tv The O Reilly Factor FOX News December 27, 2013 12:00am-1:01am PST
with us. i will see you again tomorrow on the five. and later here on greta. join us again for "on the record" tomorrow night right here at 7 p.m. eastern. good night. the o'reilly factor is on. tonight. >> more than half of the counties on the exchanges, middle class families are finding themselves priced out of coverage. >> obamacare sticker shock. how hidden fees and new taxesand are bringing some americans to their knees.si we will have the analysis.h, >> hallelujah, a christmas miracle. deck the halls and i am coming through with a christmas tree. >> and a the "duck dynasty" saga continues as he cash in on the most controversial family with a christmas day marathon. we will have a report. >> how do you tell ash 6-year-old she is not getting her present for christmas? >> and promises, promises.
how ups and fed ex ruined christmas for thousands ofousa people by failing to deliverer presents in time for the holidays. caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone. the factor begins right now. ♪ ♪ hi i'm juan williams in for bill o'reilly. get ready to pay. new taxes and hidden fees take effect in just days. they will take billions of dollars out of americans' pockets to help cover the cost of obamacare. it's all in the name of making healthcare more affordable, but a new analysis by "u.s.a. today" shows the opposite for many americans who don't qualify for government subsidies. if states using the federal obamacare web site, more than half the counties lack
affordable health plans for 40-year-old couples and more than a third don't offer affordable plans for people over 50. can americans withstand the crushing new cost of obamacare in the new year? joining us now from washington to analyze, fox news political analyst charles krauthammer, the author of things that matter, the number one "new york times" best seller now available on audio book cd. charles, i am looking here at a list in my mind, in my hand, i should say, of some of these new taxes and fees. of course, we know about the individual mandate that's going to tax -- that's what the supreme court said put a tax on people who don't sign up. but you have also got taxes on medical devices. you have got a medicare payroll tax. in all, you have got 20 new taxes in obamacare, nine that have taken effect this year or next. what -- what are all these hidden taxes and fees coming for? what is it going to do for anybody? >> well, how do you think
sandra fluke gets her free contraceptives? remember all the free stuff people are getting in the free mammograms? the free preventative care, the free everything? nothing is free in this world. what obamacare managed to do very cleverly when it was selling itself is to hide all these taxes. there are a trillion dollars in year as the ones you mentioned are just a sample. and they are everywhere. and then there is a one that you just mentioned in your introduction, which is the hidden tax. people tossed off their private insurance. and then it will be in the future people tossed off their employer insurance who now have to buy plans with all of these bells and whistles that people don't want. but it does that to artificially inflate the premium and, thus, use that extra money people are at paying, the hike in their premium and to use it to subsidize other people. so the costs here that people are paying out is huge. and what you mention about
the middle, the middle middle and the upper middle class is, they are being asked to subsidize anybody up to three times the poverty line. so that's the plan. this is a huge transfer of wealth that was always in the bill. it was never anything that couldn't have been seen. but the media and most analysts, and, of course, democrats were uninterested in looking at it at all. >> well, here is the thing. you know, it's supposed to help people, especially people who have been lacking in health insurance or under insured. but what the u.s. today story is somebody who is making a middle income, you know, an individual making $50,000 or so, a couple making $60,000, if they don't qualify for that subsidy, charles, their cost of insurance, their premium under the obamacare plan is going to be more than 8% of their income, which is what obamacare says is the base. you should pay no more than
8%. now they have to pay much more and they are going to have to pay the added fees and the added taxes. so there are people who are being squeezed we have already talked about people who have had plans canceled. here is a segment new to the table as being squeezed and possibly squeezed out of all health insurance po that was the frauds much obama's campaign promise. they only wanted to tax the upper 2% the very rich and all of that but what they didn't say is that hidden in obamacare were billions, tens of billions of dollars of tax hike on the middle, as you say, auto thousand. that's with the median income in the country. household income and the upper middle class. this is a huge tax on the middle class. but, obama posed as defender of the middle class against the very rich now we look inside. remember pelosi said we are
