Daily review 23/12/2022

56 comments on “Daily review 23/12/2022 ”

• Comment on post

1. Anker 1

   23 December 2022 at 5:54 pm

   https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/three-waters-nanaia-mahuta-introduces-130-pages-of-changes-to-a-law-hours-after-passing-it/23EV4NZJ4RC37L3HSKOYDNH5FE/

   What the hell? Mahuta introduces 130 pages of changes to three waters after it passes.

   “There are a significant number of amendments to that prior bill – changing the definition of stormwater which takes all road water networks out of stormwater; significant strengthening around some of the Māori elements along with expectations around the Treaty and the commitments of the CEOs [of the water entities]; the provision for charging for water services; and a significant sway of regulatory or compliance amendments,” Watts said.

   Reply
   • Robert Guyton 1.1

     23 December 2022 at 6:34 pm

     Fine-tuning. Clearly a conscientious perfectionist, intent on forging the very best bill possible.

     Good on her.

     Nanaia Muhuta is an intelligent, hard-working, sincere person, perfectly suited to the role she has been assigned.

     Reply
     • Tinderdry6 1.1.1

       23 December 2022 at 7:45 pm

       ‘Fine tuning’? After all the time she’s had to write this legislation? I don’t think so.

       Reply
       • Craig H 1.1.1.1

         23 December 2022 at 9:26 pm

         I have my doubts that the Minister actually personally drafted the legislation…

         Reply
         • Shanreagh 1.1.1.1.1

           24 December 2022 at 3:56 pm

           Craig H you mustn't give PS insider information like that away.

           Ministers do everything in their portfolios. PM does everything as well as driving trucks to restock supermarket shelves in times of shortage such as in the times of lockdown with Covid plus the actual physical shelf stocking. At least she was blamed for shortages at the time. .

           Reply
           • tinderdry6 1.1.1.1.1.1

             24 December 2022 at 4:11 pm

             Ministers are responsible for ensuring legislation passed through the house does not have '130 pages of amendments' required to a bill that 'just passed'. It's sloppy lawmaking. But heh the entire history of Mahuta's stewardship of 3 Waters has been 'sloppy', at best.

             Reply
             • Shanreagh …

               25 December 2022 at 3:40 pm

               I am sure with your vast experience of working in the PCO's office etc and looking at the passage of bills through the house you will be well placed to comment on the stewardship of the Three Waters Bills through the House: not.

               The Herald had to provide balance of some sort despite probably rather not having to by quoting

               'A Government spokeswoman said the next bill “adds to the Waters Services Entities Act by setting out the detailed functions and powers of the entities. These amendments are largely technical and administrative in nature.

               “The scale of this reform programme is significant and complex. Because of this, it requires separate Bills to deal with different matters.

               “At the end of the whole parliamentary process, the legislation will be brought back together to stand up the Water Services Entities to provide drinking water, wastewater and stormwater services to New Zealand by 1 July 2024,” the spokeswoman said.

               She said the Government had signalled there would be multiple bills, publicly and to the select committee.'

               I think the RMA was divided into several Bills to assist passage through the house, or it was a large environmental bill that went through at the time.

               The best and main point is though do we want the best legislation or not? I would be thinking the 'best' and what better time to achieve this than when the Bills are still 'live'.

               On the Herald itself and its coverage Bryan Gould comments here

               https://bryangould.com/theherald-a-joke/

               He concludes:

               'With news coverage as biased as this from our leading newspaper, what chance do we have of operating an effective and working democracy?'

               I class The Herald as one of the screechers like Mike Hosking.

               Back in the day I used to get The Herald and it followed me on subscription to various places in NZ. It used to have a reputation as being a bit behind the eight ball, a little bit old fashioned 'Granny' being the nickname, but has changed to being strident and screechy. I got it as my 'local' to get local news/doings/real estate. At the time I got it on sub no-one really got it for the quality of its political analysis.

               It is a pity that in trying to expand its national political coverage it has opted to be less than what is needed as a functioning member of the Fourth Estate.

