Category Archives: John Stossel

January 12, 2017

John Stossel: What the clueless, deceitful New York Times tells me about Trump

“Trump Denies Climate Change, These Kids Die.”
That’s the headline on a Nicholas Kristof column about drought in southern Africa. Apparently, there were no dry spells before “man-made global warming.”

Now that I no longer do a weekly TV show, I have more time to read my local paper. Sadly, that’s The New York Times.

The Times actually does some good reporting, but their political and economic coverage is filled with deceit.

Can I find deceit every day? You bet. Take a look at a few days just last week.

–Thursday:

The front page: “NAFTA’s promise is falling short, Mexicans agree.”

Wow, the Times now embraces Donald Trump’s position on trade? Economists estimate that 14 million jobs depend upon NAFTA, but people everywhere often oppose trade because the smaller number of jobs lost is more visible than gradual gains.

What evidence of NAFTA’s failings does the Times offer? Oddly, the article says “the workforce has grown.”

Ah, hello? Job growth is good.

Jose Luis Rico “earns well under $10,000 a year.”

Not much by American standards, but good for Latin America, and the reporter mentions that Rico got “a handful of raises.” Have you gotten “a handful of raises”?

Despite NAFTA, the “gap between the nation’s rich and poor persists.”

[…]

Complete text linked here.

November 23, 2016

Thanksgiving Tragedy by John Stossel

Property rights saved the Pilgrims from starvation; a lack of property rights keeps Indians in poverty today.

Tomorrow, as you celebrate the meal the Pilgrims ate with Indians, pause a moment to thank private property.

I know that seems weird, but before that first Thanksgiving, the Pilgrims nearly starved to death because they didn’t respect private property.

When they first arrived in Massachusetts, they acted like Bernie Sanders wants us to act. They farmed “collectively.” Pilgrims said, “We’ll grow food together and divide the harvest equally.”

Bad idea. Economists call this the “tragedy of the commons.” When everyone works “together,” some people don’t work very hard.

Likewise, when the crops were ready to eat, some grabbed extra food—sometimes picking corn at night, before it was fully ready. Teenagers were especially lazy and likely to steal the commune’s crops.

Pilgrims almost starved. Governor Bradford wrote in his diary, “So they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could… that they might not still thus languish in misery.”

His answer: He divided the commune into parcels and assigned each Pilgrim his own property, or as Bradford put it, “set corn every man for his own particular. … Assigned every family a parcel of land.”

[…]

Complete text linked here.

October 27, 2016

John Stossel: The ruling class, this election and you

When Clinton wore white to a debate, the Times called the color an “emblem of hope” and a Philadelphia Inquirer writer used words like “soft and strong … a dream come true.” But when Melania Trump wore white, that same writer called it a “scary statement,” as if Melania Trump’s white symbolized white supremacy, “another reminder that in the G.O.P. white is always right.”

America is often described as a society without the Old World’s aristocracy. Yet we still have people who feel entitled to boss the rest of us around. The “elite” media, the political class, Hollywood and university professors think their opinions are obviously correct, so they must educate us peasants.

OK, so they don’t call us “peasants” anymore. Now we are “deplorables” — conservatives or libertarians. Or Trump supporters.

The elite have a lot of influence over how we see things.

I don’t like Donald Trump. I used to. I once found him refreshing and honest. Now I think he’s a mean bully. I think that partly because he mocked a disabled person. I saw it on TV. He waved his arms around to mimic a New York Times reporter with a disability — but wait!

It turns out that Trump used the same gestures and tone of speech to mock Ted Cruz and a general he didn’t’ like. It’s not nice, but it doesn’t appear directed at a disability.

I only discovered this when researching the media elite for my TV show. Even though I’m a media junkie, I hadn’t seen the other side of the story. The elite spoon-fed me their version of events.

[…]

Complete text linked here.

May 4, 2016

No bailout for Puerto Rico! by John Stossel

Island’s ‘culture of helplessness and entitlement’ shouldn’t be rewarded.

The Republican and Democratic presidential nominees have been chosen. Ignore the deluded supporters of Bernie Sanders and Ted Cruz. It’s over. The odds at ElectionBettingOdds.com make it clear: It will be Donald vs. Hillary.

A closer contest would be: Who will bankrupt America first, Trump or Clinton?

Trump’s a contender because he promises a trade war. That’s what gave us the Great Depression. Trump claims that China is “raping” America. No, Donald, rape is force. Your proposed tariffs are also force. Trade is voluntary and good. Big difference.

Clinton might bankrupt America first, however, because Democrats promise more regulation and handouts – free college, free pre-K, higher minimum wage, etc. Similar activist government spending just destroyed Puerto Rico.

This week, Puerto Rico defaulted on $370 million worth of bonds.

The territory’s “generous” government squandered the island’s resources. Decades of leftist governors hired their friends. In Puerto Rico and Greece, about one in four workers works for government, compared to 14.6 percent in the mainland U.S.

[…]

Complete text linked here.

December 23, 2015

Politicians without borders

John Stossel decries notion constitutional restraints ‘are for sissies’

When driving on treacherous roads, guardrails are useful. If you fall asleep or maybe you’re just a bad driver, guardrails may prevent you from going off a cliff.

Recently, the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel used the phrase “no political guardrails” to point out how many of today’s politicians seem to lack any constraints, any safeguards against their use of power. She’s onto something.

“Mr. Obama wants what he wants. If Obamacare is problematic, he unilaterally alters the law,” Strassel writes. “If the nation won’t support laws to fight climate change, he creates one with regulation. If the Senate won’t confirm his nominees, he declares it in recess and installs them anyway.”

