The New York Post is reporting that firebrand Tomi Lahren is out permanently at Glenn Beck's the Blaze. This follows what was thought to be a temporary ban and now turns out to be all but temporary. Conservative media outlets are in a tizzy after a string of high profile firings and employees leaving, citing less than stringent editorial standards. Now many of these outlets are seeking to professionalize themselves considering that they are facing more scrutiny now their ideas are in power. Austin Petersen breaks down the news.
The Blaze host Tomi Lahren is in hot water after she revealed on "The View" that she was pro-choice, and that pro-life conservatives were hypocrites. Lahren drew ire from the Blaze owner Glenn Beck for her comments on Twitter along with a sharp rebuke. Austin Petersen breaks down the controversy.
Austin Petersen reads an article from the Wall Street Journal which exposes the electoral consequences of leftist moral outrage. In a brilliant piece, Petersen discusses how leftist narratives on white guilt led to the type of reactionary politics we have in the United States today. Petersen also goes through a list of Public Policy rules, in order to advance the libertarian cause, as well as offers a sneak preview of his upcoming book.
Senator Rand Paul has come under increasing scrutiny in recent days for his confirmation vote of Senator Jeff Sessions to the position of Attorney General. Paul defended his vote for sessions in an interview with Kennedy on Fox Business thusly:
"I think personal considerations; I've known him for a long time. I didn't like the way Democrats vilified and tried to create him into some sort of racist monster, which is not who he is. So the fact that they used character assassination, I didn't want to be associated with that.
But I can tell people, libertarians across the country, that there is no stronger voice in the U.S. Senate for opposing militarization of the police, opposing the drug war, opposing the surveillance state. And so if people want to apply a purity test to me they're more than welcome, but I would suggest that maybe they spend some of their time on the other 99 less libertarian senators."
Paul also recently argued against an investigation into the departure of president Donald Trump's national security advisor Michael Flynn, who was accused of lying to vice president Michael Flynn about the discussions Flynn had with a Russian ambassador about US sanctions. In an interview with Brian Kilmeade, Paul argued:
"I think that might be excessive. It looks like the President has handled the situation, and unless there's some kind of other evidence of malfeasance, this sounds like something that was internal White House politics and it looks like the President's handled it."
Very good reasoning there, but Paul took it one step further, angering many when he went on to say: "I just don't think it's useful to be doing investigation after investigation, particularly of your own party. We'll never even get started with doing the things we need to do, like repealing Obamacare, if we're spending our whole time having Republicans investigate Republicans. I think it makes no sense."
Is Paul arguing for party over principle? All that and more on the Freedom Report podcast!
In an Op-Ed for Fox News, former television show host and liberty journalist John Stossel penned that President Donald Trump had “broken his heart” in regards to his actions on immigration, threats of punitive tariffs, and “trashing trade.”
The liberty stalwart started off his opine by admitting that he was never a Trump supporter, though he found excitement in his first days as President, explaining that, “on TV I have called him a bully, a narcissist, etc. — but his first days were thrilling!”
Stossel exclaimed “finally” there was a President who “meant it when he said he’d cut red tape that kills growth, a man who mocks political correctness and sneers at leftist reporters.” He lauded the people Trump had picked for his various cabinet positions, say that these people were not “the political hacks I’ve come to expect from D.C. — not the smug bureaucracy-lovers Hillary Clinton would have inflicted on us.”
The long time journalist continued, “[they] understand the limits of government command and control, people eager to lift the web of opportunity-smothering rules.”
“Trump revived the Keystone pipeline, froze federal hiring. Wow.” said Stossel.
It was at this point that Stossel, a reformed liberal turned lover of liberty, started to explain why, after all his previous praise, President Trump had broken his heart.
His immigrant ban is bad. I won’t write about it until I know more. But even before that, he said he’d impose a 20 percent tax on Mexican imports, and he trashed trade by insisting that “we want the (Keystone) pipe to be manufactured here!”
I know — he said stuff like that when campaigning, but I didn’t think he meant it. His own businesses use overseas suppliers if they are cheaper or better. He must know that tariffs punish Americans, that a trade war helped create the Depression.
“Protecting” jobs with bans and tariffs is counterproductive.