not going to know what's in the bill until we pass it. we passed it we are enacting it and now we can see what's in it all the time and people don't like it? >> this is where i started with you this evening is to say what's all this what are all these said hidden taxes and fees part is to help the insurance companies in case their risk pools don't hand pan out. get enough healthy people. it's to make sure they have healthy compensation. what we know is there are so-called risk corridors put in there so the government can give money to the insurance companies if they are not getting enough money back doing insurance down the line. >> that's what insurers are concerned about. scrimmage line by the administration. the new rules, the extension of the deadlines. the instruction that anybody who has cancelled insurance no lomger has to pay a fine or a tax or can buy a very
cheap catastrophic plan. this stuff is being tossed at the insurers at the last moment. they already are looking at a catastrophe of enrollment. hugely under enrolled and hugely weighted against the young and the healthy, the ones who are supposed to subsidize everybody else. they can see billions losses down the road. there is is only one way out of that, juan. that is a bailout. that's why the administration is somewhat serene and that's why the republicans have to get up right now and to pass a bill saying no bailout. at least in the house. >> all right, charles, we're going to come back to you in just a moment. and, also, after charles, jesse jackson weighs in on the "duck dynasty" phil robertson controversy as a&e runs a christmas marathon featuring the very star they supposedly suspende
continuing now with charles krauthammer and a new poll how americans are fed up with this congress. this is the very worst congress in their lifetime 28% disagree. nearly three quarters say lawmakers have done nothing, zero, to address the country's problems. so, charles i don't know how you argue with this gallup had a poll out earlier this month. never been that way every month. year 2013. so they say this is the worst congress ever. and this has been this way now for about four years. they say this is a new normal. people just don't think congress is up to any good or solving anybody's problem. what does charles krauthammer say? >> well, i would say that they are completely wrong because they are using the usual liberal yardstick for what's a good or successful
productive congress, meaning the number of pieces of legislation passed. it has no relation to good governance. in fact, it probably has an inverse relationship to good governance, the more you pass, the worse it probably is. and surely, the job of the opposition to oppose. if you are looking at the obama agenda, particularly look at what obama did in years 1 and 2. obamacare, the stimulus, he tried the cap and trade. radical reforms. if you are a republican or a conservative and you think this is the wrong way to go, then success is stopping that agenda. and that's why. >> that's what john boehner said. >> that's why they have been very successful over the last four years. >> hang on. john boehner in fact said that this year. this year john boehner, speaker of the house said, don't judge us by how much we pass, judge us by repeels, by efforts to repeal. he didn't even say that. >> absolutely. >> now he has changed his tuna little bit and he is starting to say look at what we -- bills that the house
has passed but the senate has not dealt with he said that of course, about third, maybe more than a third of the bills passed by the house were all about repealing obamacare. he knew those were going nowhere. but he was -- he did it anyway at the behest, i think, of the tea party caucus. charles, do you think of the tea party caucus though is leading this congress to be despised by the american people? >> juan, at the behest of the tea party caucus, at the behest of the american people, who, in large numbers don't want obamacare, never wanted obamacare, it's never had a lead in public opinion. it's now about minus 16 points. >> but let's move beyond obama care. hold on. >> that's the definition of a responsive opposition. >> charles, we know you don't like obamacare but i'm saying move beyond it the american people say we have other issues, jobs. create jobs. help this economy get going. don't shut down the government. that's what people are talking about. even republicans.
charles, republicans, more than 85% of republicans say they think this congress stinks. >> and what exactly has been the obama answer to jobs? the largest stimulus in galactic history which has resulted in the worst recovery. >> so this is all about obama? this is all about obama recommendation charles? >> yes. >> not about governing? >> it is about stopping an agenda that has been obviously and clearly wrong headed and a failure. in obamacare, in the stimulus, in the economy, in the recovery. that's why the opposition opposes it. >> i can't believe it because most often i think you speak for some people. but i think here you disagree with most americans. you seem to think congress is doing fine. >> i do. >> there we go. charles, thanks. happy holidays to you. up next, did you happen to catch "duck dynasty" yesterday? you had plenty of opportunity. a&e ran a christmas day marathon featuring the star they supposedly suspended for anti-gay remarks.
