In which science is all the go, thanks to the mutton Dutton and the extremely scientific hole in the bucket man ...

 

It seems that the reptiles have at last gone into full Nine newspaper real estate mode, with talk of the nation's most expensive streets offering up a dose of real estate porn to striving members of the hive mind ...

The real estate porn was third story down and had by far the biggest snaps in an exciting animation offering sundry exciting snaps of pornographic sites and views ...

Down below the porn was an amusing item elevating Uncle Leon's satellites and deploring the NBN.

Isn't it wonderful how the reptiles can so easily forget their constant efforts to undermine and ruin the NBN, in conjunction with the onion muncher and his able lieutenant, who carried out his orders to introduce Malware into the system and kill it off from the get go ...

Over on the far right in the commentary section, there was more washing away of Benji's crimes by Cameron, while the reliable Chambers was chambering yet another shot at the greenies ...

The pond wondered if it might ever see a headline like this in the lizard Oz ... after all, it was a recent release, and seemed to have important points to make, instead of just regurgitating the arguments of a war criminal, then standing by him ...

The pond realised it might have reached an advanced state of delusionalism if it ever expected the reptiles to take notice of the ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing and sundry war crimes of the mass starvation kind, but it is worth a cartoon ...

Yes, the pond realises it's an avoidance tactic, what with the dreaded bigotry of the hole in the bucket man awaiting the pond.

Feeling nauseous in anticipation, the pond continued the avoidance, and turned to the long awaited announcement by the mutton Dutton of the detailed costings of his energy plans.

The pond keeds, the pond keeds ... it was Rosie Lewis who cast her glow over the latest news ... Peter Dutton vows to cancel three offshore wind zones in NSW, and WA if he wins 2025 election, Peter Dutton has vowed to cancel half of Anthony Albanese’s six declared offshore wind zones, sparking a new clash over climate amid sovereign risk warnings.

The pond doesn't usually concern itself with reptile reporting - just hard core bigotry is enough - but this one began with an epic snap of the reptiles' favourite climate science warrior, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton has vowed to cancel three offshore wind farm projects if he wins office. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman

That was worth a cartoon too ...

Then it was on with the latest news ...

Peter Dutton has vowed to cancel half of Anthony Albanese’s six declared offshore wind zones as he attempts to win 21 seats at the coming election to form government, sparking a new clash over climate amid warnings international companies view Australia as a sovereign risk for investment.
Campaigning in the NSW Labor-held marginal seat of Paterson following a blitz of key battleground seats in the state, the Opposition Leader declared he would “rip up” the Hunter offshore wind area proposed by the Albanese government, after already vowing to overturn zones in the Illawarra in NSW and Bunbury in Western Australia.
Mr Dutton will continue campaigning in NSW on Friday, which with Victoria and Western Australia is considered particularly crucial to a Coalition election win, while the Prime Minister will begin a three-day visit to the resources-rich state of WA, starting in Perth where he will announce $21m for five critical minerals projects as part of his Future Made in Australia agenda.
Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen accused Mr Dutton of having no plan for jobs in the Hunter as he talked up the economic benefits of offshore wind farms, while clean energy experts slammed the Coalition for undermining the offshore electricity infrastructure framework it established under Scott Morrison.
“The decision that we’ve taken as a Coalition is to make sure that we rip up these contracts, to make sure that we make it very clear that we will not proceed with the offshore turbines as proposed by the Albanese government,” Mr Dutton told a Port Stephens offshore wind zone community gathering.

Naturally there was a segue to that other in house mob:

Sky News host Steve Price has congratulated Opposition Leader Peter Dutton for pushing to cancel an offshore wind farm if the election swings his way. “The next election campaign, I believe, has started already,” Mr Price said. “Peter Dutton was in Port Stevens today and congratulations to him, he is cancelling, if he is elected and wins the election, an offshore wind farm.”

Oh yes, congratulations and welcome to a long hot summer. 

The pond was reminded of how the mutton Dutton was a child of News Corp when it came to climate science in Paul Barry's farewell Media Watch ......denying science with a relentless campaign to hold back action on climate change which in my view is the media’s worst crime during my time in the job. 

