John Stossel is ABC News' Co-Anchor of "20/20" and New York Times best-selling author of Give Me A Break & Myths, Lies and Downright Stupidity. His "Give Me a Break" commentaries take a skeptical look at a wide array of issues, such as education, the economy, parenting, and more.
RECENT POSTS
JOHN STOSSEL'S CATEGORIES
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Obama Actually Can Hurt a Fly, and PETA Isn’t Happy About It
06/19/2009 5:32 PM
On Tuesday, Obama successfully swatted at a fly that was buzzing around him during a CNBC interview.
He was pretty happy when he killed the bug. "That was pretty impressive, wasn't it?” he said, “I got the sucker."
The next day a spokesman for the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) spoke out against Obama’s cruel slaughter of an innocent bug, saying “We support compassion even for the most curious, smallest and least sympathetic animals.”
Don’t the people at PETA have better ways to spend their time? Their equating humans with bugs is repulsive, and the kind of sloppy thinking that lets them raise money to defend criminals, like Rodney Coronado who was convicted of an arson attack on an animal research lab in 1992.
Of course, PETA does things like this just for the publicity. PETA president Ingrid Newkirk even told The New Yorker, "We are complete press sluts. It is our obligation.”
When I interviewed Newkirk back in 2003, I wasn’t too kind to PETA. I took her on for donating money to defend terrorists and criticized her for likening turkey farms to concentration camps.
After the piece aired, she sent me a thank-you note.
I guess the publicity, no matter how negative, helps PETA raise money.
And here I am sucking myself into doing it again.
June 19, 2009 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (33)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Must say PETA are geniuses at marketing.
Posted by: pierre | Jun 19, 2009 6:19:04 PM
Money is what it's all about in the end for them.
Makes perfect sense to me.
Posted by: Angela | Jun 19, 2009 6:19:40 PM
The idea that "equating humans with bugs is repulsive" is only true because you say it is. Most ideas in the world have become realities because enough people have agreed to call them true. What is all too forgotten is that we created the ideas in the first place. Most humans place human life ahead of the lives of every other species. This becomes a reality not because of some intrinsic truth of the value of humanity but because of our definition. Obama's killing of the fly, because of his high profile and authority, served as a reminder that it is important to value all life. PETA's equating humans with bugs is not repulsive. You, John, are defining it as such.
Posted by: Jeffrey T. Guterman | Jun 19, 2009 7:26:23 PM
Very well written John Stossel, I couldn't agree more. I've honestly never followed any news about PETA except the recent news of the president and I've heard a lot of the same things you've described about them. Did they really expect the president to stop his interview and go grab a "bug friendly" trap and then go put it outside? give me a break!
Posted by: Shanda E | Jun 19, 2009 7:54:52 PM
Very well written John Stossel, I couldn't agree more. I've honestly never followed any news about PETA except the recent news of the president and I've heard a lot of the same things you've described about them. Did they really expect the president to stop his interview and go grab a "bug friendly" trap and then go put it outside? give me a break!
Posted by: Shanda E | Jun 19, 2009 7:56:23 PM
Is this for real? This seems like something The Onion would have written. How much more ridiculous could PETA be?
Posted by: David N | Jun 19, 2009 9:10:26 PM
what i found disturbing was not the killing of the fly but barack's macho posturing afterwards. urging the cameraman to get a shot of his trophy kill was very odd behavior. the man has some serious issues regarding his masculinity which may not bode well when he is faced with more serious situations than the swatting of a fly.
Posted by: el polacko | Jun 19, 2009 10:03:53 PM
what i found disturbing was not the killing of the fly but barack's macho posturing afterwards. urging the cameraman to get a shot of his trophy kill was very odd behavior. the man has some serious issues regarding his masculinity which may not bode well when he is faced with more serious situations than the swatting of a fly.