Hillary Clinton does it, too. In fact, she promises that once she becomes president, that is how she will govern. If Congress won’t give her gun control laws she wants, she says she’ll unilaterally impose them. Likewise, if Congress rejects her proposed new tax on corporations, “then I will ask the Treasury Department, when I’m there, to use its regulatory authority, if that’s what it takes.”

Whatever it takes. So far, the public doesn’t seem to mind.

[…]

Complete text linked here.

December 4, 2015

The Left’s Smears on Research That Doesn’t Support Their Conclusions by John Stossel

From gun control to climate change.

This week my TV show is on gun control. I interviewed activist Leah Barrett, who wants stricter gun laws.

I pointed out that after most states loosened gun laws to let people carry guns, 29 peer-reviewed studies examined the effect. Eighteen found less crime, 10 found no difference and only one found an increase.

“Which studies?” Barrett snapped. “John Lott’s? His research has been totally discredited.”

“Discredited” is a word the anti-gun activists use a lot. It’s as if they speak from the same playbook.

“Lott is a widely discredited ideologue,” said a spokeswoman for Everytown—a Bloomberg-funded gun control group.

“Completely discredited” is how the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy described Lott’s research.

The left-wing site Salon says Lott “was discredited in the early 2000s.”

Media Matters for America called Lott “discredited” at least 40 times.

[…]

Complete text linked here.

September 30, 2015

Welfare State: The Cult of Victims by John Stossel

John Stossel diagnoses ‘government-handout-omatic pain’ among too many Americans.

The world has enough real problems without declaring everyone a “victim.”

Bill Clinton says Hillary is a victim of a right-wing conspiracy.

Lindsay Lohan, when jailed for driving drunk and breaking parole, says she’s a victim of cruel and unusual punishment.

Michael Sam says his NFL career would have gone better had he not come out as gay.

A Philadelphia dentist caught groping his patients’ breasts said he is a victim of frotteurism, a disease that compels you to fondle breasts. Really.

People benefit by playing the victim.

Activists look for people they can declare victims, to bring attention to their causes.

The New York Times once called the Super Bowl the “Abuse Bowl,” claiming that during the game many more women are abused than usual because their men get crazed watching violence. CBS called Super Bowl Sunday a “day of dread.” The Boston Globe claimed a study showed calls to anti-violence emergency lines go up 40 percent during the game.

Then Ken Ringle of the Washington Post tried to trace those claims.

[…]

Complete text linked here.

May 27, 2015

Don’t go to college! by John Stossel

John Stossel doesn’t want taxpayers funding luxury gyms, day spas.

It’s graduation time! Have we learned much? No.

College has become a scam.

Some students benefit: those with full scholarships and/or rich parents so they don’t go deep into debt, those who love learning for its own sake and land jobs in academia and those who get jobs that require a college credential.

But that’s not most students.

Half of today’s recent grads work in jobs that don’t require degrees. Eighty thousand of America’s bartenders have bachelor’s degrees.

Politicians such as Hillary Clinton promote college by claiming that over a lifetime, college graduates “earn $1 million more.” That statistic is true but utterly misleading. People who go to college are different. They’re more likely to have been raised by two parents. They did better in high school. They’d make more money even if they never went go to college.

Economist Bryan Caplan argues that there isn’t much evidence that college grads are paid more because they learned anything at college that is valuable to their jobs.

[…]

Complete text linked here.

February 18, 2015

Stossel Sets ‘Clueless Celebrities’ Straight on Thinking Che Guevara is ‘Cool’ (Video)

“Guevara, in the name of Communism, killed lots of people.”

http://www.truthrevolt.org/sites/default/files/styles/content_full_width/public/field/image/articles/che.jpg?itok=X0k0wvn9

John Stossel explained on Fox Business exactly why honoring Che Guevara by wearing his image on clothing is not as “cool” as many “clueless celebrities” and other clueless members of society would have us believe.

He started the segment with two quotes from the communist leader, one from 1959, the other, 1962:

We must eliminate all newspapers; we cannot make a revolution with free press.

We executed many people by firing squad without knowing if they were fully guilty. At times, the Revolution cannot stop to conduct much investigation.

Stossel’s guest was Michael Moynihan, who recently wrote an article on Guevara for The Daily Beast. Moynihan offered several other reasons why Guevara is not very cool and suggested people think twice before jumping on the “Che” shirt bandwagon:

He outlawed labor unions and set up labor camps and penal colonies in Cuba
He executed counter-revolutionaries
He banned music that was considered capitalist and decadent, like The Beatles
He required Cuba to remain poor

[…]

Complete text linked here.

October 15, 2014

Crumbling Constitution by John Stossel

How effective is the Constitution if the Supreme Court itself is willing to help the President and Congress weasel their way around the constraints on federal power that the document was intended to impose?

Does the Constitution still matter?

When it was written, Ben Franklin said the Founders gave us a republic, “if you can keep it.” Few people thought the republic would last another 227 years, but it has. The Constitution’s limits on government power helped create the most free and prosperous country on earth.

But now, some Americans, right and left, give up on the Constitution whenever it gets in the way of policies they like. Some on the right defend anti-obscenity laws or want more mingling of church and state, while those on the left want endless economic regulation.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R., Okla.) asked President Obama’s Supreme Court pick, Elena Kagan, “If I wanted to sponsor a bill and it said, Americans, you have to eat three vegetables and three fruits every day, does that violate the Commerce Clause?” Amazingly, Kagan wouldn’t say, “Yes, of course!”

She dodged the question.

Once on the Court, Kagan was part of the 5-4 majority who concluded the government can force us to buy something much more expensive than fruit and veggies: Obamacare can force us to buy health insurance.

[…]

Complete text linked here.