♪ your ticket to a better night's sleep ♪ in the impact segment tonight, jesse jackson is now adding his two cents to the "duck dynasty" controversy. jackson is demanding to meet with a&e network executives to discuss the show's future as "duck dynasty" patriarch phil robertson's controversial comments about gays and african-americans. he wants the restaurant chain at that meeting after they had an embarrassing about face from the company. last week it yanked duck commander merchandise and then caved under pressure and started selling it right again. in a statement released on christmas eve, jackson said
quote, at least the bus driver who ordered rosa parks to surrender her seat to a white person was following state law. robertson's statements were unfettered, freely and openly without cover of the law, within a context of what he seemed to believe was white privilege. meanwhile, a&e ran a 25 episode christmas marathon of the show, even though its star, phil robertson has been suspended indefinitely joining us now with analysis board member jason reilly. is everybody making money off this deal? i mean, i don't get it they run a 25 hour marathon beginning, i think it was 3:00 christmas day into the next day, right? and we don't know the ratings but apparently there is heightened awareness now of duck "duck dynasty" and not only -- by the way there is a christmas album that is selling out o, right? there are scented candles.
everything associated with "duck dynasty" is a hot commercial property is this all about making money? >> yes. >> so it doesn't matter if you disagree or agree, it's just that they are selling a product i think the about face by cracker barrel is telling. a&e hasn't done the same thing but the marathon is a step in that direction, acknowledging that they have massively misread the viewership of this program. i think there is a sense among a&e producers that would tune into the show to mock or make fun of this family. it turns out that people tune in because they share the values and sensibilities of these folks. it's quite ha amazing how badly both cracker barrel with regard to its customers and a&e with regard to its viewers initially misjudged their customers. >> well, but the question is what about the people the pressure groups?
the gay rights groups. >> jesse jackson has been doing this for 30 years. is there -- is anyone surprised that he has injected himself in this controversy? this is what he does. is he part of the grievous industry very lucrative. he may claim to be acting on behalf of black people. but jesse jackson is acting on behalf of jesse jackson. >> stop right there. this is a great point. very lucrative what he just said. put pressure on a&e. doest does he want a show on a&e, too? >> he wants to be able to continue to go around corporate america and shake them down for money. give to my groups. and i will shut up about this. that's what he has been doing for 30 years. what's interesting here, juan, is again, jesse jackson claims to be acting on behalf of blacks. particularly down trodden blacks. disadvantaged blacks. what does phil robertson have to do with black kids are reading three grade levels behind white kids or shooting each other in the streets over sneakers or a
ski parka. how does phil robertson have anything do with that. how does sitting down with a&e and cracker barrel have any to change the people that jesse jackson represents. this is about jesse jackson and his deep pockets or bottom line. >> this is also about a&e's bottom line or cracker barrel's bottom line. >> i think a&e is much more interested in reflecting the sensibilities of americans than trying to shape them through these programs. they found themselves completely misjudging their viewership. they are out to make money. i think this marathon shows that that's what this is about. they fired the star of show let me explore this for a second. he is in the marathon. exactly. >> let me finish. they have nine shows in the can. meaning nine shows that they have already taped and have not shown that will be shown beginning in january. and phil robertson isn't s. in all nine shows.
>> that's right. that shows you -- >> -- what does it mean for him to be suspended if, in fact, they are making money by in fact saying phil is going to be in this show in january. maybe you sided with phil and maybe you think phil is getting unfairly vilified by the gay and black community, so better watch because, you know, we want you to watch phil and therefore put more money in a and e's pocket. now they think that keeping him suspended for too long would also hurt the bottom line so they are changing course. >> but the other side of this. >> it's not about values thighs a key point. >> other side of this they must have thought it was doing damage to the brand initially. a&e as much money as "duck dynasty" makes them is bigger than "duck dynasty." if they thought the gay community was going to react. the black community, that's why they were running in the other direction. now they find themselves. like cracker barrel they are changing direction and now they are running that way.