Posted by: el polacko | Jun 19, 2009 10:05:25 PM
what i found disturbing was not the killing of the fly but barack's macho posturing afterwards. urging the cameraman to get a shot of his trophy kill was very odd behavior. the man has some serious issues regarding his masculinity which may not bode well when he is faced with more serious situations than the swatting of a fly.
Posted by: el polacko | Jun 19, 2009 10:06:21 PM
Why do the RSS articles say the author is Andrew Kirell, Tori Barnett, or Patrick McMenamin?
This is John Stossel's take, isn't it?
Posted by: Austin Archibald | Jun 20, 2009 2:17:59 AM
This was almost better than when he put his feet on desk. When we wnated the day to day on presidential coverage. I never expected a nagging fly incident. After all he removed it himself also.
Posted by: johnnie | Jun 20, 2009 2:59:58 AM
All of the "environmental" groups are press sluts. They have all hit upon a great business model. Fear mongering through spin doctoring with free advertising provided by a mindless media that is ever desirous of a controversy to sell their wares.
Posted by: William Diller | Jun 20, 2009 9:18:51 AM
Peta is complaining about a fly?
I think thats the point where most people start to say: "Okay, you guys are a bit nuts." Peta should just put a huge sign over there head saying "we want your money to protect criminals!"
Posted by: Andaydandeez | Jun 20, 2009 11:14:17 AM
He can kill a fly, and can let the mullahs kill the Iranian protesters.
Posted by: ic | Jun 20, 2009 2:07:26 PM
"Obama's killing of the fly, because of his high profile and authority, served as a reminder that it is important to value all life."
- - - - -
Really? I thought it served as a reminder to spray for bugs before filming interviews, or that the small and powerless venture into the terrible blinding light of the elite at their own peril.
Maybe at a stretch it might remind us that it is important to value our OWN life sufficiently to think twice about doing something stupid.
Posted by: bobby b | Jun 20, 2009 2:12:57 PM
It's interesting to see how the Pope was so patient with a fly that was bothering him while speaking at a Mass in Nazereth last month.
He calmy shoos it away at least a dozen times without any anger at all! In the end he just lets it walk on his face and he keeps on talking, as if nothing happened.
Here is a link to the page on which the video is found:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/PopeinIsrael/Video/Video_recordings_Papal_visit_14-May-2009.htm
Posted by: Colin Shattan | Jun 20, 2009 2:22:12 PM
Dear Dr. (PhD) Guterman,
I am thunderstruck with your inability to understand what is true. I will choose to believe it is due to your over education and inculcation in the fields of:
"professional identity, integrative counseling models, postmodern theories of counseling, and solution-focused counseling."
Should Barry have asked the other present if there really was a fly in the room? Did they see it? Did all of them believe it to be a fly? Was there a consensus among them? What were their human-centric thoughts on feces-eating disease bearing flying insects? How did they feel about it? What should be done?
Humans: Opposable thumbs, tool-making, and top of the food chain. Any questions ... Jackass.
Posted by: M Kitchen | Jun 20, 2009 3:38:10 PM
The idea that "equating humans with bugs is NOT repulsive" is only true because you say it is. Most ideas in the world have become realities because enough people have agreed to call them true. What is all too forgotten is that we created the ideas in the first place. Some humans place human life as equivalent to the lives of every other species. This becomes a reality not because of some intrinsic truth of the equal value of all species but because of our definition. PETA's equating humans with bugs IS repulsive.
There. Two can play at that game.
Posted by: FV | Jun 20, 2009 4:15:34 PM
Does PETA take sides when flies spread disease and kill herbivores? PETA is ridiculous. Do they have a good answer for how many animals THEY kill? Or is that okay because it's them and they do it for the flies? Ridiculous and repulsive hypocrites.
Posted by: Vivian Louise | Jun 20, 2009 4:23:56 PM
I wonder if that particular now-deceased fly can be described as the most famous fly of all time.
And maybe the fly planned it all. Someone should ask Jeff Goldblum.
Posted by: OSweet | Jun 20, 2009 7:18:37 PM
Post a comment
