Ed Krayewski on the Tom Brown Show on WEZS in New Hampshire Now

|

I'll be on with Tom Brown on WEZS in New Hampshire in a few minutes to talk about the news of the day, including Chris Christie and drug dogs. You can follow all the news at Reason 24/7.

You can listen here.

Advertisement

NEXT: Lawsuit Against NYPD Internal Affairs Alleges Arbitrary Spying, Racial Discrimination, Sexual Impropriety

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 for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Better than being on the Tom Green Show, I suppose.

    1. Did someone say Tom Brady?

    2. Nothing is better than the Tom Green show.

      1. Actually, I liked Freddy Got Fingered better than his show. That movie was surreal genius.

        1. The only good thing about Freddy Got Fingered is that inspired one of the best Roger Ebert lines:

          “This movie doesn’t scrape the bottom of the barrel. This movie isn’t the bottom of the barrel. This movie isn’t below the bottom of the barrel. This movie doesn’t deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence with barrels.”

          1. I beg to differ. “Daddy Would You Like Some Sausage” is a brilliant song, and him grabbing the huge horse cock in the beginning set the correct tone for the entire movie. Also, Rip Torn.

            1. He did predict that some people would call it surreal art.

  2. Tom Brown’s body lies a-smouldering in the ground….

  3. Where’s Flashman?

    1. Expelled for drunkenness, thanks to that rotter Tom.

  4. Sounds like some serious business to me dude.

    http://www.Privacy-Road.tk

  5. Another ratfucker caught in the woodpile – 60 Minutes discovers their source on Behghazi was lying:

    CBS News’ “60 Minutes” said it is weighing whether to correct a report about the 2012 attack on the U.S. mission compound in Benghazi, Libya.

    “’60 Minutes’ has learned of new information that undercuts the account told to us by Morgan Jones of his actions on the night of the attack on the Benghazi compound,” CBS Corp. (CBS:US)’s news organization said today in an e-mailed statement. “We are currently looking into this serious matter to determine if he misled us, and if so, we will make a correction.”

    The Sunday-night newsmagazine broadcast a report on Oct. 27 based on the eyewitness account of a security contractor, Dylan Davies, who was identified under the pseudonym Morgan Jones. Davies told “60 Minutes” he was on the scene responding to the Sept. 11, 2012, attack in Benghazi, in which U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens was killed.

    http://www.businessweek.com/ne…..azi-attack

    Goddamnit, these fake scandals just don’t hold up.

    1. It’s almost like you don’t want it to be true.

    2. You mean the fake scandal where the POTUS tried to pin the Benghazi attack on a video so his foreign policy wouldn’t be called into question right before a presidential election? The one where he knowingly lied to all of America for over a week and a half?

      That fake scandal?

      Fuck you asshat.

      1. Lie, is a subjective term… the “current truth?” is what’s truly important here, and that truth is…

  6. Apparently this Typhoon Haiyan is one of the strongest storms ever recorded

    Haiyan made landfall in the central Philippines earlier this evening (early morning in the Philippines). With estimated maximum sustained winds of 195 mph, it is thought to be the strongest storm to ever make landfall anywhere in the world in modern records.

    195 miles per hour wind. Holy shit.

    1. Back in my day we had to walk through 195 mph+ winds, uphill, in the snow, both ways, just to get a monocle!

      1. Back in my day, we’d just send an orphan.

    2. Global Weirding!

  7. Please put more effort into your sales pitch. I read this and thought “wow not watching whatever the fuck that is.”

  8. That kid on the Dolphins has hired a lawyer now? Here comes the lawsuit for emotional distress and who the fuck knows what else.

    I guess this is sort of going to be like the real life version of “A Few Good Men”. I think I’m beginning to understand why the coaches wanted to try to toughen the buttercup up a little.

    1. Unionized players.

      Nuf said.

    2. Which? Martin or Incognito?

    3. At this point I think he can be seen to have an honest complaint. Incognito’s alleged behavior as a co-worker strikes me as a legitimate thing to complain to your boss about.