>> also what a&e shows if they were to drop the show another network would pick it up like that. >> what's up in setting to me is that it has nothing to do with principle. nothing to do with whether or not in fact you said something that was wrong and people saying, you know what? hold on a second, you were wrong. >> no, i don't think. this is the entertainment industry. >> if they are in the entertainment industry. jesse jackson is in the grievance industry. everyone is out to make money. >> fedex, u.p.s., leave christmas shoppers high and dry for christmas.n time for the holidays. but do consumers have any resource? we'll have the facts and the analysis. then an american contractor taken hostage by al qaeda in pakistan releases a video. >> when i need my government, it seems that i have been totally abandoned. >> stay with us for those reports.
in the unresolved problem segment tonight, a lot of americans are still waiting for christmas gifts. thanks to an epic failure by u.p.s. and fedex, they failed to deliver in time for the holiday. i sent no less than four hours on the phone with them yesterday trying to get it we came up on saturday. i have been calling them since wednesday of last week trying to just get a status on it. >> i didn't ask. i demanded that they take it
off the truck and let me pick up by baby's gift and i tell them how do you tell a 6-year-old she is not going to get her present? >> now there is a lot of finger pointing going on. who is to blame the retailers who promise shoppers their stuff would get there on time or the delivery companies that fail to come through? joining us now from philadelphia, attorney jennifer brant and from davey florida, attorney noland klein. ms. brant, let me begin with you, who would you go to for some recourse if you didn't get your package on time? >> well if i ordered for amazon or another retailer i gold to the retailer and wonder why they promised me one day delivery and i didn't get it the first line of blame goes with the retailer and then beyond that goes with the shipper. either the u.p.s., the fedexes, those are the next people in line to blame their excuse act of god, bad weather ant couldn't get them out fast enough will get them to the consumers but just not not on time
unfortunately. >> i nolan klein would you agree you go back to the retailer or go you go to u.p.s. and fedex? >> look, jennifer is right. as an initial matter, you have to go to the retailer because that's how did the business with. you bought from them. you didn't buy anything or enter into any agreement with u.p.s. however, u.p.s. ultimately in nil real proceeding is going to be responsible. the retailer is going to say hey u.p.s. i trusted you to make these deliveries on time and you didn't make them. if i'm responsible for these customers for their christmas gifts not getting there on time it's because of your wrongdoing not mine and you should have to reimburse me or pay the customer directly. that's the way it would play out in a lawsuit type scenario. >> yeah so everybody is going to be blaming everybody else. i want to come back to the customer who didn't get their package in time for christmas. now, you hear from amazon and other retailers oh we are going to give you a gift card. oh we are going to make it up to you in some way. we are going to give you a discount in the future. is that sufficient or should
people really push the limit here and say we are going to go to court and we want some compensation situation, nolan? >> well, look, my opinion is if you are in a state that has a statute that provides for statutory damages, in other words, some states have unfair we depositive trade statutes that give some minimum amount that you are entitled to, if somebody made a false statement that you relied upon to your detriment, in this case if somebody lives in a state where they could say hay hey amazon you knew or should have known that my gift wasn't going to get there for christmas in this statute. entitled to statutory damages they should take them to court. if they don't live in a state that has that type of statute, there is not really any damage element if you get your present after christmas. you can't put a price tag on not getting your gift on the 25th but getting it on othe 26th. it becomes too -- >> jennifer, i wonder, there is an emotional cost if the kid doesn't get the gift on christmas.
