Why do progressive liberals hate John Stossel?

[Sarah G]

John Stossel So Sick Of ABC’s Liberal Bias, He ‘Begged’ Fox to Hire Him

2012


Journalist John Stossel left the liberal confines of ABC News "because it sucked there." The libertarian reporter talked to the Heritage Foundation's Rob Bluey in an interview posted Thursday and exposed the liberal culture at his former network: "They were hostile to these ideas that have made us prosperous and I consider so important."

He added that ABC "tolerated" him and his good ratings, "But by the end, they were sort of saying, 'Oh, you're predictable, Stossel. All you want to do is libertarian economics all the time. I don't want to watch that.'" He joked that ABC preferred to do stories on how "[Michael Jackson's] still dead."

Stossel admitted that he was "not offered a job by Fox." He added, "I went over and begged, 'Please hire me. I can't stand it anymore.'"

---
Read more: John Stossel So Sick Of ABC

I feel for ya John, I had the same problem so I fired them...

I'm sure he had to beg anyone to hire him.

 

[American_Jihad]

"Why is there a Bureau of Indian Affairs?" he said. "There is no Bureau of Puerto Rican Affairs or Black Affairs or Irish Affairs. And no group in America has been more helped by the government than the American Indians, because we have the treaties, we stole their land. But 200 years later, no group does worse."- John Srossel

Only an idiot like Stossel could get a job on Fox.

typical European hating racist remark !!

Correction, europeeon...

 

[yidnar]

"Why is there a Bureau of Indian Affairs?" he said. "There is no Bureau of Puerto Rican Affairs or Black Affairs or Irish Affairs. And no group in America has been more helped by the government than the American Indians, because we have the treaties, we stole their land. But 200 years later, no group does worse."- John Srossel

Only an idiot like Stossel could get a job on Fox.

typical European hating racist remark !!

Correction, europeeon...

from now on we need to give leftists a taste of their own medicine !! libbs didn't vote for Romney because they hate white men !! damn racists !!

 

[eflatminor]

"Why is there a Bureau of Indian Affairs?" he said. "There is no Bureau of Puerto Rican Affairs or Black Affairs or Irish Affairs. And no group in America has been more helped by the government than the American Indians, because we have the treaties, we stole their land. But 200 years later, no group does worse."- John Srossel

Only an idiot like Stossel could get a job on Fox.

But he is correct that no group does worse. Yet, Indians are the recipients of more welfare and other entitlements than any other group. Is that not worth consideration? Further, when you look at the few Indian tribes that are NOT on the dole, the are THRIVING! That's got to be worth a discussion about the effectiveness of entitlements, no?

 

[eflatminor]

I'm sure he had to beg anyone to hire him.

So you're capable of an ad hominem attack. Wonderful, but can you debate the merits? Can you retort with specificity? Can you use logic and reason to refute the points the man made?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

John Stossel So Sick Of ABC’s Liberal Bias, He ‘Begged’ Fox to Hire Him

2012


Journalist John Stossel left the liberal confines of ABC News "because it sucked there." The libertarian reporter talked to the Heritage Foundation's Rob Bluey in an interview posted Thursday and exposed the liberal culture at his former network: "They were hostile to these ideas that have made us prosperous and I consider so important."

He added that ABC "tolerated" him and his good ratings, "But by the end, they were sort of saying, 'Oh, you're predictable, Stossel. All you want to do is libertarian economics all the time. I don't want to watch that.'" He joked that ABC preferred to do stories on how "[Michael Jackson's] still dead."

Stossel admitted that he was "not offered a job by Fox." He added, "I went over and begged, 'Please hire me. I can't stand it anymore.'"

---
Read more: John Stossel So Sick Of ABC

I feel for ya John, I had the same problem so I fired them...

I'm sure he had to beg anyone to hire him.

We all owe a huge huge debt to Fox News. Without them our Founders libertarian philosophy, that created the greatest country in human history by far, had no voice in America.

