Rating: 
Summary: A great dose of common sense...
Review: Stossel uses his experiences as an investigative reporter to demonstrate the superiority of private enterprise in solving societies problems, using statistics and anecdotes. He gives a variety of examples of how governmental solutions are wasteful at best and counterproductive at sorst. He also tries to show how many fears that are hyped by the media are not the threats they are presented as.
Read it with an open mind an gain new appreciation for the wisom of the founders of our great country and the folly of our ever expanding governmental "nanny state."
Rating:
Summary: ..... because the book has inspired thinking and debate
Review: Debate is a good thing! John Stossels' anecdotes are genuine and I give the book very high marks for being engaging, interesting and humorous. However, there is some self-indugent hypocrisy there and although he discusses his conversion from liberal to libertarian I think John forgets to also point objective fingers at his own frailties and foibles. John disparages politicians and greedy capitalists but then he turns around and himself makes money off consumers with a book to capitalize on his popular news magazine segments. Give me a break? I've read the reviews here and I smile thinking of how invaluable it is to have an opinion and the free will to express opinions without fear of repraisal. There is no way this book could be received without a debate on the absolute way John Stossel expresses his thoughts. We all have differing angles of view and that makes for great debate and important self-evaluations. I really love thought-provoking opinions and Stossels' "Give Me A Break" has always been done with great humor even though sometimes the evidence to shore up the opinion can be fairly thin. Overall I sincerely enjoyed reading his book and encourage others to read and savor his ideas but I say tongue in cheek -John a whole book on your opinions of government pork barrel? For 20 bucks? Give Me a Break!
Rating: 
Summary: The main thing that comes across is Stossel's persona
Review: I pride myself in being, or at least trying to be, an open-minded person and reviewer. When I come across a book or product I do not find appealing, rather than rant against the author or producer, I try to stick to commentary on the product. In other words, this review is not intended as an insult to Mr. Stossel. That being said, I have to admit that I simply found very little redeeming about GIVE ME A BREAK. And though I occasionally make exceptions, I usually feel that it is potentially dangerous to mix too much humor and overly stylized graphics and editing with political commentary. The risk in doing so is that the political message becomes subordinate to the messenger. Unfortunately, it is my opinion that this is what happens in GIVE ME A BREAK. As to the idea that Stossel has become the scourge of the liberal media, two things come to mind: 1. Most of us so-called liberals opposed the war with Iraq and, as depicted in 2/15: THE DAY THE WORLD SAID NO TO WAR, we took part in historic protests to bring that point to the world. The mainstream media largely ignored our efforts, and where it did depict our protests, it often portrayed American protestors as eccentrics who were out-of-touch. And when the war started, there was a little thing called "embedding," where media actually went over and lived with soldiers in Iraq to document the war firsthand. Now, Stossel claims that we, the so-called liberals, control the media. If this were the case, why did it take our supposedly liberal-controlled mainstream media nearly a year to bring to the national attention our point of view - that there are no "weapons of mass desctruction" in Iraq? 2. In PERPETUAL WAR FOR PERPETUAL PEACE Gore Vidal wrote, "In a country evenly divided between religious fanatics and political reactionaries, I see not a liberal among us." Andrew Parodi
Rating:
Summary: Hmmmmm......A Reader
Review: Almost sounds like the previous reviewer never read the book, but approves of any book that puts down liberals in its title.
"How convenient?" That's the Dana Carvey Church Lady thing, isn't it? Sounds like the previous reviewer also has no sense of appropriate reference. Anyway getting back to the book. It is inarguable that the liberals in this country do not want Stossel to report on how the movie theaters in America are poisening our children with their high fat popcorn, because the Democratic Party has been in bed with the popcorn and butter manufacturers since popcorn became the common theater snack back in the 1920s. And they certainly do not want to see Stossel's story on how squirrels are burrowing into the gardens of good Americans and eating their roma tomatoes and cucumbers, because they fear that the powerful anti-roma tomato and cucumber lobby will stop funneling their vital kickbacks to the democratic congressmen who rely on these funds to pay for their heroin and prostitutes. I applaud Stossel for his courage and passion in exposing the lying lawn-mower repair mechanics and wreckless drive-thru employees at the Taco Tommy shop in El Segundo. As viscious and violent as the liberals may get in their zeal to censor Stossel's vital work, they will never shut out this shining beacon of truth.