children suspect much expect, it's not u.p.s. and fedex but santa is going to deliver, right? >> that's right. unfortunately sometimes santa runs into bad weather and just can't get it there until the next day. i think nolan is completely wrong on this issue. i don't care what state you are in. i don't think you have any legal recourse in a situation where you are missing your package for a day. >> yeah. and you mentioned bad weather. >> kind of emotional distress. >> you mentioned bad weather. but they also said that they were surprised at the amount of vool that, in fact, there was more shipping going on in a shorter christmas season, so would that be a legitimate excuse? >> well, i feel that that's the part where they may fall down a bit. but you have to go back to the consumer, too. why are you waiting until the last minute to get your packages. it's poor planning on the part of many consumers. they have to bear some of the blame as well and just understand that, you know, these companies are only companies, and if you really want your package to get there on time, you either shop early, go to the store directly and make sure you have it in hand but don't necessarily rely on the
shippers to make sure they get your package there santa is a lot more reliable than u.p.s., apparently. >> i would say so. >> i just don't think that you can go with that i disagree with nolan. i don't think what state you are in, i don't think there is any legal recourse here. it's unfortunate and bad for children and other people who didn't get their gifts on time. >> yeah. >> but the companies are going to make it up to them. they say they are going to make the delivery. >> that's a good point. >> i think that's the bottom line. >> i think they should. it's overlitigious to start running to the court over a pang. folks deserve some compensation in some ways. >> perhaps give them a gift card or some other type of exhibition to make up. >> i have got two legal eagles here tonight. you know there is a very tragic case out in oakland, california a 13-year-old girl. she had a tonsillectomy, it went bad. now the young lady is according to medical authorities, johnny mcmath, you see her there,
you see her there declared brain dead. her parents don't want her to be pulled, the feeding tubes to be pulled, but they are going to have to make a decision. so, jennifer, what standing does the family have? how -- can they keep her alive? well, if brain dead can they insist that the feeding tube stay in? >> well, it is a tragic situation. at the outset. any parent would feel for this family without a doubt. but they are trying to keep her alive. but the problem is the doctors are declaring her legally dead. they say they don't have an obligation to treat a dead person. unless this family can find a doctor who sees some type of brain activity which they haven't done thus far, i have a feeling that the court is going to side with the medical professionals here and order that the life support be removed from that child. >> i said feeding tube. it was a breathing tube. so what do you see? does the family have any standing here, you know,
seven day adventists? any religious thing or anything that can can help them here? >> i think what jennifer is failing to do is differentiate between being required to do something and being able to do it. this hospital isn't required to do it under california law if she is legally dead. being on a breathing tube having no brainstem activity is clinically dead. this family had asked to move this poor girl to a nursing home, to another hospital. this very had offers of financial help from all over the country to help them do that and there is no reason, no moral or ethical reason certainly why they shouldn't be able to move their daughter at their own expense and keep her alive. i find it very distasteful. >> it's a difficult case. jennifer, thank you both. up next, an american contractor taken hostage in pakistan. he appears in a video and says he feels abandoned by his country. right back with it. and ah,
so you can see like right here i can just... you know, check my policy here, add a car, ah speak to customer service, check on a claim...you know, all with the ah, tap of my geico app. oh, that's so cool. well, i would disagree with you but, ah, that would make me a liar. no dude, you're on the jumbotron! whoa. ah...yeah, pretty much walked into that one. geico anywhere anytime. just a tap away on the geico app.
thank you so much for staying with us. i'm juan williams in for bill o'reilly. in the personal story segment tonight, an american contractor taken hostage by al qaeda in pakistan two years ago says he feels abandoned and forgotten by his government, the american government. in a video released on christmas day, 72-year-old
warren weinstein is seen pleading for his freedom. >> nine years ago, i came to pakistan to help my government. and i did so at a time when most americans would not come here. and now, when i need my government, it seems that i have been totally abandoned. and forgotten. >> right now the state department still trying to authenticate that video. joining us now from washington with more fox news strategic analyst lt. ralph peters. do you think he had a gun to his head making that tape. >> yes. certainly he is afraid it is al qaeda prop propaganda video. it's certainly not true that his government has abandoned him. our government does everything it can. the special ops to find hostages such as. this by the way, juan, all
those nsa programs that snowden said are so terrible, they are aimed at tracking as best they can a hostage like this. and i'm very sorry for this man and his family, but, we cannot negotiate with terrorists. we cannot make deals with terrorists. we cannot change the security policy of the united states for one captured contractor and oh, by the way have a field day with this human interest story. there is another human from story. this al qaeda propaganda clip with some footage of our wounded warriors whose lives have been shattered. burned, horribly. missing limbs. this is important. >> i hear you. by the way. they don't want to deal with al qaeda. >> i agree with you. let's stick with this story because i think people want to know, you know, you say, you know, we are trying. are you convinced that the u.s. government is making an effort to rescue this hostage, mr. weinstein? >> absolutely. the intelligence community special op.s is trying.
