Follow Dr. Waddy

Submit your email address below to receive updates on new articles, videos, and posts. Don't miss out!

Thursday, November 29, 2018

Make a Run for the Border?



Friends, the thin green line is hard at work, as the U.S. Border Patrol attempts to keep the Central American migrants at bay.  The newspaper copy pretty much writes itself for leftist journalists: "President Trump is tear gassing babies!  Oh, the humanity!"  We break the story down during my latest Newsmaker interview with Brian O'Neil.  We also cover the denouement of the Mueller investigation, the fate of Rod Rosenstein, the controversy over bias at Twitter, and the military lessons of the Vietnam War.  Don't miss it!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xClvGp46pOA&feature=youtu.be

14 comments:

  1. Dr. Waddy: The intensity of the personal and acidic attacks on the President reflect the unbearable frustration that the left suffered at the denial of the rush a Hillary victory would have given them. He simply hadn't and still hasn't done anything to deserve such excoriation. A wimp like Kasich would have endured the same but he would have apologized and rationalized in typical RINO fashion. Trump tells them to jump in 'da lake and they can't take it. Meanwhile, the left went to the wall for a convicted perjuror for whom CREDIBLE evidence exists that he may have committed the unforgiveable savagery of forcible rape several times. Where do leftists, of all people, get off tsk - tsking about Presidential "respectability".

    That Federal District Court judges can issue orders binding on the nation as a whole is a fault worth addressing but while it obtains we can use it too. Imagine a Bible Belt nonetheless Federal judge ordering an immediate stop to all abortion; how the left would howl and how many hundreds of thousands of humans would live.

    Lots of responsible leaders, including the great Eisenhower, believed in the domino theory. Australia and the Philippines, countries which had experienced the onslaught of Japanese totalitarians, fought there. Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, China, Soviet Asia - how much more of that did we have to countenance? Now those Brits, despite their post war difficulties, went right to town on the Malayan Communist savages and surprise, surprise, Malaysia is a relatively free and prosperous country. I traveled through areas in its interior which witnessed that conflict and was entirely safe.

    It tickles me to see Trump cozying up to some on the left, which he has to know is ineluctably contemptuous of and hostile to him. He's an hombre!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree, Jack -- it's the fact of Trump's victory, and his impudent style, that really gets the Left's goat.

    You're right that a conservative federal judge could just as easily issue a national injunction, but I wonder whether any right-leaning federal judge ever has? Not to my knowledge. I'll look into it. My guess would be that conservative judges don't believe in judicial activism. Sometimes our principles put us at a tactical disadvantage...

    Good point about Malaya. Certainly the battle against communist insurgencies was never "unwinnable". I find it incredible that Vietnam skeptics continue to make that ridiculous claim.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dr. Waddy: You are right to question whether any Federal judge has ruled so. But the principles which would restrain a conservative Judge would have no purchase with a liberal mole.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dr. Waddy: The reason that crustbound Vietnam skeptics continue to make that claim is that they are not chased out of the venues in which they make them: (eg. "60's" reunions and Greenwich Village haunts). I challenge them to show up at the Vietnam Memorial today ( and to bring Slick willy).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jack, I did some research, and it turns out national injunctions HAVE been used by conservative judges to hamstring the policies of a liberal President (e.g. Obama). The precedent has been set. I have very mixed feelings about the phenomenon myself, because it can cause much mischief. On the other hand, very few cases end up on the Supreme Court's docket, so the lower courts will need to adjudicate some mighty important issues. I suspect you and I could agree that, whatever becomes of the national injunction, we need a lot more "Trump judges" and a lot fewer "Obama judges".

    I'm glad to hear that some Vietnam veterans are still standing tall and defending the rectitude and efficacy of our efforts in that theater. As usual, the tone is set by the media, which long ago decided that Vietnam was a fool's errand, and thus we were "wise", noble even, to cut and run. We needn't concede the point. I certainly never will.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dr. Waddy: The judicial situation being what it is (and thanx for researching that) I agree the solution is more Trump judges (i.e. lawful judges).

    I'm glad we vets took a public stand against the peaceniks in the Olean area at the start of the Iraq War. We were determined that they (some of whom were involved in the '60's treachery) would not trash the military again. We knew service members enjoy hometown newspapers and we wanted them to see stories about veterans standing up for them. The Olean paper did put it on the front page and that was a comfort to us. We'll never forget the vicious attacks to which some of us were subjected by Americans after coming home.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dr. Waddy: The MSM's condemnation of our Vietnam effort is as one with their vindictive reaction to the defeat of Hillary. It has never forgiven the U.S. for being Marxism's Nemesis. It believes still that the creed was simply mismanaged on the first try and rates another chance (albeit, yawn, at the hazard of 100 million more lives).

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jack, you're spot on, as usual: anti-Americanism lies at the center of the Left's worldview. Ergo, if America goes to war with anyone (even the monsters in the Viet Cong), then our enemies are, ipso facto, the good guys... You're right that we changed that dynamic substantially in the Gulf War. That was heartening. I remember thinking that President Bush squandered the opportunity that the upsurge of patriotism and unity in 1990-91 presented. No one, in early 1991, thought that Bush could be vulnerable in 1992, for sure, but a year and a half is plenty of time in politics, and once the media goes back to work they can turn American hearts to stone very quickly.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dr. Waddy: President Bush's defeat was a very rough parallel to the Bolshevik take over of Russia. "Oh, so you don't like the present regime? Well let us hasten to offer you an alternative!" How painful it was to see today the disgraceful Clintons polluting the throng gathered to honor President Bush. Yes, President Bush disappointed us in some ways but to empower his tawdry successors (surely not his intention),was a reaction from which the real America must recoil and from which it has surely learned.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I hope so, Jack! What a crushing disappointment that election was to a naive young conservative like myself... If President Bush can be reproached for anything, it's lackluster leadership that created an opening for the Clintons. I hope he realized what a grave disservice to the nation that was.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dr. Waddy: From what I've read he was mortified at being defeated by the likes of Slick Willy and I'm sure he eventually realized that his second term would have spared us the tawdry indignities predictably afforded us thanx to the Clintons . We must needs cringe at the thought that the electorate rejected Bush 41 and fellow WWII stalwart Bob Dole in favor of this reprehensible duet. In their inherent Greatest Generation decency, President Bush and Bob Dole yet could not fully comprehend the injustice done them and their generation by those of the boomers who were ignorant ingrates and by their amoral exemplars. The nation owes them a mea culpa and President Bush got it this week. ( and I applaud President Trump for snubbing the Clintons).

    ReplyDelete
  12. We must thank our lucky stars that we now have a President who will fight tooth and nail for victory. I only wish Bush Senior and Dole had had that "fire in the belly".

    ReplyDelete
  13. Dr. Waddy: Oh, I think they had it at one time but it had been sorely tried by their WWII trials (especially the physical crucible Dole endured). It may have been impossible - entirely outside their capacity as productive members of a generation which faithfully strived to fulfill positive values and goals - that their very children's peers were capable of such astonishing ignorance, ingratitude and presumptuous destruction. Oh, we boomers countenanced it because we didn't know any better. I don't think Bush 41 or Bob Dole could find it in them to consider the possibility that the succeeding generation, personified by the Clintons, were as monstrous as to dismiss their '30's and '40's ordeals as "irrelevant". Its still shocking.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Quite right, Jack -- the Greatest Generation didn't realize how many of its values were on the verve of "irrelevance," and how profoundly the country was changing. If they had, they would have put up more of a fight. Drip, drip, drip. That's the secret to liberal success.

    ReplyDelete