               Reply
               • tinderdry6 …

                 31 December 2022 at 8:41 pm

                 “The scale of this reform programme is significant and complex. Because of this, it requires separate Bills to deal with different matters."

                 Except that this latest bill did much more than that. It was "mainly (be) a series of amendments to the second bill.". Why are such amendments due so soon after the original legislation was passed? Why could those 'amendments' not have been included in the original legislation?

                 The Minister has managed the 3waters program poorly, and this, more than any media coverage, has contributed to the significant public distaste for 3waters.

                 Reply
                 • Incognito …

                   1 January 2023 at 11:30 am

                   Watts agreed that the fact there would be multiple bills is nothing new – however, he said the Government had not been transparent about the fact this bill, the third bill in the Three Waters reform process, would mainly be a series of amendments to the second bill. [my italics]

                   From a cursory look at the Bill, it would seem that Watts was indeed politicking and grandstanding (aka making up shit), as suspected.

                   https://legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2022/0210/latest/whole.html#LMS794055

                   As a member of the responsible Select Committee he was probably also complaining that he’s in over his head because these Bills are hugely complex.

                   Reply
                   • tinderdry6 …

                     1 January 2023 at 4:27 pm

                     Of course he was politicking. Doesn't change a thing.

                     "There are a significant number of amendments to that prior bill – changing the definition of stormwater which takes all road water networks out of stormwater; significant strengthening around some of the Māori elements along with expectations around the Treaty and the commitments of the CEOs [of the water entities]; the provision for charging for water services; and a significant sway of regulatory or compliance amendments,” Watts said.

                     The "detailed functions and powers of the entities" should have been in the original Water Services Entities Act.
                   • Incognito []

                     1 January 2023 at 8:53 pm

                     A matter of opinion. Amendments are natural part of Bills, just look at how many other amendments are in this new Bill. Three Waters reforms were always going to comprise several Bills. Watts is spinning a narrative rather than doing his job as SC member and MP, which is so typical of Nat MPs: whinge & whine but offer nothing much of substance. I can see the appeal to you because you simply are anti-Three Waters no matter what and your comments are self-serving without substance.
                   • tinderdry6 …

                     2 January 2023 at 2:52 pm

                     "Amendments are natural part of Bills…"

                     Interesting. Can you think of a bill that introduced amendments to an Act passed just hours before? Of course there will be plenty of examples in which a Bill was changed days before being passed into law (including a notable example recently by this same Minister). But just hours after?
                   • Shanreagh …

                     2 January 2023 at 6:57 pm

                     Actually Td I am not sure that you are onto a point at all.

                     In my summation of what can happen when bills go through I think the Minister has been blessed with a good department that is following the changes made, worked out if they have implications for clauses passed or to come and they have put forward amendments on the way through. Bear in mind that this was a very complex Bill, quite confusing with amdts/counteramdts and being part of an omnibus set of legislation.

                     You are buying into the idea that this is

                     a) unusual

                     b) worthy of condemnation

                     from the statement of a new Nat MP (2 years in) who has no prior, ie in terms of previous work, legislative drafting experience, and no in house parliamentary experience in legal drafting.

                     He may have been on the select committee but does not seem to have kept his eyes open and absorbed what is going on. I would have thought that a member of the select cttee would have been well aware of the Dept'l workload, the huge amount of work put in by PCO & dept'l staff and of the changes that had gone though to make this workload.

                     (bearing in mind that select cttee members and dept'l staff usually get to be on close terms because of the work they do together.)

                     I actually think he would have done better to have congratulated the select cttee on the work they had done, commented that it is not done yet and work awaits if he needed to say anything at all.

                     Saying stuff like this just shows him to be a bit of a 'cock', dick, dork (take your pick, excuse the French). People who know how things work will be saying just that while those who don't know how things work will be saying 'shock, horror did you hear what he said….?'

                     He is just grandstanding or politicking as Incognito has said.
               • tinderdry6 …

                 2 January 2023 at 10:24 pm

                 "and they have put forward amendments on the way through."