And which reached a climax during the terrible bushfires of 2020:
PETA CREDLIN: So, let me deal with the issue head on. Does climate change cause these fires? No. - Credlin, Sky News, 20 January, 2020
CHRIS KENNY: … So that’s the key. The drought. And if the drought can’t be blamed on climate change you can’t blame the fires on climate change, especially when so many are deliberately lit ...  - The Kenny Report, Sky News, 11 December, 2019 
ALAN JONES: What’s burning in Victoria are eucalypts. What’s burning in South Australia are eucalypts ... When are we going to wake up and stop using this as an excuse to justify the climate change hoax? - Richo & Jones, Sky News, 29 January, 2019

Ah, the parrot, may he get what he deserves, but do go on with a parade of all the pond's favourite hits and feral reptile denialists ...

And in 2022, when floods hit the East Coast almost as hard, Sky’s After-Darkers were at it again:
CHRIS KENNY: … this isn’t new. We’ve always had them. We will always have them. - The Kenny Report, Sky News Australia, 9 March, 2022

LIZ STORER: … every time we act like these floods, these fires are new, Chris. They have always been synonymous with living in Australia. - The Kenny Report, Sky News Australia, 9 March, 2022
And Sky’s Rowan Dean — the channel’s biggest clown — joined Miranda Devine in the Tele and sunk even lower by blaming London’s terrible Grenfell Fire, in which 72 people died, on climate change alarmism: 
ROWAN DEAN: There's no other rational explanation for why this building went up like a tinderbox, like a Roman candle. - Outsiders, Sky News Australia, 18 June, 2017
That was totally wrong and a complete fabrication, as the official inquiry into the fire has since confirmed.
But Sky’s shock jocks didn’t just downplay or ignore climate science, they also targeted climate scientists with personal attacks: 
PETA CREDLIN: Let’s be clear, this is not science but advocacy dressed up as science. And just because someone has ‘professor’ in his title doesn’t mean he’s not pushing a barrow. - Credlin, Sky News Australia, 28 November, 2019
And to the delight of its readers, The Australian campaigned almost as hard, ridiculing climate catastrophists: 
More people being inundated, more floods/ droughts. You know, the normal catastrophic stuff - Media Watch, ABC, 15 October, 2018
Accusing scientists of exaggerating the state of the Great Barrier Reef. 
And suggesting, back in 2015 that the world was facing a coming Ice Age.
To offer just three examples from scores of stories.
Even as the News Corp tabloids proclaimed they had joined the Green Revolution with a 16-page wrap around: 
CARRIE BICKMORE: Yep, you heard that right.
VOICEOVER: ‘How the world’s racing to save the planet’. ‘Vic power plant worker backs change from coal’. ‘How much solar panels will save you’. ‘Getting Australia to a net zero future’. - The Project, Ten Network, 11 October, 2021
Whatever happened to that? It didn’t last long. 

It certainly didn't last long ...

It disappeared faster than a Gaza genocide headline, and now here we are ...

“It’s completely unacceptable that we would see a complete disregard for the environment, for industry, for the sector, particularly of fishing, particularly of tourism. It’s not just on the professional fishermen here, or the tourist operators, it’s on small businesses right across the community because we’ll see a complete transition of the way in which people know and that they’ve enjoyed life in this local community up until this point.
“The Prime Minister really needs to come down here and speak to you and to explain and to justify.”
Mr Bowen declared six priority offshore wind zones – Gippsland and Southern Ocean (Victoria), Bass Strait (Tasmania), Bunbury (WA) and Illawarra and Hunter (NSW) – in August 2022, shortly after Labor won government, which are all at differing stages of being investigated.
Coalition sources noted Mr Dutton may not oppose any more than the three zones he’s pledged to rescind and would treat the remaining areas on a case-by-case basis, insisting he was addressing community concerns first and foremost.
Mr Bowen said the Hunter offshore wind zone could generate enough power to keep the lights on in 1.2 million homes, equivalent to two Tomago smelters.
“Peter Dutton has no plan for Hunter jobs and can’t be trusted to look after the energy workers in the region,” Mr Bowen said.
“Offshore wind in the Hunter could support future onshore manufacturing, as it builds on the local industrial expertise and infrastructure. Should the project go ahead, it would employ around 3000 workers during construction and create around 200 to 300 permanent local jobs.
“It would inject development expenditure worth hundreds of millions of dollars into the Hunter region and leverage existing heavy industry.”