Rating:
Summary: Hmm... 'A Reader'
Review: Almost sounds like the last 3 reviewers never read the book. How convenient.
Rating:
Summary: 'Worship Me,' Stossel Reports: 'I Am A Genius.'
Review: John Stossel has two serious problems: (1) He is deeply, madly, passionately in love with himself. He can not get enough of himself, of his voice, and now, of his own writing. During his maddeningly mundane weekly "news" stories, he rants and raves about some of the silliest, dullest, dumbest topics to ever cross the American airwaves. His stories, which can generally be summed up in eight or ten words ("Stossel Stood In DMV Line Too Long," or "Stossel Saw A TV Show He Does Not Like"), are long--I mean, lonnnnnnnng--and repitition is the name of Stossel's very boring game. In one memorable instance, Stossel spent more than 20 minutes of high priced prime-time network TV time whining about how he thought there were too many warning stickers on 8-foot wooden ladders. His conclusion? 'Liberals ruined America,' of course. (2) Stossel wishes beyond all reason that he was controversial. He wants nothing more than to be the new Geraldo Riveria, the second coming of Howard Cosell, the next Bill O'Reilly. Unfortunately for Stossel, while he appears to have the all-encompassing ego--and the snide, holier-than-thou attitude--of his heroes, he has none of their marketing brains, none of their timing and, frankly, he just doesn't address issues of any concern to most people. According to this book, Stossel has become Enemy Number One to something he calls, over and over--and over and over and over again and again and again--"the Liberal Media Elite." Apparantly, there's a vast Liberal conspiracy aimed at keeping Stosell from continuing to complain that there are too many 'Liberal' newspapers available at public libraries, too many kids hanging out at the mall near his house, and too many people driving too fast on the New Jersey Turnpike. Honestly, how can you blame those nasty Liberal Elitists, with Stossel tackling such hot topics? I mean, when Stossel reported a few years ago that some politicians--Liberals, surprisingly enough--have opinions that he does not agree with, it had to ruffle some feathers in high places, huh? And when he broke the big story about how some illegal immigrants do things that he doesn't like, that was pretty brave too. Right? This guy has made his career reporting silly little stories on a network that he says is run by some of the very same Liberal Media Elitists whom he claims want him off the air. This book is just like Stossel's TV reports: goofy, rambling, non-sensical, and straight-up boring.
Rating:
Summary: Bleh
Review: You would have to be an idiot to buy into any of this simplictic BS. Waste of paper.
Rating:
Summary: No, -- Please - give me a break Mr. Stossel!
Review: In this book, Mr. Stossel gives us exceptions to the rule, anecdotal evidence, and cobbled up bits of statistical data to portray a society and bureaucracy gone amuck.
In a way, I have to agree with him. After all, bureaucracies have to continually 'war up' year after year to support their existence and they do this by presenting new 'problems' to be 'fixed.' Just look at the DEA and its 'claims' about how 'harmful' marijuana is. Yet if the same standards where applied to alcohol and tobacco, they too would be outlawed.
One of books central claims is that the government should step aside and let the 'free market' do the job. The only problem with that is that in many instances, the free market has ignored or failed to come up with a solution. In other cases it simply broke laws.
Let's face it, if it wasn't for the government would we have roads, which subsidized the auto industry? And if it wasn't for the government would we have the Internet, which was a product of the government? In other words could we have expected the 'free enterprise' system to build the roads and the Internet? Libertarians conveniently forget that it was the 'government' that stole land from the native population so that individuals could be given the 'legal' right to own the land which the government stole. Nice - eh? First steal something then make it against the 'law,' then make it a foundation of you political philosophy. And can we really trust the 'free market' to be honest? Just look at the Saving and Loan scandal, the government deregulated the savings industry and that ended in a scandal that cost U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars. Look at the stock market bubble of the late 2oth century and the various scandals that came from that. Mr. Stossel does a bad job of promoting the free market. In fact, by complaining about the so-called 'liberal' media, Mr. Stossel argues against the free market since if the 'liberal' media exists (and I think it only exists in his head) it would mean that there is a market for it. In sum, Mr.Stossel is just another pampered, overbearing media star with a cushy job giving his audience what it wants - entertainment, no matter if the entertainment is bogus and error filled!
Rating:
Summary: Read an excerpt!