      I would bet the lawyer sought him out, with offers of a great many dollars potentially out there. I can not blame the young man for taking such an offer.

      1. Yeah, he IS A little money-grubbing asshole. Agreed.

    4. Incognito appears to be a dumb racist thug. Don’t really have any sympathy for him.

  9. Saudi nuclear weapons ‘on order’ from Pakistan”

    While the kingdom’s quest has often been set in the context of countering Iran’s atomic programme, it is now possible that the Saudis might be able to deploy such devices more quickly than the Islamic republic.

    What could *possibly* go wrong?

    1. What could *possibly* go wrong?

      It will end our dependence on foreign oil, in a real hurry… that’s a good thing, right?

    2. Standing (launch) order to drop ship directly to Iran then?

  10. No more Mr. Nice Guy! Mainstream, moderate, common-sensical, business oriented Republicans are contemplating war against nihilistic, fanatical, extremist, puppy-killing Tea Partiers.

    “Senate Republicans are spoiling for a fight this primary season as they try to take back control of the party from conservative activists.

    “The strategy: prop up the most electable candidates ? even if they are more moderate than ones demanded by tea party activists ? and punish those who get in their way….

    “With the blessing of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the hardball plan is already beginning to take shape. Senior Republican officials are privately warning GOP consultants and firms who continue to work with one of their main foes ? the Senate Conservatives Fund ? and another GOP ad firm that they won’t get contracts from the NRSC. They’ll also be frozen out of McConnell’s network if they remain hired by their right-wing rival….

    “”Hopefully it means that the tea party people will start to realize that it’s better to work within the Republican Party than to continually make it very difficult to elect Republicans,” said Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, who thwarted a tea party challenge in his primary last year. “I think the tea party could be a great asset to the Republican Party if they would just get behind solid conservatives who are running.””

    http://www.politico.com/story/…..99511.html

    1. “I think the tea party could be a great asset to the Republican Party if they would just get behind solid conservatives who are running.””

      Let me know when you find some Orrin.

    2. “With the blessing of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the hardball plan is already beginning to take shape.

      Ominous words from a man with, like five or six primary challengers in orbit around him…

  11. Doctor who did abortions becomes prolife, testifies before Congress to support ban on abortions after 20 weeks. He’s obviously worried about a primary challenge from some other doctor – he can’t possibly be serious!

    “Dr. Anthony Levatino is a pro-life physician from New Mexico but, before having a change of heart on the issue of abortion he was an OBGYN who also performed abortions.

    “Levatino did as many as 1,200 abortions ? some of them after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Then, after his daughter died in a tragic automobile accident, he re-evaluated his position on abortion and stopped doing abortions.

    “Today, Dr. Levatino told members of a Congressional committee that they should support a bill sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks that would ban abortions nationwide aft[er] 20 weeks of pregnancy.”

    http://www.lifenews.com/2013/0…..ign=Buffer

    1. Change the first sentence to “doctor *that* performed abortions” etc.

    2. Eduard, out of curiosity, what is your position on the death penalty?

      1. It’s never too late to abort?

      2. Rarely, if ever. But let us suppose that I supported the execution of run-of-the-mill convicted murderers.

        Can you think of any relevant differences between a person on death row after being convicted of or one or more murders, and an innocent human being in the womb? If you are aware of the differences, why are you playing at Socratic questioning? If you don’t know the difference…well, I don’t know what to tell you.

        1. I honestly was asking because I wondered if it was the ‘pro-life’ thing that made you so focused on saving ‘babies’ or if it was the innocence thing.

          No trap, just curious.

          1. OK, I beg your pardon for my tone. I seem to have confused you with a certain class of lefty thinks that the death penalty point is a slam-dunk for their position, leading them to high-five themselves for their cleverness. As if it’s purer and more consistent to spare the convicted murderers while allowing humans in the womb to be offed.

            1. I can see a focus more on innocence than on ‘life’ per se as relevant.

              Does this mean you would be OK with physician assisted suicide for convicted murderers who ask for it 😉 ?