Its scary to think how far our counbtry had fallen until Fox came along!!

 

[American_Jihad]

Charity Begins With Wealth Creation

John Stossel
December 26, 2012

Charity—helping people who have trouble helping themselves—is a good thing two times over. It’s good for the beneficiary and good for the donor, too. Stephen Post's fine book, The Hidden Gifts of Helping, reveals that 76 percent of Americans say that helping others is what makes them most happy. Giving money makes us feel good, and helping face-to-face is even better. People say it makes them feel physically healthier. They sleep better.

Private charity is unquestioningly better than government efforts to help people. Government squanders money. Charities sometime squander money, too, but they usually don’t.

Proof of the superiority of private over government efforts is everywhere. Catholic charities do a better job educating children than government—for much less money. New York City’s government left Central Park a dangerous mess. Then a private charity rescued it. But while charity is important, let’s not overlook something more important: Before we can help anyone, we first need something to give. Production precedes donation. Advocates of big government forget this.

We can’t give unless we (or someone) first creates. Yet wealth creators are encouraged to feel guilt. “Bill Gates, or any billionaire, for that matter,” Yaron Brook, author of Free Market Revolution and president of the Ayn Rand Institute, said on my TV show, “how did they become a billionaire? By creating a product or great service that benefits everybody. And we know it benefits us because we pay for it. We pay less than what it's worth to us. That's why we trade—we get more value than what we give up. So, our lives are better off. Bill Gates improved hundreds of millions of lives around the world. That's how he became a billionaire.”

...

Charity Begins With Wealth Creation - Reason.com

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Charity Begins With Wealth Creation

John Stossel
December 26, 2012

Charity—helping people who have trouble helping themselves—is a good thing two times over. It’s good for the beneficiary and good for the donor, too. Stephen Post's fine book, The Hidden Gifts of Helping, reveals that 76 percent of Americans say that helping others is what makes them most happy. Giving money makes us feel good, and helping face-to-face is even better. People say it makes them feel physically healthier. They sleep better.

Private charity is unquestioningly better than government efforts to help people. Government squanders money. Charities sometime squander money, too, but they usually don’t.

Proof of the superiority of private over government efforts is everywhere. Catholic charities do a better job educating children than government—for much less money. New York City’s government left Central Park a dangerous mess. Then a private charity rescued it. But while charity is important, let’s not overlook something more important: Before we can help anyone, we first need something to give. Production precedes donation. Advocates of big government forget this.

We can’t give unless we (or someone) first creates. Yet wealth creators are encouraged to feel guilt. “Bill Gates, or any billionaire, for that matter,” Yaron Brook, author of Free Market Revolution and president of the Ayn Rand Institute, said on my TV show, “how did they become a billionaire? By creating a product or great service that benefits everybody. And we know it benefits us because we pay for it. We pay less than what it's worth to us. That's why we trade—we get more value than what we give up. So, our lives are better off. Bill Gates improved hundreds of millions of lives around the world. That's how he became a billionaire.”

...

Charity Begins With Wealth Creation - Reason.com

yes, capitalism is the greatest gift mankind has ever received.
Ask the Chinese who went from 60 million slowly starving to death to 60 million buying cars the instant they switched to capitalism!!

 

[American_Jihad]

How Government Handouts Foster Dependency

Section 8 recipients can become comfortably dependent on government assistance.

John Stossel | January 9, 2013

The Obama administration now proposes to spend millions more on handouts, despite ample evidence of their perverse effects.

...

It was a reasonable idea. But, as always, there were unintended consequences.

“On paper, Section 8 seems like it should be successful,” says Donald Gobin, a Section 8 landlord in New Hampshire. “But unless tenants have some unusual fire in their belly, the program hinders upward mobility.”

Gobin complains that his tenants are allowed to use Section 8 subsidies for an unlimited amount of time. There is no work requirement. Recipients can become comfortably dependent on government assistance.