Bid joined in the chanting ...

Nationals Senate Leader Bridget McKenzie claims Opposition leader Peter Dutton has made “the right call” in vowing to scrap an offshore wind farm project. “We’ve been listening to the local community,” she told Sky News Australia. “This project is going to have incredibly negative impacts on the ground.”

... though the mutton Dutton's ugly mug dominated the frame ...

Then it was on to the final gobbet ...

Clean energy experts said international offshore wind proponents were now openly saying Australia was too hard a place to invest due to the political climate. Australia had been labelled a sovereign risk for investment.
Clean Energy Council chief executive Kane Thornton said the Australian offshore wind industry required long-term certainty to provide the confidence to develop and invest in these “significant” assets.
“Today’s announcement from the Leader of the Opposition will send shockwaves through offshore wind investors and risks undermining investment confidence in offshore wind and other energy and infrastructure sectors across Australia,” he said.
“As coal exits the energy system over coming years, investment in a suite of renewable energy technologies such as ­offshore wind, will be critical to deliver the lowest-cost energy system for consumers.”
Smart Energy Council chief executive John Grimes said the Coalition was doing everything it could to ensure Australians remained locked into coal and gas, which he said were the “most expensive, filthy and unreliable forms of electricity generation”.
“The notion that Peter Dutton and David Littleproud are opposed to offshore wind because they’re born-again environmentalists would be laughable if it wasn’t so terrifying and damaging,” Mr Grimes said.
“Having failed to land an energy policy for their entire 10 years in government, Peter Dutton’s Coalition is now proposing to do away with a clean energy source that will reliably power millions of Australian homes and businesses.”
After finishing the parliamentary year by pushing through 45 government bills in a week, Mr Albanese said his critical minerals funding would support projects across the country, creating “opportunities” for direct jobs and through the supply chain.
“Peter Dutton and the Coalition voted against WA last week in the parliament when they refused to vote for production tax credits for the WA resources industry,” the Prime Minister said ahead of visiting Perth as he attempts to cement major gains Labor made at the last election.
“A strong resources sector means a healthy economy and good, well-paid local jobs.”

Why did the pond start with a news report on the latest bout of climate science denialism, renewables abuse and pandering to the worst?

Well, it seemed a fitting way to slide into our Henry's latest bout of bigotry, Calling Indigenous lore science marks Ed Husic’s ignorance, Ed Husic grossly misrepresents the nature of the scientific enterprise by saying Indigenous Australians were ‘the nation’s first scientists’. But he is not alone. A burgeoning industry now promotes ‘Indigenous science’ across our schools and universities.

It meant that the pond would waste some five minutes of its life, or so the reptiles say, but at least there'd be the mark of the Satanic beast that might come in handy, what with a snap of Industry and Science Minister Ed Husic. Picture: Martin Ollman/NewsWire

Then it was on with the bigotry, and never mind the replicable mechanics involved in constructing a boomerang or a spear thrower ...not when our hole in the bucket man can trot out his usual pompous classical references...

According to Ed Husic, the Minister for Science, Indigenous Australians were “the nation’s first scientists”, whose insights, obtained “through observation, experimentation and analysis”, rested upon “the bedrock of the scientific method”.
Nor is Husic alone in making those claims. Thanks to generous taxpayer funding, a burgeoning industry promotes “Indigenous science” in venues ranging from schools to universities.
But to call Indigenous knowledge “science” grossly misrepresents the nature of the scientific enterprise that emerged from the intellectual revolution of the 17th century. The error is neither innocent nor harmless: it both devalues that revolution’s achievements, which made Western science into an engine room of human progress, and projects a romantic, yet fundamentally condescending, vision of Indigenous culture.
To refer to the changes that occurred in the 17th century as a revolution is not to ignore the solid foundations on which they built. The notion of science as an activity that, in the words of Diogenes Laertius (180AD-240AD), seeks to “understand things as they are” through the “rational explanation of phenomena”, was well known in classical antiquity and persisted into the Middle Ages.
However, the great thinkers of the 17th century radically transformed what Kant later referred to as science’s “regulative principles”: that is, the rules that distinguished science, as an activity and as a body of knowledge, from mere knowhow.
At a fundamental level, the transformation involved a dramatic change in the conception of the cosmos.

