the carnage of Chicago was mostly white people, and not people of color, then we would already have ended drug prohibition by now.

“think about all that’s going on in the world…and this is the ad that Democrats are running?”

If only Republicans would listen to Fiorina and start passing a few bills that AREN’T about abortion and birth control, the Dems might have another topic in their political ads.

“They’re looking for trouble to gain fame and perhaps notoriety.”

Actually that’s what the Fox talking heads like Ingram do! But real journalists gain fame by doing their job as professional journalists-not by being TV personalities. I’m not surprised Ingram doesn’t know the difference.

Geez, pastors telling their flock how to vote is a political activity . It is the tax status that is at issue. So if churches will start paying their taxes they can have their ‘freedom’ back. But they won’t because they want their cake and they want to eat it.

This makes me wonder-would churches be taxable in a Theocracy?

Even if Stewart can be considered an ‘important media commentator’—commentators mostly aren’t known for being fair or impartial. They do generally take sides.

I think this is Kurtz’ way of trying to cover up for asking a really dumb question in the first place.

If I had tuned into a news or opinion show last night I would’ve expected news about this crash, not the political angle on the crash story. Its amazing that so many Fox viewers are OK with this type of “information”