Stossel, after mentioning the economic protectionism, predicted that Trump supporters would sneer at him for his comments, but her went on to explain:
Yes, some steelworkers’ jobs are saved by buy-American edicts, but more jobs will be lost. It’s hard to recognize this because of a conflict economist Frederic Bastiat called “the seen vs. the unseen.”
We see the jobs at a steel plant. If it closes, our cameras record the moment. We interview the workers on their last day. Our hearts break at their disappointment. Many won’t find other jobs, or jobs that pay as well. We want to “do something” to help.
What we don’t as easily see, though, are the many jobs created if companies are free to use steel that’s a little cheaper. We don’t see the jobs created by the dynamism that results when people are free to buy and sell all over the world. Alternatively, we don’t easily see the jobs that never get created because tariffs or “buy American” rules make ingredients more expensive.
“History makes it clear: Where trade is free, prosperity follows. When it is restricted, stagnation follows.” said the libertarian-minded host.
To validate his claim against “protectionism,” Stossel explained the degression of China, where in 1400 the country was a beacon of innovation, proliferating the use gunpowder, paper and printing process. “Then they walled themselves off. They burned the trading ships. The emperor wanted to ‘protect’ the Chinese from outsiders.” he said. “The result was stagnation. By last century (before free market reforms), China was one of the poorest nations on earth,” Stossel concluded.
Stossel then moved to speaking about Trump’s inauguration speech, in which Trump promises “to take power from Washington and give it ‘back to you, the people.’ America ‘must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies and destroying our jobs.'”
At Cafe Hayek, economist Don Boudreaux writes, “Overlook the absurd suggestion that foreigners who peacefully offer to sell to us attractive products at low prices are akin to invading armies … Trump’s incessant promise to raise trade barriers is a promise to reduce each American’s freedom to spend his or her money as he or she chooses … a pledge to give to politicians and bureaucrats in the capital city more authority.”
He mentions that he wants to cut Trump some slack, and the benefit of the doubt, but then references Historian Robert Higgs. Higgs has asked:
“Why do some libertarians cut Trump so much slack? … (s)omeone who enjoys thumbing his nose at the political establishment (poses) his own brand of threat to your life, liberty, and property. Trump talks about many things. … But … there is one topic that he never mentions, and that is freedom.”
This is a contention which Stossel agrees and uses to wrap up his piece on Trump, saying, “It’s true. I never hear Trump say the word. I wish he knew what it really means.”
While it is true that Trump may do things here and there which will touch the hearts of many libertarians, actions which deserve praise, or more allegorically a “carrot,” there have also been many actions which are completely antithetical to the liberty movement. These setbacks or created/continued precedents which continue the growth of power to government deserve a “stick.”
Donald Trump signed an executive order formally withdrawing the United States from talks which would have secured a Trans Pacific Partnership with some of America's foremost trading partners. Former presidential candidate Austin Petersen explains the pros and cons of the deal, and discusses why free markets should always be the center of any discussion regarding trade.
Reporter Piers Morgan put Meryl Streep on blast after her remarks about Donald Trump at the Golden Globes Awards. Morgan chided Streep over her snide, condescending attitude towards flyover country voters, explaining why she was a hypocrite for claiming high moral character after she gave child rapist Roman Polanski a standing ovation. Today's episode of the Freedom Report podcast is brought to you by ThreadsofLiberty.com, get your Make Taxation Theft Again hat at threads of liberty, and help spread the ideas of economic freedom, and personal liberty.
Philadelphia's city council passed a soda tax that went into effect on January 1st. Citizens are noticing that frequently the cost of the tax is more than the cost of the beverage, and many are in an uproar. The tax was sold to the public under the pretence that the money will be used to fund early childhood education programs (see: glorified baby sitter services). The soda tax is everything that's wrong with the Democratic party and a big part of why people hate Democrats and handed them their rear ends in the November elections.
Alex Nowrasteh of the Cato Institute coined a new term to describe the conservative version of political correctness: Patriotically Correct. In this terrific piece, Alex describes the hypocritical double standard employed by conservatives who complain about the left stifling free speech, while engaging in their own narrow version of PC.