The reptiles flung in an audio visual distraction, featuring lovely meter maid Rita ... with maths standards all the fault of uppity, difficult black people ...

Mathematic skills across the country have been falling for two decades, according to Sky News host Rita Panahi. “At the end of last year, almost half of Australia’s 15-year-olds were failing to achieve national standards in key areas of math, science and reading,” Ms Panahi said. “It is math that is declining most rapidly of the three over the past 20 years.” Ms Panahi’s comments come as ANU is set to introduce professors to teach ‘Indigenous mathematics’. “Since the original curriculum was apparently too racist and Western-centric,” she said.

Yes, yes, let us not mention mathematics in the medieval Islamic world, Arabic maths and what not. Let's just take all the cred and blather about being Western-centri ...

Then it was back to our Henry in full pompous reference mode ...

In effect, the 17th century upended the Aristotelian view of nature, which claimed that the basic properties of matter differed in the various parts of the universe. Nature, the proponents of the new science argued, was homogenous, uniform and symmetrical: matter was the same throughout the universe, governed by the same causes or forces. Moreover, those forces were mechanical: the very essence of science lay in uncovering their laws of motion.
In turn, those presuppositions of regularity and homogeneity underpinned a change that proved momentous: the rejection of Aristotle’s prohibition on metabasis, that is, on the transposition of methods from one discipline to another.
The sciences, said Rene Descartes in 1637, could not progress “in isolation from each other”; they all had to advance, and could only advance, by adopting common methods, centred on developing mathematical representations of the phenomena they were seeking to explain.
And the test of those representations had to be both analytical and empirical: analytical in terms of mathematical correctness; empirical, in that it had to be shown that the representation could be used to recreate the phenomenon.
Truth, in other words, was “fact” in the Latin sense of the word: that which can be done or made. As Giambattista Vico summarised the new thinking in 1710, “verum et factum convertuntur” – the true is that which can be converted into fact, ie, can be done in practice.
That is why Newton, to prove the existence of a centre of gravity, devised the famous experiment of the rotating bucket filled with water. It is also why Francis Bacon resuscitated the Greek term “praxis” – the unity of theory and practice – in the Novum Organum (1620) to describe the “scientia activa” of experimentation, which, far from diverting study from its object, was the sole means of “augmenting” it.

There was another snap of a villain Bruce Pascoe, The Dark Emu Story ...

... but that mention of Newton did make the pond wonder if our Henry had backed the right horse, given that Newton didn't think much of his science, and had other hobbies, of a mystical kind ...

English physicist and mathematician Isaac Newton produced works exploring chronology, and biblical interpretation (especially of the Apocalypse), and alchemy. Some of this could be considered occult. Newton's scientific work may have been of lesser personal importance to him, as he placed emphasis on rediscovering the wisdom of the ancients. Historical research on Newton's occult studies in relation to his science have also been used to challenge the disenchantment narrative within critical theory.
In the Early Modern Period of Newton's lifetime, the educated embraced a world view different from that of later centuries. Distinctions between science, superstition, and pseudoscience were still being formulated, and a devoutly Christian biblical perspective permeated Western culture.
Alchemical research
Much of what are known as Isaac Newton's occult studies can largely be attributed to his study of alchemy. From a young age, Newton was deeply interested in all forms of natural sciences and materials science, an interest which would ultimately lead to some of his better-known contributions to science. His earliest encounters with certain alchemical theories and practices were when he was twelve years old, and boarding in the attic of an apothecary's shop.[4] During Newton's lifetime, the study of chemistry was still in its infancy, so many of his experimental studies used esoteric language and vague terminology more typically associated with alchemy and occultism.[5] It was not until several decades after Newton's death that experiments of stoichiometry under the pioneering works of Antoine Lavoisier were conducted, and analytical chemistry, with its associated nomenclature, came to resemble modern chemistry as we know it today. However, Newton's contemporary and fellow Royal Society member Robert Boyle had already discovered the basic concepts of modern chemistry and began establishing modern norms of experimental practice and communication in chemistry, information which Newton did not use. (wiki for the footnotes).