but, to me, if you want to get this guy back, you have got to bring heat on pakistan, because, just as i am convinced having dealt with the pakistanis they knew all along where bin laden was. i suspect the pakistani intelligence services know where this guy is if they don't they could still help us. >> if we are making a full, hearted earth to go and find him. the second question then to you is, colonel, okay, what if the hostages, the people who have taken him hostage, ask us to negotiate with them. do you say yes or no? >> i said. no no. and i will repeat it no. you do not negotiate with terrorists. >> so ralph peters is saying let him die. >> no, ralph peters is saying try to rescue him. do wha but, you cannot change the security policy of this country. all those wounded soldiers, all the dead, did they ask for special treatment from our president and secretary of state? did they ask to negotiate with al qaeda on their
behalf? no. get it in perspective. i'm sorry for this man and his family, but my heart is with the wounded warriors, not a contractor. >> all right. now, got a second story here on the foreign policy front, colonel peters, which is we have had 37, 37 people killed in the baghdad bombing this week, most of them christians because, you know, in two separate bombings, christians have been targeted. we have seen christians killed by extremists in not only iraq but this is going on now throughout the middle east, syria, egypt, iran, they are holding people. you know, it's a war on christians, that's what it looks like to me. what should the u.s. response be? what should the government, the military, the intelligence community be doing in support of christians in the middle east? >> well, begin with honesty. the obama administration refuses to recognize that there is an islamist extremist, a jihadi effort to finish the annihilation of christian civilization
throughout the middle east. 2,000 years of christian civilization are being destroyed and the obama administration says virtually nothing, our embassy in baghdad in response to these christmas day bombings said we deplore all loss of life. by the way, juan, today is saint stephens day. the feast of stephan. the first christian martyr. and on this day, christians are still being martyred in the middle east. >> are you saying start another war and start a war that's going to have religious overtones that it's going to be a war on muslim? >> juan, please replay what i said earlier. i never said any such thing. i said our government should take a stand, call it by its right name. and stop supporting indirectly or directly i jihadis -- >> -- but don't go after the people who are responsible. is that what you are saying then? >> case by case, juan. case by case. there is no unified field theory for how to deal with the world. you take it case by case. >> man, this is a tough
call. that's why we wanted you in here. ralph peters, thanks so much. merry christmas to you. >> merry christmas to you. >> when we come right back, an american story that you have got to see. a teacher's union supporting a convicted child rapist. the boy's parents talk to bill o'reilly and what they say will leave you shocked and angry. right back with it.
in the factor flashback segment tonight, as promised another opportunity to watch the truly shocking story that reflects very badly on the teacher's union in michigan. this 39-year-old man neil erickson has been sentenced up to 30 years in prison for raping one of his male students for three years beginning when the boy was just 12 years old. the boy's parents, john and
laura are angry, broken-hearted. you can understand that, as the family has been torn apart by this. adding to that is the fact that the michigan education association, the union that erickson belonged to continues to support this monster demanding that he be given $10,000 in severance pay. bill spoke to the family last week. >> your son, at age 12, met this man erickson right? he was a teacher and he took an interest in your boy? >> yes. he did. he was a well-known person. we wouldn't have thought twice about anything. >> does your son ever mention the teacher? >> well, i worked with all of these teachers and mr. erickson for the last 11 years. i trusted these people. and when they went to six grade camp, erickson was one of the teachers who went. my son was interested in ipods. they were just coming out.
and neil erickson honed in on that and teaching him technology and just started grooming him from there. i thought he was just being a good teacher. i trusted him. now i have that failure of suffering the rest of my life knowing i failed my son and didn't protect him. >> we both feel like we failed as parents. we should have never let it happen. >> yeah, but i don't think that's fair -- i don't think that's fair and i will tell you that every one of us watching tonight who is a parent has, you know, bad things happen to parent, bad things happen to kids. you just don't know. did your son's behavior change? >> his behavior changed dramatically. he was angry. physical altercations against me. it changed drastically. >> there was nothing we could do that was right. >> this guy, as many child
molesters are, presents nims a way you couldn't link it together. the guy is finally caught, sentenced to 15 to 30 years in a michigan state prison. is that sentence enough for you? >> the sentence between my wife and i was enough for us, yes. we thought on july 10 we would have closure. we stood in the hall of the courtroom that day and unbeknownst to my wife or myself, her colleagues, 7 to ten of them walked by us in the hallway, glared at us and sat on neil erickson's side of the courtroom. >> so teachers in the school and subsequently the teachers' union supported this monster. >> yes. >> they knew he was guilty. >> that's disgraceful.