              1. “I can see a focus more on innocence than on ‘life’ per se as relevant.”

                Hmmm, I’m not 100% sure what that means.

                1. Perhaps my answer to you will also answer Pathogen’s below.

                  On the one hand I can see someone thinking that life is so precious that it should never be taken (perhaps other than to save another life).

                  I can also see a distinctly different position that while some people deserve their lives to be taken, innocent lives should be protected.

                  I was honestly curious where you fell. Neither strikes me as intellectually incoherent.

              2. “Does this mean you would be OK with physician assisted suicide for convicted murderers who ask for it 😉 ?”

                And if Answer=Yes?

                1. If ‘Answer=Yes’ then I think Eduard clearly falls into the ‘innocence’ category, not ‘all life must be protected’ category.

                  1. And then what?

                    1. Not much, from a ‘points scoring’ perspective, if that is what you are getting at.

                  2. Where does the “all life must be protected” thing even come from? The Jains?

                    Of course even a death penalty supporter would protect guilty human beings – up to the point when they’re convicted of murder. I don’t think even Ernest van den Haag (prominent DP supporter) would kill someone without trial, no matter how guilty, or execute adulterers or the vast majority of sinners.

                    So I’m not sure I share your formulation.

                    1. So it is not that ‘all life is precious and should not be taken unless to protect another life’ (the Catholic Church’s position, no?), it is that innocent life must be protected, but death is warranted for people who commit horrendous crimes?

                      As I said, I think both positions intellectually coherent btw.

                    2. I’ve already given plenty of fuel to the “OMG he’s discussing abortion again” folks here, and they’re going to let me hear about it. Maybe I should just leave my position as I’ve stated it.

                    3. -Maybe I should just leave my position as I’ve stated it.

                      Have you stated it?

                    4. By this time, I’m just going to say, “look it up in the Catechism and get the best approximation of my stance.”

                    5. Is your stance on all of this that of the Catechism?

                    6. I’m trying to follow his flowchart here, it’s objective is…murky..

          2. I too have yet to see an unborn child in the womb convicted of a capital crime, sentenced by a jury, nor granted an appeal(s) at the clinics. I’m not convinced on a pro-life/pro death position yet, but I don’t see the point in conflating such exclusive moral arguments.

            1. It’s supposed to be a gotcha. It…isn’t. Not sure why someone would admit to thinking it is.

    3. I don’t recall EvH, are you pro choice or pro non-choice?

      1. It’s Troll Appreciation Thursday, dude. So have some respect.

    4. Levatino did as many as 1,200 abortions ? some of them after 20 weeks of pregnancy. Then, after his daughter died in a tragic automobile accident, he re-evaluated his position on abortion and stopped doing abortions.

      There are similar accounts of slave traders who sold men and women away from their families and homes by the thousands, and transporting them in inhuman conditions, making similar volte face. I have always wondered what it is like to have a moral epiphany like that after having been responsible for so much suffering.

      1. -There are similar accounts of slave traders who sold men and women away from their families and homes by the thousands, and transporting them in inhuman conditions, making similar volte face.

        Double-plus points for the slavery and ‘baby killing’ equation.

        1. They aren’t equal. Killing babies is obviously worse.

          1. Yes, enslaving fully developed human persons and two-inch ‘human beings’ with underdeveloped brains and neural nets is clearly more wrong for the latter…

            1. Yeah but that’s question begging and you know it. We see them as human life equally valuable to humans at any other age. You know this so what was the point of your comment?

            2. And besides that, the OP was about abortions after 20 weeks. They are quite developed and bigger than two-inches. At what stage does personhood begin for you?

              1. At what stage does personhood begin for you?

                140 days. Half way between conception and birth.

                1. I have said this before but in my observation most people probably feel the same way. It doesn’t resolve the question but in Europe earlier date restrictions than what some describe as extreme over here like 20 weeks are common.

        2. Would you not say that, from the pro-life perspective, it is similar? Obviously abortionist =/= slave trader in the mind of a pro-choicer, but it does to that particular former abortionist. I have always wondered what motivates people to make epiphanies which are terribly inconvenient to themselves to the point of making them out to be moral monsters.