The pond hesitates to accuse the hole in the bucket man of disenchantment, but if the irony-laden shoe fits ...

In social science, disenchantment (German: Entzauberung) is the cultural rationalization and devaluation of religion apparent in modern society. The term was borrowed from Friedrich Schiller by Max Weber to describe the character of a modernized, bureaucratic, secularized Western society. In Western society, according to Weber, scientific understanding is more highly valued than belief, and processes are oriented toward rational goals, as opposed to traditional society, in which "the world remains a great enchanted garden".

Hah, the pond managed to fit in its own pompous references, before moving on ... with our superstitious Henry suddenly seeming to suggest that there was a creator in the mix. 

Maybe that talk of disenchantment stung a little ... come on down creator and join the portentous chat ...

Those contentions, and particularly the emphasis on factual replicability, provoked vociferous objections from the so-called Occasionalists, who feared the implication that we can master the making of the universe in the same way as does the creator.
However, the pioneers of the new science were cautious in their claims. Yes, mathematical techniques could accurately model limiting cases, such as motion in a vacuum; but they only approximated actual outcomes. And it was improper to speculate about the underlying causes of phenomena beyond what could be directly observed and experimentally verified.
Hence Newton’s great outcry, “hypotheses non fingo”, “I feign no hypotheses”, regardless of how much superficial completeness adding unproven hypotheses might give his system.
That intellectual modesty opened the road to a recognition of the uncertainties inherent both in the actual operation of the laws of motion and in their testing. In what ranks among humanity’s great breakthroughs, Blaise Pascal’s work on probability theory, and Thomas Bayes’ formalisation of inductive inference, set the basis for the systematic hypothesis testing that allowed Western science to progress at an unprecedented rate.
But that rate of progress also reflected another crucial feature of the intellectual revolution: its openness. Traditionally, true knowledge had been seen as esoteric, handed down, within closed circles, from one generation to the other and validated by the weight of inherited authority. By the end of the 17th century, that notion had been utterly discredited. Instead, theories, models and experimental results were widely published, discussed and contested, vastly accelerating their development.
In short, what defined Western science and made it absolutely unique – and uniquely powerful – was the tight integration of formal methods, rigorous verification and public replicability. Additionally and crucially, it was self-aware, devoting ongoing attention to the regulative principles with which scientific practice had to comply.

At this point the reptiles dropped in another snap ... Silas Wolmby (L) and Peter Sutton in 2012. Picture: Brian Cassey

Now the pond isn't going to embark on an argument with our Henry. 

The pond will leave that to others, such as Joe Sambono, Jingili man, at the Australian Museum with Indigenous science goes far beyond boomerangs and spears ...

...One only has to look at the origins of the word ‘Science’. It comes from the Latin word ‘Scientia’, which simply means ‘to know’.
To suggest that there are any groups of human beings who didn’t have science is, ironically, quite unscientific.
Australia is home to many of the earliest examples of scientific thinking in the world, and any curriculum that aspires to be relevant to Australian students should obviously include an understanding of Australian science throughout history.
This is not just relevant here; learning about ‘world firsts’ is important in any field of study. It is also crucially important to recognise and not denigrate Indigenous science as mere ‘superstition and witchcraft’ if we want to engage Indigenous students in the sciences and promote respect as well as scientific rigour amongst non-Indigenous students.
When I was a student I learned that Aboriginal people were nomads, hunters and gatherers, and otherwise didn’t achieve much of interest in ‘40,000 years’. As Dr Irabinna Lester Rigney has argued, “Indigenous intellectual traditions and knowledge transmission, which sustained Indigenous cultures and humanity for thousands of years, were not considered worthy science or even science at all.”
Science at its core is, in my opinion, a human trait practised to some degree by all peoples of the world.
As Robin Fox wrote in 1996, “In our everyday thinking we are constantly testing and confirming and falsifying hypotheses; this more than “conditioning” explains how we behave as we do.
We are natural scientists; we have no other choice…our perception of the world, and our decision making about it work on the basic principles of hypothesis testing and refutation, and that “scientific method” therefore is simply the extension of basic cognitive principles.”
How did the Dyirabal People learn to detoxify cycads? How did the Mithaka People learn to detoxify nardoo? How were spear throwers developed? How was fire starting developed?