                 A sound legislative process would be one in which said amendments were made to the legislation as that legislation passed through the various stages of the house. Not hours after it passed into law.

                 Bear in mind that this was a very complex Bill, quite confusing with amdts/counteramdts and being part of an omnibus set of legislation."

                 Yes and I would argue that places an even greater responsibility on those responsible for the legislation to get it right.

                 "You are buying into the idea that this is

                 a) unusual

                 b) worthy of condemnation"

                 Assuming by 'this' you mean making changes to a law within hours of it passing:

                 a) I would expect it is highly unusual, otherwise there would be a pattern of very poor practice. But I will wait for any other examples to be provided.

                 b) It is certainly worthy of criticism. The entire passage of the 3Waters proposal has been tardy. Just three examples are the infantile advertising that had to be cut short, the deception around the opt out, and the potentially 'constitutionally damaging' attempt to entrench public ownership. I could give plenty more examples, and almost all will fall at the feet of the Minister. This is just the latest example.

                 Reply
             • Shanreagh …

               25 December 2022 at 5:47 pm

               TD my response at 3.40pm 25/12/22 was harsh.

               I know that this idea of 'sloppiness' is your opinion and you are entitled to it.

               Hopefully though it has not been formed by the likes of the article that Anker linked to from the Herald. The article mentioned a Nat MP that they had obviously asked to comment on the 'shock, horror' expose about the amendments.

               Simon Watts came into parliament in 2020 and therefore has no experince in shepherding legislation through the house from early stages to enactment. If say the Herald has got someone on the Nats side who had experience in legislation of the size and complexity of the Three Waters legislation then perhaps there would have been a point.

               But as it is we have commentary breathlessly quoted from the Herald from a person who has had no relevant experience. There is no measure to say if 130 pages is more than usual, less than usual or about average.

               As you have always listene to what I have to say even though we mostly would disagree, I can only give you my experiences from the departmental side and the Ministers office advisory side of two pieces of legislation where I did have some sort of experience at the stage where Three Waters is now..

               Of course in many Govt depts our whole whole work lives are spent looking at legislation, amendments, writing technical policy etc about the legislation. Mine mostly was.

               Anyway back to what happens that could cause 130 pages of amendments

               1 the draft legislation would have come itoot parliament via PCO/legal departmental officers often many months before

               2 clause are drafted to work within each other and with other parts of the bill.

               3 after it has been introduced, referred to select committees, come back into the house, changed at various stages some of these clause don't work within themselves or with each other as well as they had before. This is even with the best legislative brains in the business looking at it. PCO are the best legal drafting brains.

               4 the reason for this is usually time pressures.

               5 once the legislation goes back to the department then the best subject matter experts will have a look and say well even though it is well drafted it will have ramifications for this section or that section and these will need to have changes made.

               6 the worst case scenario is that a section is amended somewhere and that further down the track we find that a whole part of an act cannot actually work.

               7 Of course everybody is working like beavers to make sure this doesn't happen, huge long hours are worked both at PCO level and departmental level. With legislation going through it was not unusual for PCO/Minister's offices and departmental legal and subject matter experts to work all day & night with minimal breaks. Having meetings at 11.00pm etc to discuss wording being surprised at one of these meetings to suddenly have the PM appear, concerned about a clause.

               8 Suggestions for amendments can come from other MPs with legal drafting experience and from members of the select committees from all sides of the house.

               9 This all takes time

               10 So it gets enacted, and remembering there was a giant mix-up because of the entrenchment clauses lodged by Eugenie Sage.

               11 So something final comes back to the department and subject matter experts look at the final product…….there may be unexpected clashes etc with other parts of bills to come, with existing legislation etc etc.

               12 they will bring these to the attention of the Minister. When we did this we usually advised if we could live with the unexpected or not. If not what was the urgency in getting it fixed? Would a fix be controversial?

               13 In this case because there are still parts to come and because some are urgent and some are 'well we may as well clarify while we can' they would have all gone up.