          1. Bo Cara Esq.|11.7.13 @ 11:40PM|#

            I honestly was asking ….

            First time for everything.

  12. Mitch McConnell: “”The most important election yesterday wasn’t the governor of New Jersey and it wasn’t the governor of Virginia, it was the special election for Congress in South Alabama, where a candidate who said the shutdown was a great idea, the president was born in Kenya, and that he opposed Speaker Boehner came in second.””

    I mean, McConnell could have put up with the birther stuff, but opposing Boehner? That’s just crazy!

    http://online.wsj.com/news/art…..1565709594

  13. Got to hand it to The Atlantic, this is impressively stupid: If Rand Paul were a Woman

    But let’s imagine the junior senator from Kentucky were a woman. Not just any woman?let’s call her Randi?but, for the sake of this argument, a beautiful woman. The “men want to sleep with her, women want to be her” echelon of physical attractiveness. Everything else is identical: self-certified eye doctor, first-term senator, and she got the job with a boost from her father.
    […]
    People snicker about how dumb she is. Twitter erupts with sarcastic hashtags: #RandiLulz, #CandywithRandi and #RandiLogic. She’s considered a ditz?the Senate’s answer to Michele Bachmann. Still, Randi gets ratings!
    […]
    But her lecture on media ethics is greeted with the same seriousness as complaints from her fellow Republican Sarah Palin. Randi had no credibility to lose. She was already a national punch line. A meme. A joke. A shiny distraction. And now she’s also a proven plagiarist. She’s referred to as “silly.” A silly airhead. There’s a collective condescending chuckle at the thought of a girl like her in the Oval Office. Right?

    So the question is: Why not for him?

    I don’t even know how to respond to this.

    1. Imagine how seriously we would have taken Josephine Biden.

    2. Wait, is she saying that Rand Paul is dumb and should be treated like an airhead, or that it sucks that TEAM BLUE can’t portray him that way because he’s not a woman?

      If it’s the latter, that is one of the biggest mask slippages I’ve seen in a while. Because if it is, it’s a direct admission that TEAM BLUE will shamelessly demean women if they are on the other TEAM.

      1. -Wait, is she saying

        It is hard to discern any cogent meaning there, but I think she is arguing something about sexism, that if Rand were a woman like Palin ‘she’ would be mocked a lot more. Strangely, it is a criticism of the way Palin was treated and of course a jab at Paul is intended.

    3. I think it is hard to argue Paul has scant intellectual accomplishments, at least as measured by the intelligentsia. An MD from Duke University is hardly the stuff that would inspire them to criticize anyone else.

      1. “I think it is hard to argue Paul has scant intellectual accomplishments”

        Go on… What does that mean?

        1. Palin was criticized because she did not have the kind of intellectual accomplishments the intelligentsia respects.

          On the other hand, Paul has a graduate degree (and not one in, say, Danish Literature, but medicine) from a prestigious university. He passed his certification once and obviously left and formed a different certification group not out of not being able to pass their requirements but out of a policy dispute.

    4. I don’t know how she can claim that Paul would be treated differently if he were a woman. Hillary Clinton has shown herself to be grossly incompetent at virtually every job she’s ever had, but that hasn’t resulted in her being called a moron.

      Admittedly, she’s a Democrat. A Democratic woman could spend her days drooling on the floor of the senate and periodically shitting herself and the media would inform us in hushed tones that we simply do not understand her genius.

      1. I am no fan of Hillary Clinton. I would be surprised to be shown a policy position she would take that I agreed with.

        Having said that, what is it that makes you think she is ‘grossly incompetent at every job she’s ever had?’

      2. One of my favorite things to do is ask Clinton supporters to identify Hillary Clinton’s top 2 or 3 accomplishments other than getting elected or appointed to some position.

        Most people can’t or get all defensive about it. Hillary isn’t stupid, she’s just an example of the right connections and personal ambition leading someone to higher office without actually doing anything.