Indeed, indeed, but how did our Henry's complacent white nationalist bigotry arise? 

Would it help explain the cheek with which he berates the Chinese, currently cleaning lots of clocks when it comes to science and technology, and not just on the dark side of the moon ...

The contrast even to China could not have been starker, helping to explain why China’s initial advantage in virtually every area of technology stalled and then collapsed. As for the chasm separating science from Indigenous knowhow, with its secrecy, its anthropomorphic explanations and its reliance on the authority of elders, it can only be measured in light years.
However, Husic’s claim is not just absurd. It is, like Bruce Pascoe’s fantasies about settled agriculture, deeply patronising. Husic plainly does not grasp the complex of ideas that comprise the scientific method. But he clearly believes that Indigenous culture, if it is to be respected, must be cast as an anticipation, if not a mirror, of Western culture. If we had science, whatever that may be, they must have had it too – and many centuries before us.
One might have hoped that the decisive refutation of Pascoe’s contentions by Keryn Walshe and Peter Sutton would have laid those views, and the broader attitudes they embody, to rest.
Yet they live on, thanks, in part, to sheer ignorance. Also at work is the conviction that historical accuracy and intellectual honesty matter less than “celebrating” Indigenous culture – a conviction that, far from promoting science, offends the unbending commitment to the truth that is science’s very essence. Significant too is the now ingrained hostility to the Western achievement, and to the scientific spirit, which is among its glittering jewels, with it.
However, spinning fairytales is no way of convincing the community, and young people in particular, of science’s vast potential. Nor will it do anything to reverse the continuing fall in the number of high school students taking core science subjects. Having a minister for science who knows what the term means will certainly not solve those problems. But it would be a sensible place to start.

Waiter, please, a boomerang with which to club the bigot on the head ...

And so to a bonus, featuring Morning Joe ...

Again the pond must break from the tradition of observing the reptiles ...this time it was David Frum in The Atlantic scribbling The Sound of Fear on Air, It is an ominous sign that Morning Joe felt it had to apologize for something I said.

There's no doubt there's fear in the land ...

 ...and Frum - someone the pond would have once dismissed out of hand - felt a small tentacle caressing his stubbled cheeks ... thanks to the craven lickspittle kiss the ring apologists at MSNBC, in full rout and retreat ...