>> this group of teachers was a tight clique, but after i found out in the courtroom that these teachers that were sitting there wrote letters of leniency. i got to read them the following week. i just couldn't understand it. >> the union came in and is demanding, what, $10,000 in severance pay for this guy? is that what's happening? >> yes. >> yes, it is. another slap in our face. >> and the school district isn't going to give him the money though, i don't think. >> the school board has went ahead and said no. and the union has filed a grievance against school boards. >> unbelievable. >> when neil erickson was arrested he was the local union president. >> there you go. >> another teacher came out on
day they were going to file the grievance. that current president stepped down, from my understanding, because he didn't believe that this was right and now there is another gentleman that's taken it over. i feel the money should go to our son. >> how is your son? how old is he? what's he doing? what's the mental state? >> our son is now 21. he's graduating with honors from western michigan university this april. we talk more now. i lost my son for nine years. he hated me. he despised me. there was nothing i could do right for him. it killed me. i loved him and i lost him. now we are starting to have a relationship but the anger is still there. >> is he coming for christmas?
>> yes. >> all right. he's going to watch this segment. he's got to know how much you guys love him. i'm telling him right now that you guys could not possibly have prevented this. this was a tragedy. all right? he had to endure it and you are good parents now going on national television to right a terrible wrong, telling a story that's difficult to tell because you love your son and don't want it to ha to any other son. >> exactly. >> that's why you are here. i want you to have a marry christmas. there is not going to be payment to this guy in prison. we hope he rots for 30 years. that's what he deserves to do. >> absolutely. i want to say how much i admire you both. >> thank you very much for listening. >> up next, the reaction to the
as i mentioned the reaction to the michigan story has been overwhelming. we decided to devote the mail segment to that story. fred from utah. bill, the teachers and the union supporting the molester are as bad as the child molester. chris peltier from texas. thank you for exposing the teachers union in michigan that's defending a convicted child rapist. i find this to be despicable. you shedding light on the story is sure to put pressure on the organization to change its stance. we hope so. from arizona, wanda. bill, your outrage over the michigan teachers union wanting
$10,000 for the teacher who viciously molested a child is shared by most people. thanks for taking on the subject. i believe the union should heed your word. kent from pearl, mississippi. hey, bill. i know it must be a bitter pill to swallow. when a union member pays dues it creates a contractual obligation. the union must do its utmost on behalf of the member. one of problems in the school is the unions look out for the teachers first and only. the students don't get a seat at the table because they neither vote nor pay dues. a good but sad point. cindy from vermont. dear bill, thank god for your anger toward the teachers and the union who are supporting this pedophile. this sounds like a place watters should visit. we may have to get jesse on the case. all right. jeff glover, rough and ready, california. i'm a retired peace offer.
that story brought back difficult memories. your passion was apparent and much appreciated by the busted up cop. sty on this thing like white on rice. you can believe mr. o'reilly will be on it. and bill wolf from new york. the school bully here is the teachers union. thanks for letting them know the factor is watching them. before we go, please check out the fox news factor website which is different from billoreilly.com. also we'd like you to spout off about the factor. o'reilly t@fox news.com. name and town if you wish to opine. be sure to check out billoreilly.com. if you sign up to be a premium member you get any of bill's big best sellers free. that's it for us tonight. thanks for watching. "the kelly file" is next. i'm juan williams for bill
o'reilly. please remember, the spin stops right here because we are always looking out for you. hello everyone. i'm dana with kimberly, bob. it's 5:00 in new york city, and this is the five. we hope you had a merry christmas. we have a jam packed show for you tonight. first in iraq, a deadly attack on christmas day on baghdad. on the obamacare front could there be a silver lining for republicans the they don't blow it? and news from bieber, bee i don't know say and duck dynasty. first let's start with