46 votes

John Stossel: Liberty Conference Guest Interviews - UPDATE

Video 1:


Video 2:


Video 3:


Video 4:


Video 5:


Thanks to user 'the clover helix' for Kucinich Link.

For the Ann Coulter interview:


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

To the people

doing all the down votes, what happened to freedom of speech ? Down voting is akin to censure.

Freedom is a byproduct of acceptance - judge not.

Freedom of speech

Freedom of speech is protected from government, not private companies. A private company or organization can make rules and not alow someone to do or say something.


I'm talking about the principle. Liberty isn't about excluding the opinions that you don't like is it. How free would we be if everyone behaved that way ?

Freedom is a byproduct of acceptance - judge not.

I appreciate John but...

I appreciate what John is doing but his style turns off a lot of people - including me. I get excited to watch a Stossel clip but I'm always left feeling disappointed. I've never learned anything from Stossel.

John doesn't let an argument, pro or con, fully develop. He cuts off speakers, pro and con, before they can get to the meat of their point or rational. By doing this, all points can only be taken at face value. Whether you like to admit it or not, we don't have win arguments at face value. Let's explore why student's boo'd the Civil War or why libertarians are against spending money on climate change. Both these topics are generally thought of as no-brainers by the mass-media public. When he leaves these at face value, he and other libertarians are dismissed as idealist or failing to understand reality. He asks, "would you cut Medicare?" but he doesn't ask why philosophically we should make cuts like this. Justin Amash helped Stossel by saying that defense is the primary job of the federal government but without that statement, outsiders can construe Stossel as not wanting a military or even anarchist (I know many people here are but anarchy automatically turns people off, it's not the aruement we should be making). He jumps from the moral justification of drone warfare to the concept of "blowback" - without even giving the concept justification. He loses the argument when he jumps around like this. Simply dismissing these topics makes the libertarian perspective appear un-grounded.

To those familiar with the arguments, we can fill in the blanks. But those seeking to learn another perspective are left without answers. In many cases the opposition ends the debate on top. I'm afraid it's enough to satisfy people's curiosity and they will stop investigating liberty. It's as though he's looking for 10 second sound bites but he rarely gets one.

The movement has and will continue to gain traction through complete, principled, rational debate. The liberty movement cannot use the same strategies as the opposition - emotion, strawman, unspecified assumptions etc but must reveal the use of those tactics through calm, rational, and complete discussion/debate.

Amash the only decent one of the bunch

Cato guy and JG support the idea that legislation is needed to rectify the homosexual marriage issue, proving they are just as eager to import their version of Big Government.
Audience participant, Thomas, raised Ron Paul's argument that govt shouldn't be involved in marriage at all to Coulter. Coulter's rebuttal was that the govt is already too involved as it issues divorce decrees, alimony orders, child support and custody. And she's correct - marriage is a contract and subject to the same kind of laws as any other kind of contract and with it comes all sorts of privileges and troubles should one party wish out of the contract.
I really hate this issue as I don't agree 'marriage' should be redefined but too many want to change its concept. It's a tradition long held with a very clear meaning - mostly surrounding progeny and birthright. The politics behind it has varied throughout the ages, but a sacred vow between a man and a woman is marriage IMO. Sacred vows between same gender partners should, IMO, be called something else because the relationship is different. Everything gets classified, just look at the plant or animal kingdom classifications. The LGTB crowd have already created a set of definitions for themselves through their labels and lifestyles and a separate term used for their kind of union would most probably be accepted by a wider audience. What I agree with is that the laws governing each should be equal since both concepts involve humans.
I truly believe this discussion would be less contentious if there wasn't this insistance that a homosexual union be called a 'marriage', though it would probably anger the wider Muslim community, too.


Though it's nice to see Muslims and Christians coming together on something.

If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison

Regarding John Bolton

Whenever he is a guest anywhere, or speaking, my first thought is that he was Ambassador to the United Nations.

We are in another war for our Independence.

And a member of the Council on Foreign Relations

And he's a CFR member and neocon. never forget that ......

Where are the other videos?

Where are the other videos?

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

Yeah this was pretty

Yeah this was pretty frustrating, I see a numbered, ordered list like this and I assume it's the whole thing, in order. Now I have to basically re-watch the whole thing and fast forward through bits. I appreciate putting vids up on the Daily Paul when it saves me time but this kind of annoys me :/

Bolton is lame

This guy is just incredible. Did you hear his rebuttal to the booing over the civil war?

Hey Bolton how come every other country was able to abolish slavery without a civil war? hmmn interesting question.