               14 In our department just days after legislation had been enacted we would be starting a file series to cover amendments to it that may arise in the future. Depending how urgent and the legislative programmes these might get in the following year or in ten years time by which case they would be joined by 50 or so other proposed amendments.

               So I don't think you can say that this is sloppy, in fact it is usual

               As I have said you have your opinion about Hon Mahuta's handling.

               Bearing mind the hugely complex bill, treading new ground I think as a Minister shepherding legislation through she is easily on a par with Minister's who have dealt with similar legislation.

               In common parlance I think she 'is across' her portfolio, she would probably be able to give a commentary on some of the minutiae at the drop of a hat.

               I know the two Ministers I worked for (Nat/Lab) were able to converse at length on various aspects on legislation they had got through the House. One even gave a speech on it without notes on a complicated piece of legislation from the portfolio!

               Sorry for the length and again for being harsh about your opinion.

               Reply
               • Tinderdry6 …

                 1 January 2023 at 12:33 am

                 Hi S. I’ve only just seen this reply, and I really do appreciate the care you’ve taken in your response.

                 My view on the media is simply that editorial is the place for expressing opinion, and all other reporting should be presenting facts, without fear or favour. But I’m a dinosaur, and I have learned from personal experience that what sells is what gets printed in most cases.

                 Have a thoroughly good new year.

                 Reply
                 • Shanreagh …

                   1 January 2023 at 4:42 pm

                   Well I'm joining you in dinosaur land.

                   Ha ha imagine how happy we would be with our media printing facts and editorials or guest comments providing the opinion.

                   Mind you NZ Herald has always been a bit Nat oriented per editorial stance…what seems to have changed is that the articles seem to reflect this and do not present an all sides view.

                   And to be simple we need all the sides so we can have good opinions, whatever they may be.

                   Happy New Year to you too TD……looking forward to seeing your opinions as we go forward.

                   Reply
     • Anne 1.1.2

       23 December 2022 at 9:10 pm

       Indeed, that has long been my assessment of her too Robert. She is vastly under-rated but it is to be expected since she is Maori and has a moko. Something else that is underrated is the high level of racism that exists in NZ – not that the offenders ever admit to it.

       Reply
     • Jester 1.1.3

       23 December 2022 at 11:22 pm

       "Clearly a conscientious perfectionist". That's your best line yet. Pure gold. Passed that on to a few people here and they still haven't stopped laughing!

       Reply
       • Shanreagh 1.1.3.1

         24 December 2022 at 3:59 pm

         Why?

         Is it funny to some people? What kind of people would these be?

         Nat voters

         Anti Maori people ie prejudiced people?

         People who drive tractors with silly signs on them?

         We are waiting in anticipation

         Reply
         • Robert Guyton 1.1.3.1.1

           24 December 2022 at 4:05 pm

           The folk you list are more sneerers than laughers, so I'm guessing Jester's crowd are either patients in an institution, or stoned; the sort of people who would laugh at length at a piece of string wriggling.

           Reply
           • Shanreagh 1.1.3.1.1.1

             25 December 2022 at 3:42 pm

             Goodness what a way with words Robert, love it

             the sort of people who would laugh at length at a piece of string wriggling.

             Reply
         • Jester 1.1.3.1.2

           26 December 2022 at 12:17 am

           None were farmers that I know of. A couple of plumbers, an electrician, a builder, a lawyer, a few retail workers and some uni students. Just average people.

           Reply
           • Shanreagh 1.1.3.1.2.1

             26 December 2022 at 10:35 am

             So no anti Maori people and no Nat voters?

             Though I prefer to think of these contacts of yours as those who wouwith strange senses of humour.

             The people I know laugh at things that are really funny like the jokes in Christmas crackers.

             Reply
             • Jester …

               26 December 2022 at 2:40 pm

               Yes I'm sure there were some Nat voters among them as roughly 37% of people vote Nats?

               And ironically, nearly half of them were Maori (or partly). So I don't think they would be anti Maori.

