John Stossel on O'Reilly Factor tonight 10/20/09 8:00 and 11:00 p.m.

[Knightskye]

I saw a commercial for it. He'll be on O'Reilly's show talking about marijuana dispensaries in California.

It's on at 8:00 p.m. and replays at 11:00 p.m.

I don't know when his show on Fox Business starts, though.

http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=10850730&referralPlaylistId=search|John%20Stossel

[Knightskye]

Bump. I don't watch O'Reilly's show, but I'll watch if Stossel's on. Hehe.

[itshappening]

thanks for the reminder

[Chieftain1776]

Ugh, I was intentionally avoiding O'Reilly & Co this week :mad:

I'll watch but he should have announced it on his blog: http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/

[Chieftain1776]

Wow, Chris Preble of the Cato Institute is on as well discussing foreign policy.

[Son of Detroit]

On now.

[Chieftain1776]

He's on. O'Reilly says he'll be on "The Factor" every Tuesday.

[MRoCkEd]

Stossel will be on O'Reilly every Tuesday from now on.

[Chieftain1776]

Pretty good. Stossel needs to learn to be a pundit with quicker answers. He touched on one argument but didn't say it clearly i.e. the people that abuse drugs are abusers of other things i.e. children. He's making the fallacy of correlation equaling causation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation). To say there is X % of people who abuse children do drugs is a red herring. A more accurate approach would have been to discuss what % of people who use drugs also abuse children. Even the small percentage that I think that would be would still be suspect b/c they were already willing to break the law in the first place.

Jacob Sullum of Reason makes this hilariously makes this point, Why Skydivers Would Be Better Off Without Parachutes (http://reason.com/blog/2009/10/05/why-skydivers-would-be-better). Also Bread Kills! (http://monster-island.org/tinashumor/humor/breadkills.html).

[MRoCkEd]

As Stossel himself mentioned, he needs to work on his answers.

[jkr]

i hope he finds a way to shit in his office...

[Chieftain1776]

Or this application of O'Reilly's "logic": Drugs=Happiness: http://reason.com/blog/2009/08/19/do-drugs-be-happy-or-both

[ClayTrainor]

I hope Stossel doesn't hold back... :)

[Knightskye]

Here it is:
http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=10850730&referralPlaylistId=search|John%20Stossel

[revolutionary8]

Here it is:
http://www.foxnews.com/video/index.html?playerId=videolandingpage&streamingFormat=FLASH&referralObject=10850730&referralPlaylistId=search|John%20Stossel

Thank you for posting Knightskye :)

SHUT UP BILL!!!!!!!!!!!!
He "gave" Stossel "2 minutes to prove him wrong", but he couldn't close his big fat mouth for more than 10 seconds. Go figure. :rolleyes:

Stossel does need to work on his replies, as he says himself, but I hope that he goes the route of Ron Paul- he needs to ask himself the right questions for these buffoons- they are incompetent/ignorant at best, and completely compromised at worst.
He'll get better. Yes he will.

[BudhaStalin]

Stossels not really the aggressive type in his questioning so unfortunately its a lot easier for people like Bill to just shout over him

[SelfTaught]

Stossels not really the aggressive type in his questioning so unfortunately its a lot easier for people like Bill to just shout over him

I have a feeling he'll learn. He's on Bill O'Reilly's show. Bill does that with most of his guests and some of his guests have learned to deal with it and even overcome it. I would just give Stossel some time and he'll learn to answer the questions forcefully enough.

[MRoCkEd]

His big problem is that he starts off by conceding some of Bill's point.
"They are selling these drugs to kids"
"I'm sure some are... but"

Instead he should have said something like "Drug dealers don't care about the age of their customers because drugs are illegal. It isn't like they are checking IDs. By making it legal for adults, the selling would be done in a safe and controlled fashion like with alcohol. It's not quite so easy for a kid to buy booze, but he can easily get pot."

[itshappening]

O'Reilly is a bully and a thug!

I hope RP goes on there and beats him up again, it's fun when Bill gets owned.

[lx43]

Stossell really needs to work on his answers with Bill.

[haaaylee]

also on glenn beck's radio show.

YouTube - Glenn Beck interviews John Stossel Pt 1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3OCCgqpMPQ)

[lx43]

After listening to Stossell on O'Reilly, Beck's TV and radio show I am disappointed in his delivery of the message of freedom. He doesn't seem enthusaed at or almost like he is disappointed in leaving left ABC.

[Knightskye]

Stossel answers questions the way he talks in his documentaries.

[sevin]

Also Bread Kills! (http://monster-island.org/tinashumor/humor/breadkills.html).

:D

Thanks for posting that. I gotta share that with some people.

[Knightskye]

:D

Thanks for posting that. I gotta share that with some people.

Yeah, it is pretty funny.

[Flirple]

After listening to Stossell on O'Reilly, Beck's TV and radio show I am disappointed in his delivery of the message of freedom. He doesn't seem enthused at or almost like he is disappointed in leaving left ABC.

Yeah he's always always taken that tone on cable news and talk radio interviews and debates. That's just his technique in that setting. I guess he thinks it's a way to stay on the conservative's good side. It's always annoyed me how Laura Ingram, Glenn Beck, Dennis Pragar, Bill Oriely, etc. all gush over Stossel and yet hate Ron Paul even though they are making the same arguments. I think the right wing media only loves Stossel because he was vehemently non-liberal on a very mainstream very liberal rival network news station.

Looking forward to Stossel's new show and regular presence on Beck, Orielly, etc.

[SimpleName]

Stossels not really the aggressive type in his questioning so unfortunately its a lot easier for people like Bill to just shout over him

Indeed. He is made to look like a careless person. When you are up against Bill O'Reilly, you have to argue. Intelligent debate isn't possible.