This morning, I had an unsettling experience.
I was invited onto MSNBC’s Morning Joe to talk from a studio in Washington, D.C., about an article I’d written on Trump’s approach to foreign policy. Before getting to the article, I was asked about the nomination of Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense—specifically about an NBC News report that his heavy drinking worried colleagues at Fox News and at the veterans organizations he’d headed. (A spokesman for the Trump transition told NBC, “These disgusting allegations are completely unfounded and false, and anyone peddling these defamatory lies to score political cheap shots is sickening.”)
I answered by reminding viewers of some history:
"In 1989, President George H. W. Bush nominated John Tower, senator from Texas, for secretary of defense. Tower was a very considerable person, a real defense intellectual, someone who deeply understood defense, unlike the current nominee. It emerged that Tower had a drinking problem, and when he was drinking too much he would make himself a nuisance or worse to women around him. And for that reason, his nomination collapsed in 1989. You don’t want to think that our moral standards have declined so much that you can say: Let’s take all the drinking, all the sex-pesting, subtract any knowledge of defense, subtract any leadership, and there is your next secretary of defense for the 21st century."
I told this story in pungent terms. It’s cable TV, after all. And I introduced the discussion with a joke: “If you’re too drunk for Fox News, you’re very, very drunk indeed.”
At the next ad break, a producer spoke into my ear. He objected to my comments about Fox and warned me not to repeat them. I said something noncommittal and got another round of warning. After the break, I was asked a follow-up question on a different topic, about President Joe Biden’s pardon of his son. I did not revert to the earlier discussion, not because I had been warned, but because I had said my piece. I was then told that I was excused from the studio chair. Shortly afterward, co-host Mika Brzezinski read an apology for my remarks.
"A little bit earlier in this block there was a comment made about Fox News, in our coverage about Pete Hegseth and the growing number of allegations about his behavior over the years and possible addiction to alcohol or issues with alcohol. The comment was a little too flippant for this moment that we’re in. We just want to make that comment as well. We want to make that clear. We have differences in coverage with Fox News, and that’s a good debate that we should have often, but right now I just want to say there’s a lot of good people who work at Fox News who care about Pete Hegseth, and we will want to leave it at that."

Frum tipped in his own obligatory tugging of the forelock. Who knows when you might need a gig on the channel?

She’s right, of course: There are good people at Fox News. But if NBC’s reporting—based on interviews with 10 current or former Fox employees—about Hegseth’s alcohol abuse is accurate, many of those same good people have failed to report publicly that their former colleague, appointed to lead the armed forces of the United States, was notorious in their own building for his drinking. That would be a startling and shameful shirking of responsibility on a matter of grave national importance. What’s the appropriate language to call it out?
I am a big admirer of the Morning Joe show and the commitment of all involved to bring well-informed political discussion to a national audience.
I recognize, too, that the prominence of the program has exposed the hosts and producers to extraordinary pressures and threats in the Trump era. Trump has spoken again and again of his determination to retaliate against unfriendly media. Shortly before leaving office, Trump amplified a conspiracy theory that Brzezinski’s co-host, Joe Scarborough, was a murderer. Kash Patel, Trump’s nominee to head the FBI, has compiled an enemies list to target with investigations. Trump’s candidate to chair the FCC has speculated about stripping licenses from platforms that displease the new incoming administration. Interference with mergers and acquisitions to punish critics was a feature of Trump’s first administration. Now MSNBC may be spun off by Comcast, leaving the future of the liberal network very much in question. The hosts of Morning Joe visited Mar-a-Lago in November to mend fences with Trump. They genuinely have a lot to worry about.

But in the end, he couldn't escape the ineluctable truth of the new Vichy, the new quislings, the appeasers and newly formed fellow travellers ... from talk of Hitler to talk of dialogue ... and so their abject willingness to surrender, to do a Chamberlain and wave their pathetic scraps of paper ...

As for my own comments: You can decide for yourself whether I overstepped the proper limits of television discussion. But I also note that if I did misstep, well, my face was on the screen, my name was on the chyron, and anyone who took offense knows whom to blame.
It is a very ominous thing if our leading forums for discussion of public affairs are already feeling the chill of intimidation and responding with efforts to appease.
I write these words very aware that I’m probably saying goodbye forever to a television platform that I enjoy and from which I have benefited as both viewer and guest. I have been the recipient of personal kindnesses from the hosts that I have not forgotten.
I do not write to scold anyone; I write because fear is infectious. Let it spread, and it will paralyze us all.
The only antidote is courage. And that’s infectious, too.
This article originally misstated Comcast's plans for its news channels.
David Frum is a staff writer at The Atlantic.

Okay, all that was just so that the pond could wrap up proceedings with an on topic cartoon from the immortal Rowe ...

By golly he draws a good likeness though the pond is advised by experts that the putter is a little dated ... with King Donald I favouring a style that isn't towards the centre ...

On the other hand, the portrait of King Donald I's crowned, porcine face is uncanny, almost neo-realist ...almost photorealist, up there with Chuck Close and his works in MoMA ... with that gut all to real, though hidden by a shirt ...