Reason Writers on TV: Peter Suderman Talks Mitt Romney's Flip Flops on Freedom Watch with Judge Napolitano

February 2, 2012

On Wednesday, February 1, Reason Associate Editor Peter Suderman appeared on Freedom Watch to discuss GOP primary frontrunner Mitt Romney's book, No Apology, and the candidate's record of flip-flops on healthcare. Approximately five minutes.

Reason needs your support. Please donate today!

Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.

← Atlas Shrugged Part Two To Start… | Main | "If they're saying $100 billion, that… →

See all 9 comments | Leave a comment

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.

Pusse Comitatus|2.2.12 @ 3:44PM|#

Napolitano requires Suderman to be in a different location, because he finds Suderman's contention that Homeland is "a thinking man's 24" to be pretentious and insulting to the average Fox News viewer.

Needless to say, the Judge can't stand the actual sight of Suderman.

Fist of Etiquette|2.2.12 @ 3:50PM|#

Suderman said that? That's more scandalous than KMW telling everyone that Ron Paul would be president over her dead body.

Peter Suderman|2.2.12 @ 4:09PM|#

I didn't say anything about Homeland on TV. But I wrote a piece about the show: http://reason.com/archives/2011/12/29/terror-tv

Fist of Etiquette|2.2.12 @ 4:26PM|#

Rather than view the bureaucratic process as a trifle to be dismissed, Homeland goes out of its way to remind viewers that the internal politics of the security bureaucracy—as with other government agencies—hinge on the personal biases and inscrutable incentives of the leadership as much as questions of national security. The show recognizes that bureaucracy is often an end in itself.

So I guess you missed the episode where Jack shot Mason - his supervisor - with a tranquilizer dart. That's hardly marginalizing the bureaucracy. How did I miss your sacrilegious article when you posted it?

And I watched the first episode of Homeland but Claire Danes didn't shout at anyone once to find out where the bomb was, so I gave up.

Pusse Comitatus|2.2.12 @ 4:32PM|#

If by "morally ambiguous", Suderman means "I miss most of the plot because I was distracted by the possibility of a Claire Danes nude scene," then, yeah, I would agree.

|2.2.12 @ 4:37PM|#

Jack shot Mason - his supervisor - with a tranquilizer dart.

Well, to be fair, who hasn't?

|2.2.12 @ 4:04PM|#

Cosmotarians. What can you say.

lily|2.2.12 @ 8:05PM|#

looking for the bilover?---datebi*cO'm--- is a site for bisexual and bicurious singles and friends.Here you can find hundreds of thousands of open-minded singles & couples looking to explore their bisexuality.sign up for free.