        In Paul’s case, his heretical views fundamentally baffle progressives, so they just explain it away by saying he’s stupid even though he’s a bloody eye surgeon with an MD from a major medical school and a solid reputation with regard to his career practicing medicine.

        1. A JD from Yale law school and ‘Becoming the first female chair of the Legal Services Corporation in 1978, and the first female partner at Rose Law Firm in 1979’ would not rate in your opinion?

          1. Like I said, she isn’t stupid and those are nice accomplishments from 40 years ago.

            But in her tenure as Senator or Secretary of State, what has she accomplished? There seems to be a lot of evidence that she didn’t run the tightest ship during her tenure as Secretary.

            1. But in her tenure as Senator or Secretary of State, what has she accomplished? There seems to be a lot of evidence that she didn’t run the tightest ship during her tenure as Secretary.

              Mild understatement.

              1. Well I’m not going to sugarcoat it Irish.

              2. Irish, I frankly cringe when someone sources the NY Post. This is the same outfit that provided so many convoluted defenses of Bloomberg’s ‘Stop and Frisk.’

                1. So because the supported Stop and Frisk everything they report is dubious?

                  I agree that the Post is kind of like the American Daily Mail, but I doubt they’re making all that up. Diplomats getting involved with prostitutes and gambling is the kind of thing that leads to security leaks, so I think it is serious.

                  1. Well, she did seem to have a pretty firm grip on day to day business at the U.N., where I’m sure she was immensely popular…

          2. Since entering politics, the only thing that liberals actually care about in her case, what has she succeeded at? She was a first lady that failed to get her health care package passed. She became a Senator entirely based on her husband’s name, something that should make feminists blanch but which they ignore in service to the cause. She became Secretary of State and under her tenure we saw travesty after travesty out of the State Department. Not only did we have Benghazi and the subsequent clusterfuck, but we’ve had half a dozen instances of various ambassadors and state department officials behaving abhorrently, virtually none of whom were actually punished in any way.

            The State Department was an utter mess under Clinton. Yet they’re telling me she’s competent to run State and every other department as president? Please.

            1. -Since entering politics, the only thing that liberals actually care about in her case, what has she succeeded at?

              Where do you get that from?

              -we’ve had half a dozen instances of various ambassadors and state department officials behaving abhorrently, virtually none of whom were actually punished in any way.

              Again, I am curious what you are getting at?

            2. For her core supporters, as I’ve mentioned before, not only would they stick by her if she unleashed King Ghodorah over Tokyo, they’d be extremely angry at anyone who criticized her over the incident.

            3. “Becoming the first female*__________*” is the best she can hope to attain…

    5. I don’t even know how to respond to this.

      With complete disdain…

      …or don’t bother.

      Meaningless drivel.

    6. Is this all about the plagiarism thing? I guess we’ll see an article about how stupid Joe Biden is any day. Followed by one about how much of an idiot Martin Luther King was.

      1. “Followed by one about how much of an idiot Martin Luther King was.”

        I first blamed Paul for being as sleazy as MLK jr, but after thinking about it, that’s not true.
        Paul’s staff blew it and Paul is to blame; it is his staff. Someone needs a pink slip, even if there was a footnote, and Paul needs to take the heat.
        MLK did ‘write’ it (he had no staff to do so), didn’t bother with a footnote and used that ‘writing’ to knowingly and fraudulently apply for a degree.
        Paul is careless, MLK Jr was sleazy.

  14. Randy Barnett Shows the Bind Many SoCons Are In

    He starts by quoting someone else’s article advising what Cuccinelli should have done:

    -Cuccinelli also needed to address the false Democrat War on Women and contraception allegations. He should have fired back that the nonsense McAuliffe and his Democrats were peddling would actually have been unconstitutional under the long established Supreme Court precedent of Griswold v. Connecticut.