               But it's funny how you play the race card saying 'anti Maori people' (just like those that argue Efeso lost to Brown because of his colour, nothing to do with the fact they wanted change or thought Brown would get more done).

               Reply
   • Incognito 1.2

     23 December 2022 at 9:13 pm

     That Bill was introduced on 8 Dec and had its First Reading on 13 Dec. Why the whinge about it on pretty much the last day before people go on holiday? Who’s playing political games here?

     Reply
   • roblogic 1.3

     23 December 2022 at 11:39 pm

     Note how Granny Herald (organ of the colonial settler regime) reports every political story through a National Party lens. They could have gone to the source and asked Mahuta herself.

     Twats

     Reply
     • Shanreagh 1.3.1

       25 December 2022 at 3:43 pm

       And it has not gone unnoticed by Bryan Gould

       https://bryangould.com/theherald-a-joke/

       Reply
2. Incognito 2

   23 December 2022 at 6:55 pm

   Mayor Brown is boosting staff morale.

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/130848666/auckland-council-staff-report-mayor-wayne-brown-over-upsetting-comments-in-the-workplace

   Reply
   • Sacha 2.1

     23 December 2022 at 7:11 pm

     They make it sound like the first time he has done a job like this, so needs to be instructed.

     Reply
     • Incognito 2.1.1

       23 December 2022 at 7:24 pm

       Perhaps a reminder of his people skills would suffice?

       Reply
       • Sacha 2.1.1.1

         23 December 2022 at 7:28 pm

         This may be as good as they get, it seems.

         Reply
         • Incognito 2.1.1.1.1

           23 December 2022 at 7:54 pm

           It explains his rather bloated team of minders to keep him out of trouble aka don’t give interviews, dodge questions, and engage with staff in lifts.

           https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/local-government/130719437/auckland-mayor-wayne-brown-pays-four-staff-250k-a-year–as-did-his-predecessor

           https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/auckland-mayor-wayne-brown-earmarks-415k-to-matthew-hooton-and-key-advisors-after-pledge-to-slash-council-salaries/B6AO72ETCVCKNKVVHK75GLBKLY/

           Reply
3. adam 3

   23 December 2022 at 7:03 pm

   Enjoy watching this on your cell phone or Ipad.

   Reply
   • Sabine 3.1

     23 December 2022 at 7:34 pm

     Tsk tsk tsk, electric car are the greenest thing for environmentally minded personz and peoplez in the parts of the world were we refuse to mine or drill because mining and drilling destroys the the environment and pollution is for poor countries, not us civilized western first world countries.. Now tell the anxious consuming masses that they should buy another battery driven gadget, replace that barely one year old communication device, get that government money for that E-car, and feel 100% green and clean and it keeps the economy going and it brings in GST and sales taxes. Woot Woot. Feel good. Feel Green. Feel Clean in your 50+ Grand vehicle. After all, what else is to life then spending money on shit no one actually needs.

     Reply
     • adam 3.1.1

       25 December 2022 at 1:52 am

       Hear, hear.

       Reply
4. weston 4

   23 December 2022 at 11:09 pm

   Hard to find a more nauseating sight than 400 or so stupid yanks in a room all clapping like seals but there it was ….again !! just like the 'Juan Guido ' episode with Donald Trump presiding where exactly the same wierd scenes played out .

   Those 400 yanks from 'both sides of the isle ' who ordinarily cant agree on anything !! yet have no trouble voting for endless war .This year its apparently more than a trillion dollars for its military not including what its spending in Ukraine .

   Funniest moment is where one of the senators declares "
   they're gonna track down an find out who wasnt clapping "!!!You couldnt make it up !!Ikiest moment is where zelensky kisses Nancy !! eeewww !!