Review: I have not yet read this book, however the March 2004 issue of Reason magazine has an excerpt entitled 'Confessions of a Welfare Queen', which is a great read, and not at all what you expect it to be. Based upon that excerpt alone, I WILL be buying this book!
Rating: 
Summary: A Good Apple Stuck in a Bad Barrel
Review: In Give Me A Break John Stossel does a credible job of addressing some of the most important issues of our time. His argument is often persuasive, and his words worth reading. Given his many good points, John regrettably has gotten religion. Reverend Stossel is a devout Libertarian. Compared to some of the faith that mascarades as either economics or politics, his peity is rather tame. Lest you think otherwise, let me remind the reader that Chapter four of Give Me a Break is entitled "Epiphany." Still John Stossel is much better when he uses evidence than when he resorts to his faith. For example, I loved Chapter five where Stossel takes on all the dumb stuff that scares us that really should not. He shows that statistically one person a year dies of Bic lighters, but 710,000 die of heart didease, yet some folks fear a defective BIC more than the habits and genetic factors that cause coronary disease. His table of causes of death was most revealing "and" empirical. I have used his sixth Chapter in some of my college classes as examples of good persuasive argument. He uses statistics and evidence to press his point. John also shows how victimless crimes like prostitution and drug use impact our society. The fanancial and personal costs are staggering. Again there is John with the graphs, charts, and stats to back up what he says. His arguement here is good, but all surmise needs support, and that support is not lacking. Here is where I think the book loses steam at times. He is a
believer in free market solutions. Now there is a good amount of empirical data about this idea and it is mixed. Here John dances around a bit and theorizes when he need not. Privatization and deregulation are almost always good according to John. Yet there is an ample amount of evidence that deregulation and privatization sometimes harm consumers. The Savings and Loan Scandals come to mind. Also I know that recent efforts to use vouchers in private schools have failed to improve results over those of public schools. He never addresses empirical evidence here. Nor does he "ever" mention why the public health care systems in countries like Canada are so much more efficient than our private system of insurance in the United States. We pay twice as much as the Canadians ($4200-$2300), have a much higher infant mortalily rate, live almost three years less, and have lower recovery rates from cancer and heart disease. Stossel never mentions this. When I finished the book, I checked the index to make sure I had not missed anything, and sure enough, health care was never mentioned. Nor does he mention it as one of those few things that government does best. My guess is health care does not fit his model, and he does not know what to do with it. Entrepreneurial spirit is supposed to unleash innovation, lower costs, and, in the case of health care, lengthen lives. It doesn't. And it is likely his economic handler would not like it if he mentioned the public health care system. The only economist that Stossel consults in his book is Walter Williams, a free market maven (I must add that he mentions Thomas Sowell and Milton Freidman each once, but that adds zero diversity of opinion). Always, capitalism fuels innovation and creates properity for all. Well sometimes captialism is the best way. And Stossel argues successfully that most goods and services are optimally delivered by free markets. And when he is right he gives great evidence. He shows how Cornelius Vanderbuilt reduced the cost of a train fare from eight dollars to one dollar, how other goods and services are moved optimally by amoral impersonal markets, and that many people benefit when a seller and a buyer meat. He gives a neat example of truck driver who delivers Stossel his steak for dinner. The driver has no care for or knowlerdge of John Stossel, but the transaction benefits both. He mentions how CEO's like Micheal Eisner have made tons of money
(in Eisner's case a billion dallars over the years), but they have added immeasurably to the bottom line (Eisner added 41 billion dollars to Disney's value). He sites how Ben&Jerry could not get a decent CEO for 14 times what they paid their entry level workers. CEO talent is worth what it is paid says John. Yet he never mentions empirical evidence gathered by economists like Paul Krugman and writers like Arianna Huffington that show that CEO salary packages correlate little with corporate profitability. And writers like Jim Hightower offers examples of highly profitable companies where CEO pay is very reasonable. Stossel is at his best when he deals with fact and stays away from his epiphany and his right wing handlers. On the Jacket of the book is high praise from some of the hardest right-wing pundits out there: Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly and poor Bernie Goldberg. Many of these folks do not agree with much of what Stossel stands for. They are almost all drug warriors with a strong censorial streak. He has chosen to attack the liberal media in his title and in the book. He has taken sides, and that is a loss for us all.
| 
