Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show covers an enormous amount of ground (what else is new?), including the factors that determine the American people's selection of presidents, our industrial decline, Facebook's (long overdue) reinstatement of Donald Trump's account, the strengths and weaknesses of America's rising generation (Gen Z), the removal of Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell from the House Intelligence Committee, the first rallies that DJT has held as a presidential candidate (for the '24 cycle), and so much more! There's a theme that runs through this week's program, in my view: the importance of the family, and the fact that so many of our nation's problems come down to indifferent/incompetent parenting. Anyway, it's a great show, in my humble opinion, so give it a listen...
https://wlea.net/newsmaker-february-1-2023-dr-nick-waddy/
***
In other news, how does the "Deep State", including the National Archives, bend the narrative to damage conservatives and shield leftists? Here's a case in point:
The SUNY DEI course referenced below is actually one that I teach, believe it or not! At first, here at Alfred State, it was called "Global Perspectives," but it's been reworked as "Global and Diverse Perspectives" to appease the DEI crowd. I will say, however, that a course description has, in practice, relatively little impact on how a course is taught, or on what subject matter is covered. I doubt that SUNY will compel me to teach the class in such a way that I would be forced to endorse any particular ideology. Ergo, the question people ought to be asking is not so much "What courses are on the books?" as "Who is teaching them?" Everything is ultimately a matter of perspective, and it's beyond obvious at this stage that the vast majority of college professors agree with the leftist, neo-Marxist paradigm. Thus, their courses are going to be filled with nonsense, regardless of what the course description says.
Lastly, I've opined before on the potential upsides and downsides of A.I., but here's a MAJOR pitfall: A.I. "learns" from the internet, and especially from those online sources that it is told are "reliable". It should come as no surprise, therefore, that most forms of A.I. will parrot the ideology of the digital Masters of the Universe who run the internet, and of the woke techies who program A.I. in the first place. This is, or ought to be, a very serious concern. A.I. is destined to wield significant power in our society. In fact, it already does. It already manages most social media censorship regimes. We can safely assume, moreover, that it will exercise this power in a biased fashion, and maybe even with genuine hatred or contempt for "right-wing extremists" like ourselves (but without any form of compassion to mitigate its disdain). You've been warned!
Dr.Waddy from Jack: I was unable to access this week's broadcast. We must be one of the very few countries which would under any circumstances, alllow leftist bigots like Swalwell, Schiff and Omar any access to intelligence. Oh, we mean well but its utterly counterintuitive. Their removal from House authority to be privy to such sensitive info bespeaks a return to common sense after years of Madame Pelosi's consummate, disdainful partisanship.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: Where the hell are our legislators on this overt
ReplyDeleteState "University" of NY dictation of ideological conformity!? Mine are sure going to hearfrom me. Leftist domination of the american academy is well established but taxpayers should not have to pay for it. NY is becoming unliveable for common sense people.
DrWaddy from Jack: In a time when information is of paramout importance in the positive and constructive conduct of both individual lives and those of nations,leave it to the left to fix its baleful visage and totalitarian intent on advanced information technology. I think its safe to say that to a great extent,we don't know what we don't know of what AI has in store but we can be sure the left will make haste to usurp it to its ends. How incredibly lucky for the world that the US was the first to learn how to make nuclear weapons. The boche might have beat us to it if Hitler hadn't been so jumpy. With AI, we may not be as lucky this time.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: It shouldn't be necessary to note that the family is the fundamental building block of the foundation of any sound society. But our cultural marxists have made it so with their heretofore unimaginable vicious onslaught on this vital institution. They are resolved to destroy all positive aspects of our culture to pave the way for their forceful imposition of their cursed vision of unattainable human perfection. How ironic it is that their ideology, based as it is on a catastrophicly presumptuous misinterpretation of history, was utterly discredited by its sociopathic history in the 20th century. By the way, I think Leave it Beaver was quite realistic. It did not manifest the compulsive inclusion of reference to the unseemly side of life so apparent in today's entertainment; it was not intended to teach snide politically correct lessons. But it was real; I lived it as a kid in the '50s,when childhood was still available to children.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the heads-up, Jack! I will get Brian to fix that.
ReplyDeleteAs for the bozos who have access to our precious intel, that, I fear, is an almost universal weakness in democracies. We elect bozos and then, alas, we're stuck with them in position of awesome power and responsibility.