In Gobin’s over 30 years of renting to Section 8 tenants, he has seen only one break free of the program. Most recipients stay on Section 8 their entire lives. They use it as a permanent crutch.

Government’s rules kill the incentive to succeed.

...

Once people are reliant on Section 8 assistance, many do everything in their power to keep it. Some game the system by working under the table so that they do not lose the subsidy. One of Gobin’s lifetime Section 8 tenants started a cooking website. She made considerable money from it, so she went to great lengths to hide the site from her case manager, running it under a different name.

...

How Government Handouts Foster Dependency - Reason.com

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

How Government Handouts Foster Dependency

Section 8 recipients can become comfortably dependent on government assistance.

John Stossel | January 9, 2013

The Obama administration now proposes to spend millions more on handouts, despite ample evidence of their perverse effects.

...

It was a reasonable idea. But, as always, there were unintended consequences.

“On paper, Section 8 seems like it should be successful,” says Donald Gobin, a Section 8 landlord in New Hampshire. “But unless tenants have some unusual fire in their belly, the program hinders upward mobility.”

Gobin complains that his tenants are allowed to use Section 8 subsidies for an unlimited amount of time. There is no work requirement. Recipients can become comfortably dependent on government assistance.

In Gobin’s over 30 years of renting to Section 8 tenants, he has seen only one break free of the program. Most recipients stay on Section 8 their entire lives. They use it as a permanent crutch.

Government’s rules kill the incentive to succeed.

...

Once people are reliant on Section 8 assistance, many do everything in their power to keep it. Some game the system by working under the table so that they do not lose the subsidy. One of Gobin’s lifetime Section 8 tenants started a cooking website. She made considerable money from it, so she went to great lengths to hide the site from her case manager, running it under a different name.

...

How Government Handouts Foster Dependency - Reason.com

and, of the working age population on Section 8 almost all are women who have a free loading drug dealer male living off them. This is what liberals call a hand up when really is a racist crippling moral hazard that should be eliminated at once.

 

[oldfart]

In case you haven't noticed, there is zero interest in a thread that cuts and pastes somebody's blog. Give it up, no body gives a shit.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Why do progressive liberals hate John Stossel?

Because regressives are anti-liberty and despise people who advocate individual freedom.

 

[American_Jihad]

In case you haven't noticed, there is zero interest in a thread that cuts and pastes somebody's blog. Give it up, no body gives a shit.

lol, but you're here, hey fart don't get to close to da flame...

 

[American_Jihad]

Obama Is Not King


Obama's dangerous agenda is putting the country at risk

John Stossel
January 30, 2013

...

At his inaugural, President Obama himself said, “The patriots of 1776 did not fight to replace the tyranny of a king with the privileges of a few.”

But then Obama went on to say that his privileged few should force the rest of us to do a zillion things.

He said, “We must do these things, together.” But what “together” means to big-government folks is that they have a vision—and all of us, together, must go deeper into debt to pay for their vision, even if we disagree.

We can afford this, as the president apparently told John Boehner, because America does not have a spending problem.

But, of course, we do have a spending problem, and a debt problem, and the president knows this.

...

It’s hard to believe that Obama chose those words just seven years ago, because now his administration has racked up another $6 trillion in debt.

It’s also a shock that Barack Obama believed this: “America has a debt problem. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit.”

Yet this year, he demanded Congress raise the debt limit without conditions.

...

Obama Is Not King - Reason.com

 

[Annie]

Interesting thread. I've not read through all of it, but will say that in high schools, at least in my area, Stossel in the Classroom is used extensively in both American History, World History, and Economics classes. In the main the video is shown and there is discussion, sometimes a written reaction is required.

There are teachers that ask how to 'argue against' what the video's thrust was, for the most part though, the teacher has set this up as one of at least 2 if not 3, depictions of current opinion. When there are various perspectives given, with only basic information given by the teacher, the students are required to compare, contrast, and evaluate their own perspective towards a topic.