   Tucker nails it

   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs3ZOH3__Do

   Reply
   • roblogic 4.1

     24 December 2022 at 12:37 pm

     Hard to find a more nauseating sight than a clip of Tucker Carlson 🤮

     Reply
     • westonI couldnt watch him 4.1.1

       24 December 2022 at 1:02 pm

       I couldnt watch him every night but like i said he nails it here and for MSM he quite often does imo

       [Please, fix your user name – Incognito]

       Reply
       • Incognito 4.1.1.1

         24 December 2022 at 1:17 pm

         Mod note

         Reply
         • weston 4.1.1.1.1

           24 December 2022 at 1:31 pm

           Done

           Reply
     • Shanreagh 4.1.2

       24 December 2022 at 4:01 pm

       True ‘dat Roblogic and so consistently wrong as well.

       Reply
       • weston 4.1.2.1

         24 December 2022 at 8:26 pm

         You may as well just go baaaa baa baaa shanreagh

         Reply
         • roblogic 4.1.2.1.1

           24 December 2022 at 9:18 pm

           lol, says the Fox News viewer

           Reply
           • weston 4.1.2.1.1.1

             24 December 2022 at 9:34 pm

             Perhaps if u had half a clue of the actual subject roblogic and an appreciation of what was actually available to inform you on MSM you'd think differently but i see youre content just to go with the mob ie Zelensky is "churchilian "the Ukrainians are winning and if you dont clap its the end of the world as we know it etc etc etc …whateva ..the world will spin for a few more revolutions yet hopefully

             Reply
             • roblogic …

               25 December 2022 at 1:08 am

               War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine – Wikipedia

               Russia accused of war crimes cover-up by razing Ukraine theatre

               etc., etc.

               Reply
               • weston …

                 25 December 2022 at 11:37 pm

                 Your reply is completely out of context to my original comment roblogic it was specifically about a room full of supposedly intelligent and very important people in AMERICA who were clapping " like seals" in other words because everybody else was clapping .The thing looked like a movie because thats exactly what it was the movie directors were 'setting the scene ' they were selling a war !

                 Tucker Carlson just exposed a few parts of the action afaik the only news anchor in MSM to do so and i take my hat off to him for doing so .

                 incidentally i could find you a hundred links detailing Ukrainian transgressions of human rights but i suggest you find them yourself war is hell on both sides of the conflict .

                 Reply
             • Macro …

               25 December 2022 at 4:29 pm

               You Literally Can't Believe The Facts Tucker Carlson Tells You. So Say Fox's Lawyers

               Now comes the claim that you can't expect to literally believe the words that come out of Carlson's mouth. And that assertion is not coming from Carlson's critics. It's being made by a federal judge in the Southern District of New York and by Fox News's own lawyers in defending Carlson against accusations of slander. It worked, by the way.

               Just read U.S. District Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil's opinion, leaning heavily on the arguments of Fox's lawyers: The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' "

               Reply
               • weston …

                 25 December 2022 at 11:51 pm

                 Not believing facts etc

                 Yeah i noticed that back when the story first came out , its a weird scene to be sure its America !! But just because Tucker appears to fuck up in this case does'nt negate his input to news for all time it just reemphasizes what we have always known ie caveat emptor .

                 Reply
   • joe90 4.2

     25 December 2022 at 4:31 pm

     Hard to find a more nauseating sight

     Easy.

     The nauseatingly sinister sight of a white nationalist proclaiming a prominent Jewish politician as having "declared war against Christianity"

     A close second is you and your ilk lapping up Carlson's blood libel.

     

     Reply
     • weston 4.2.1

       25 December 2022 at 11:54 pm

       Why dont you just accuse Tucker of being " anti semetic ' joe ? or is that phrase a bit too jaded ,even for you ?

       Reply
   • RedLogix 4.3

     25 December 2022 at 5:55 pm

     Tucker Carlson has some historic parallels with Charles Lindbergh, another very high profile figure in American history.

     Lindbergh was the figurehead of American isolationism in the early 1940's:

     American isolationism may have reached its zenith on 1940, when a group of Congress members and influential private citizens, headed by already-famed aviator Charles A. Lindbergh, formed the America First Committee (AFC) with the specific goal of preventing America from becoming involved in World War II then being waged in Europe and Asia.