Unfortunately, there's very little chance that SUNY will reconsider its diversity mandates. They would take the view that anyone who doesn't LOVE diversity (which is whatever they say it is) must be a dirty white supremacist. The lefties are the kings of inventing new terminology to mask their radicalism, and then blanching in horror when anyone questions their ruse.
Yes, Jack, AI has vast potential to do harm, although mainly I suspect it will be a tool to reinforce the domination of the incumbent ruling class (as though they need any help in that department!).
Jack, I shall henceforth call you "Beave". Not really, but you're every bit as endearing as the original!
All fixed now, Jack! It's a good show. Worth the wait. :)
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: Much obliged!
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: I was paying attention when Nixon declared in 1968
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: . . . and by then he had become credible after his "certain" political demise in 1962 when he couldn't even get elected Gov. of California.As I remember, Rockefeller actively sought the nomination and Reagan was mentioned. Nixon did steer a middle course between them. LBJ opted out and " Hubert Horatio Wind" (so named by Goldwater, who claimed to have clocked gusts of up to 350 words per minute in some of Hubert's prerorations) just was not up to it.Rockefeller was a know it all New Yawka who casually wasted zillions of tax payer dollars on his new "Brasilea" in tank town Albany, tore down neighborhoods to make way for it and misguided SUNY into almost permanent mediocrity. The common sense majority in the GOP had literally booed him right off the convention stage in '64. He was the essential definitive Rino and when he tired of his NY state plaything he blithely discarded it.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: Your reasons for having misgivings about the expulsion of Swalwell and Schiff from the intelligence inner circle are honorable. But the american left, in embracing marxism, rejected traditional proven morality; its support for Slick Willy confirmed it. "Anything goes" ( excepting that which manifests doubt or opposition to the cultural marxism which has made a counterintuitive wilderness of our society) is their byword in their unrelenting and to them guaranteed march to totalitarian sway and "consummate justice."Any restraint on our part is repaid with withering, sneering contempt which , should they regain the majority in the House,would surely bring on a full scale onslaught untempered by any gratitude for decency on our part.We must take off the gloves and keep them off when dealing with this mob!!
ReplyDeleteDr. Waddy from Jack: In my opinion, both Nixon and Johnson were pedestrian public speakers but in "private" Johnson could be amusing:his expectorated declaration "ah don't wont no damn 'din bin fu!' "Dien Bien Phu) was a laugh.
ReplyDeleteJack, it's hard to imagine now a Republican Party in which someone like Rockefeller could have held such sway. Why do you think he WAS a Republican, and why, out of curiosity, was he booed off the stage? Not Goldwatery enough?
ReplyDeleteJack, I fully accept the need for ruthlessness in our dealings with the radical Left, but I fail to see how booting a few of the worst offenders off certain committees will have any meaningful effect. It's a symbolic snub in response to previous symbolic snubs. It will, perforce, lead to further escalation and, I fear, someday a House of Representatives in which the minority has ZERO rights. By then, though, I expect the GOP will have been banned anyway, so maybe it's a moot point.
Dr.Waddy from Jack: I think Rocky became Gov. in '58 and I was paying no attention but I would guess the GOP was still a comfortable place for plutocrats then.Maybe the idea of a Rockefeller in the party of FDR was anathema for either side. Rocky was a "do gooder"and intended to reform an "erring" GOP. But he was a rino and the Goldwater people were angered by his presumption in interfering with Goldwater's very real reform and were motivated by traditional heartland disdain for New Yawk.
ReplyDeleteDr.Waddy from Jack: The polarization continues at an ever increasing pace, with no end in sight. We didn't start it; the left did when it got every other boomer to kiss Marx's ring and fall out of love with the most fortunate nation in history. If we don't go nose to nose with them we lose any chance to save our civilization.I wish Churchill or Thatcher could come back; if anyone knew how to stand up to a truly terrifying totalitarian threat, they did. We may perceive that we have time but if the far left does triumph the result would be the same as that Britain faced in '40 - 41. Imagine Hitler strutting in Parliament square.
ReplyDeleteJack, I don't know much about Rockefeller, but I do know that expanding government was all the rage in the 60s and early 70s, and few Republicans escaped its siren song, including Nixon. At the end of the day, though, if a party doesn't exist to advance some kind of ideology, what good is it?
ReplyDelete