Essentially what he was saying is their deaths were justified because they were on the wrong side of the argument.

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul


Watching these made my evening.

Seeing the bright intelligent questions made to all there from the students tells me the rEVOLution is in tact and gaining traction.

I don't recall hearing Ron Paul's name mentioned, but the ideas he has taught for over 30 years had an awful lot of spokespeople speaking to his success.

He must be proud when he sees this.


((( Granger))) Quick! Look! Justin Amash is on TV!!!

It is in the main thread! :-) :-)

And also in my sig! :-) :-)

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

(((((PAF))))) How about Amash

saying HE believes the GOP is the best vehichle for liberty? :))


lol, did I imply otherwise????

Well, maybe I did when I said that I will only vote the person and not the party :-)

This is the conundrum that we are in. The founding fathers did not want a 2 party system. It is what we have today. If it is a vehicle, then I support ousting every leftist democrat such as boehner, mcconell, rience, rubio and others, and replacing them with conservative liberty people. If that means the gop dies in the process only to be reborn, then so be it :-)

Where's the Judge!!!!

"What if the American people learn the truth" - Ron Paul

Well yeah

by taking the GOP it changes, is reborn. I've got a front row seat..

Very nice

Great to see them all.

Thanks for all the updates




Kucinich video...


Cuimhnigh orm, a Dhia, le haghaidh maith.


Thanks for the link

Honesty in a debate!

It would be much more interesting to let Mr Kucinich make his points and argue in an honest way instead of bringing him there just for dismissal.

Mr. Kucinich

Man-made Climate Change is not a fact as you seem to claim.

"Air is the very substance of our freedom, the substance of superhuman joy....aerial joy is freedom."--Gaston Bachelard--

Well, the only thing I take

Well, the only thing I take issue to, is that there is absolute consequences to what people do, and the effects can have direct affect on the environment. Where or not a hurricane is a result of people is another story, but my position is simple. Each person needs to take care of the planet to his/her best ability.

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

Well, this is not at all

Well, this is not at all automatically the same issue as the man-made climate change. I, of course, agree that what human beings do have effects to the environment. For example different poisons and nuclear waste are of course highly damaging to the environment and especially to the living beings, but this is not the same issue as the CO2 connected man-made climate change.

I agree with you that "each person needs to take care of the planet to his/her best ability". But what does this mean is another question. What people think as taking care of the planet is not automatically at all the same thing as REALLY taking care of the planet. Is the reducing the carbon emissions according to you part of the solution to take care of the planet? The people who believe in the man-made climate change of course think that this is crucial for taking care of the planet, but others (scientists) think actually exactly the opposite that the more there is CO2 in the atmosphere the better and also that CO2 increase does not correlate to the warming of the planet the way the theory of anthropogenic climate change claims.

"Air is the very substance of our freedom, the substance of superhuman joy....aerial joy is freedom."--Gaston Bachelard--


I think that there should be more on DP in regards to 'global warming'. This is one topic where it seems most Americans (including liberty minded folks) are blinded by the MSM

proverbs 20:15
There is gold, and an abundance of jewels;
But the lips of knowledge are a more precious thing.

Concerning Ambassador Bolton

Bolton makes a very succinct and good argument as to why drones should be used. As it stands the vast majority of Americans polled agree with him.

The problem is the argument made against it is not very effective. Rand Paul is doing a good job, but the questions asked did not get to that line of thinking.

The ambassador parried very well the questions asked about "war time"..but there was no student or even Stossel (who may have to portray himself more deferential) concerning the NDAA or other laws that have essentially allowed the US Soil to be considered a war zone.

I don't agree with what the fmr amb Bolton states, but it's very persuasive, and merely getting a rousing BOOOOOO from the audience does not help.


Tell me what it was that was

Tell me what it was that was persuasive?

If you disagree with me on anything you are not a real libertarian...

It's not persuasive. It's

It's not persuasive. It's just repeated assertions and not answering questions. IDK maybe that passes for persuasive with victims of the public education system.

I don't know why John didn't ask any good questions. Bolton didn't answer any questions asked and John, being polite, didn't make him answer.

No one held his feet to the ground about due process. No one mentioned ex parte Merryman. No one said if 'war' justifies any government overreach isn't it convenient that we are always and forever at war?

Can't wait to see the Denis Kucinich part

Can't wait to see the Denis Kucinich part

he didn't do very well

Stossel rightly came after him on democratic social policy, which is a nightmare.

I had my skepticism on Stossel bringing in Kucinich to defend Dems....that is about as credible and bringing in Amash to Defend the GOP's positions...

that said, Stossel did very well.