    But then shows why this would not work:

    -But this is not something that conservative Republicans can do if they are judicial conservatives who believe that the Court in Griswold was wrong to protect a right to use contraceptives. So the next question of a smart lawyer candidate who tries this response is, “Oh so you believe there is an unenumerated right of privacy?” And they have all be trained to answer this answer “no.” And the smarter and better trained they are as judicial conservatives, the more they are trapped by the accusation that state legislatures could ban contraceptives if they want, which then leads to the next questions is whether they think state legislatures ought to ban contraceptives. How they answer this question can then get themselves in trouble with parts of their socially conservative base.

    http://www.volokh.com/2013/11/…..servatism/

    1. Really? The SoCon base wants to put criminal penalties on contraceptives? Does he have a cite for that?

      1. With respect Eduard, you may want to re-read the sourced article.

        1. He suggested that a conservative candidate could get in trouble with his/her base by opposing criminal penalties for contraceptives. Did you read it differently?

          1. Fair enough. It is his guess they would be upset, it could be wrong.

            1. Well, when Rick Santorum wrote clearly in his book *It Takes a Family* that he would not have supported the old Connecticut and Massachusetts contraception bans. Did he alienate his base by saying this?

              http://washingtonexaminer.com/article/1042801

              1. I think Santorum was playing politics there, though I can not prove it.

                He has spoken out against birth control as ‘harmful.’ He has been willing to support statist positions against things he thinks ‘harmful.’ But, yes, he has said he would not outlaw birth control. The fact that birth control is so popular, and that he was running for office, makes me doubt him. But there it is.

                1. My point is a narrow one – he didn’t alienate his conservative base, even the folks who thought he was telling the truth.

                  1. I might point out who else they were going to support, but fair enough.

                    How about you Eduard? Do you condemn laws like ‘Connecticut and Massachusetts contraception bans’ as silly nonsense?

      2. Ask a Dem candidate whether the Constitution guarantees an unenumerated right to freedom of contract. If they’re true judicial liberals, they will deny this, since freedom of contract is a relic of the evil pre-New Deal era.

  15. Hey lawyer types, is it possible for a state’s AG to issue a criminal complaint against Obama for his ACA/doctor lie in that it was a fraudulent representation of a product or service?

    1. I’m no lawyer, I do not play one on TV, nor did I sleep at some motel last night.
      I’m going ‘way out on a limb and guessing there is no way any AG, lawyer representing a class action, lawyer representing an individual or any other legal agent could bring suit re a president’s lies.
      Impeachment or fergidit.

  16. Why am I the only person in the world who liked The Postman?

    1. Because you like to get mail, and truly believe in the tenets of president Starkey?

      1. President Starkey may be the best President we’ve ever had. Talk about a small government platform.

        1. I’d rather live in a town with Mayor Tom Petty.

          1. I’m quite certain Tom would tell you, “Don’t come around here no more.”

            1. I’m quite certain Tom would tell you, “Don’t come around here no more You don’t have to live like a refugee.”

          2. Mayor Tom Petty ruled over a city “where we don’t allow guns”….. In a post apocalyptic society.

            The 90s really blare through the movie. Having said that, I liked the movie and watched it a couple times.

    2. Are we talking the shitty Kevin Costner movie or the Italian movie about Pablo Neruda?

      1. Costner.

        I like most of his movies. One of the few Hollywood types Id like to have a beer with.

        1. He definitely seems like a cool guy and he’s a fine enough actor, but so many of his movies are needlessly self-indulgent, like ‘The Postman’ or ‘Wyatt Earp’.

          1. My new favorite Western is Open Range. It displaced Josey Wales for top honors.

            1. He didn’t fuck around with the henchmen…

            2. Yes, that was a good movie and I will say that it had one of the best shootouts in all of film though.

              But it still can’t supplant Josey Wales or Unforgiven in my book. Clint is just too awesome.

              1. Love Clint. But the shootout in OR was fucking awesome.

                And Bobby Duvall is a living god.

                1. Yeah, I’m watching it on YouTube now. Very impressive film making. Costner knows how to direct.

          2. Ya, fuck the postman. Statist propaganda.

  17. I am really liking the sound of that man. WOw.

    http://www.Privacy-Road.tk

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.