I have most of the "Stossel In the Classroom" videos, free of charge. My only 'cost' was to send feedback of how I'd used in the classroom. Several times his older videos saved me on days with no lesson plans by classroom teacher, I have them in my bag. One of the reasons that several high school chairs request me as a sub.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Interesting thread. I've not read through all of it, but will say that in high schools, at least in my area, Stossel in the Classroom is used extensively in both American History, World History, and Economics classes. In the main the video is shown and there is discussion, sometimes a written reaction is required.

There are teachers that ask how to 'argue against' what the video's thrust was, for the most part though, the teacher has set this up as one of at least 2 if not 3, depictions of current opinion. When there are various perspectives given, with only basic information given by the teacher, the students are required to compare, contrast, and evaluate their own perspective towards a topic.

I have most of the "Stossel In the Classroom" videos, free of charge. My only 'cost' was to send feedback of how I'd used in the classroom. Several times his older videos saved me on days with no lesson plans by classroom teacher, I have them in my bag. One of the reasons that several high school chairs request me as a sub.

I'm glad to see you get away with it, but its probably only because the chairs are too slow to know Stossel is on Fox and that libertarians share a lot with conservatives.

 

[American_Jihad]

Big Government Goes on a Banning Spree

Politicians want to limit the choices of consenting adults.


John Stossel | February 6, 2013

...

After banning things, politicians’ second favorite activity is granting special privileges to a few people who do those same things—so big casinos flourish, and most states run their own lotteries. Running lotteries is one of the more horrible things our governments do. The poor buy the most tickets, and states offer them terrible odds. The government entered the lottery business promising to end the “criminal numbers racket.” Now states do what the “criminals” did but offer much worse odds. Adding insult to their scam, politicians also spend our tax money promoting lotteries with disgusting commercials that trash hard work, implying that happiness comes from hedonism.

Hypocrisy.

...

Big Government Goes on a Banning Spree - Reason.com

Check out the health care waivers...

 

[American_Jihad]

You Can Love Nature and Still Hate the Tyranny of Environmental Regulations

Throughout the world, most reductions in pollution have been achieved because of capitalism, not government control.

John Stossel | April 3, 2013

...

So in the '70s, government passed rules that demanded we stop polluting the air and water. Industry put scrubbers in smokestacks. Towns installed sewage treatment. Now the air is quite clean, and I can swim in the rivers around Manhattan.

But government didn't stop there. Government never stops. Now that the air is cleaner, government spends even more than it spent to clean the air to subsidize feeble methods of energy production, like windmills and solar panels. Activists want even more spending. A few years back, the Center for American Progress announced they were upset that "Germany, Spain and China Are Seizing the Energy Opportunity ... the United States Risks Getting Left Behind."

In this case, we're better off "left behind." After spending billions, those European governments made no breakthroughs, and now they're cutting back.

The Endangered Species Act was another noble idea. We all want to save polar bears. But now the bureaucrats make it almost impossible for some people to improve their own property.

...

Industry and technology, not regulations, are humanity's greatest contribution to the environment. Leave people their freedom, and they come up with new, smarter, more efficient and thus cleaner ways of doing things. Stifling that process with regulation isn't "progressive."


You Can Love Nature and Still Hate the Tyranny of Environmental Regulations - Reason.com

 

[Rshermr]

Just happened by this thread. You should need an IQ of at least 90 to post. Should be illegal to do so without some small amount of brain activity. So I was pleased to see that ed and jihad post together. Between the two, they probably just pass the 90 iq requirement. In aggregate.

Relative to the thread question? They don't. Progressives don't bother to hate entertainers. Only cons take entertainers seriously.

 

[American_Jihad]

Just happened by this thread. You should need an IQ of at least 90 to post.

WTF are you doing here then...