     When the AFC first convened on September 4, 1940, Lindbergh told the gathering that while isolationism did not mean walling off America from contact with the rest of the world, “it does mean that the future of America will not be tied to these eternal wars in Europe. It means that American boys will not be sent across the ocean to die so that England or Germany or France or Spain may dominate the other nations.”

     “An independent American destiny means, on the one hand, that our soldiers will not have to fight everybody in the world who prefers some other system of life to ours. On the other hand, it means that we will fight anybody and everybody who attempts to interfere with our hemisphere,”

     And if you follow Peter Zeihan, you will have heard his detailed argument that this same isolationist spirit has been gradually re-asserting itself in the US since the end of the Cold War. Obviously events like Iraq and Afghanistan ran counter to this narrative, but the undercurrent has been growing steadily. It perhaps had it's most recent and visible manifestation, in Biden's precipitous and disastrously handled withdrawal from Afghanistan, and quite likely played into Poots equally disastrous miscalculation that NATO would not care too much about Ukraine.

     Carlson is giving modern voice to this very American sentiment – why should they pay in blood and treasure for wars being fought on the other side of the planet? But then reality came to visit:

     After growing to over 800,000 members, the AFC disbanded on December 11, 1941, less than a week after the Japanese sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii. In its final press release, the Committee stated that while its efforts might have prevented it, the Pearl Harbor attack made it the duty of all Americans to support the war effort to defeat Nazism and the Axis powers.

     His mind and heart changed, Lindbergh flew more than 50 combat missions in the Pacific theater as a civilian, and after the war, traveled throughout Europe helping with the U.S. military rebuild and revitalize the continent.

     Both Lindbergh and Carlson are best understood in the light of this very old pattern of American thinking, born of their fight for independence from colonial empires, and fostered by a geography that literally isolates them by two oceans and grants them the option to decouple economically from much of the rest of the world if they so needed to.

     But events always prove the basis of this thinking to be wrong – deluded at worst. Lindbergh to his credit changed his mind; it remains to be seen what Carlson's future holds.

     Reply
     • SPC 4.3.1

       25 December 2022 at 6:34 pm

       There is another aspect, Tucker Carlson is in synch with the notion of a white race religion, heritage and cultural order, one that he sees Putin as part of. Even to the point of dismissing any priority to a collective defence of democratic nations. Which is only a few steps away from acceptance of doing bad things to secure domestic political victory for the GOP.

       Japan attacking US homeland (50 state) territory crossed even the isolationists redline (and Hitler declared war on the USA afterwards), and of course they were in full support of a containment of Soviet communism, in defence of private ownership etc.

       Reply
       • RedLogix 4.3.1.1

         25 December 2022 at 7:23 pm

         Well yes. Carlson is a social conservative as is much of Russian society. But it is possible to be anti-woke and yet anti-imperialist at the same time and this war is going to leave him exposed on the wrong side of history.

         I think this is because Carlson represents an essentially backward looking conservatism; that lacking a positive vision for the future, clings instead to a selectively rosy view of the past. He is far from alone in this.

         Reply
         • weston 4.3.1.1.1

           26 December 2022 at 12:45 am

           " the wrong side of history "

           You reckon ? Imo the exact opposite is true , like a good deal of the information coming out of this war , casualty figures for example the line about a lie going right around the world before the truth has got its boots on has never been more apt .

           Reply
     • weston 4.3.2

       26 December 2022 at 12:28 am

       Jeepers seems like not a very good fit comparing Lindbergh and Carlson red i mean Carlson just comes across to me as a salesman he's just selling fox news to the world and undoubtedly making huge money in the process i dunno how much he makes but i remember hearing that that lunatic Maddow was making 30mil annually for the four years she peddled the Russiagate hoax .

       To me Tucker Carlson steps away from the 'official narrative ' just long enough for me to notice additionally he interviews people the rest of MSM considers persona non grata . I think thats a good thing .

       Reply

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS