Follow Dr. Waddy

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

Monday, May 10, 2021

They Walk Among Us


Friends, I'm torn.  On one hand, I'm vaccinated.  I didn't hesitate to get vaccinated, because it seems to me that a lot of the widespread myths about the coronavirus vaccines are nonsense.  "Gene therapy"...  Yeah, right!  A vaccine just trains your body to be ready to fight off an infection.  It doesn't alter your DNA.  It alters your immune system.  Sometimes people have reactions to vaccines, it's true.  In almost all cases, those reactions are mild or insignificant.  In a handful, they're bad.  Overall, vaccines are one of the main reasons why we live, or tend to live, to ripe old ages nowadays, instead of dying at 30, like our ancestors.  Personally, I'm a-okay with getting vaccinated.  And I did get vaccinated.  I'm still here...

On the other hand, this is a free country, right?  We keep saying that, so it must be true, or at least semi-true.  Millions of my fellow Americans don't feel comfortable getting vaccinated for COVID-19.  The development and testing of these vaccines was abbreviated.  Many people don't believe that the disease poses much risk to them.  Others resent the social and even legal pressure that's being placed on people to get the vaccine.  Fair enough.  To each his own.  Yes, everyone who refuses to get vaccinated makes it harder for society to reach herd immunity, but, if the vaccine works and doesn't tend to kill people, over time those doubts ought to recede, and more and more people will "get the jab".  So be it.

Here's a poll that reveals who it is that's refusing to undergo vaccination.  It's an interesting list.  We're told that Republicans are the problem.  Well, Republicans are among the most vaccine-hesitant, but interestingly more women than men are too.  Aren't women supposed to be smarter than men?  They're certainly more mask-compliant and COVID-wary, in general.  Maybe women are just good at being scared of things, including vaccines?  Could be.  Note that single women, who are supposed to be among the wokest among us, are also among the least likely to get vaccinated.  Curious.  Note also that the poor are particularly reluctant.  There are some key Democratic constituencies on this list!  To make a long story short, lots of people don't want the jab, and for lots of reasons.  I guess that's the equivalent of saying that human beings are a complicated bunch, and, personally, I wouldn't have it any other way.  


I hope, at the end of the day, that most people decide to get the vaccine, and that COVID goes belly up, but let's get there the right way, shall we?  Let's give Americans a choice.

Saturday, May 8, 2021

"Follow the Science" and Other Myths


Friends, for the better part of a century Freudian psychoanalysis was considered more or less bulletproof, grounded as it was in biological and medical science.  Today it's widely considered quackery, grounded in little more than the perversions of Sigmund Freud and the heartfelt desire of his adherents to make a quick buck by charging neurotic housewives for "talking cures".  Our perception of what is "scientific", in other words, and what is true, evolves over time, and often we look back on the supposed verities of "science" and cringe.

Well, that is no less true today, given the myriad ways in which science can be bent to follow the dictates of political ideology, corporate greed, personal ambition, and even conventional wisdom.  What follows is an article that explores in a very compelling way the state of modern "science" and its strengths and weaknesses, but most of all its vulnerabilities at a time when "truth" is the most valuable commodity of all.  One of the author's most insightful arguments: nowadays a sense of crisis -- permanent crisis -- drives political change, and we often seek to ratify our sense of threat by claiming that anyone who doesn't share it is an enemy of "science" and of "truth".  No kidding!


Here's an article that suggests that eliminating standardized test scores from the college admissions process will get colleges and universities what they want, in the short term: more minority students.  What it won't achieve, in the long term, is more minorities receiving degrees and enjoying lifelong careers in prestigious fields...which you would think would be the point, no?


Lastly, this article gives a good sense of the media landscape as the dust settles from the 2020 election.  The upshot?  Without anti-Trump angst to buttress the level of public interest, ratings for most mainstream media outlets have crashed, but, more importantly, their partisan and ideological biases remain naked and extreme.  I thought that the media's constant shilling for Biden might cease, once he took office.  I was largely wrong.  The media continues to see Joe Biden as "their man" in D.C.  They shield him from criticism and lavish him with praise.  Very gradually I expect their love affair with Sleepy Joe will abate, but they seem to realize how fragile Biden himself is, and Bidenism too.  The GOP already looks like it's capable of winning one or both houses of Congress in 2022.  Journalists and news editors are drawing the appropriate lesson: if they don't engage in a permanent and frenetic campaign to prop up progressivism and the Democratic Party, both are in danger of losing sway, which is another way of saying that conservatism, populism, and the Republican Party all have a lot of life left in them.  The media is acting like it knows this all too well. 

Friday, May 7, 2021

Har Har Har, Elon


Friends, this Saturday I might watch SNL for the first time in years.  Normally, it's a woke snoozefest, but this week the host is none other than the world's second richest man (nice try -- better luck next time): Elon Musk.  Musk is a titan of industry and a skilled self-promoter, in addition to being a visionary futurist.  He's also been sponging off of taxpayers since the beginning.  He's a complicated fellow, in other words, and my latest article, published by the New York Daily News, is a reflection on that paradox:


In other news, here's Liz Cheney's recent WaPo op-ed on why the GOP needs to purge itself of Trump and Trumpism.  I won't waste my time debunking all its claims, but suffice it to say that plenty of Democrats have opined that past U.S. elections were tainted and/or illegitimate, including the 2016 presidential election and the 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election.  Fretting about election integrity and unfairness just isn't that unusual in America, so Liz Cheney needs to get off her high horse and chill out.  She won't be conference chair for long, and that's entirely appropriate.  She won't be in Congress for long either, but that's a different story.  Now, if a Republican hates Trump, as far as I'm concerned they're still welcome to be a Republican...but they don't represent the party's mainstream, and if they pick fights with DJT on a constant basis they're essentially doing the Dems' work for them.  How do you know if a Republican is really, at heart, a Democrat?  If they start publishing op-eds in the Washington Post, that would be a big clue...


It looks like fellow New Yorker Elise Stefanik is the favorite to replace Liz Cheney in the Republican leadership.  Apparently she's not as right-wing as they come, but that's cool: the GOP is a big tent, right?


Here's an interesting reflection on how banning and censoring content has become our default expectation in the modern age.  Sad. 

Here's a study of who posts political rants online and who doesn't.  No surprise here: the most extreme among us are also the most outspoken -- and Dems and liberals feel more comfortable letting it all hang out online than Republicans and conservatives.  Gee, I wonder why?


Finally, Kudos to Florida Governor Ron DeSantis for signing Florida's new election integrity law, which enacts modest changes to ensure the security of drop boxes and to prevent ballot harvesting, as well as to prohibit the mailing of unsolicited absentee ballots.  None of this will prevent Floridians from exercising their right to vote, needless to say, but all of it will be compared to "Jim Crow", as per usual.  Come on, Dems!  Find a new line of attack. 

Wednesday, May 5, 2021

Facebook Doubles Down on Thought Control


Friends, today Facebook decided to uphold the "indefinite suspension" of Donald Trump that it instituted back in January in response, supposedly, to the Capitol Riot and Trump's complicity therein.  Probably many of you are completely unsurprised that Facebook decided to keep the suspension in place.  I'm a little surprised, and I'm extremely disappointed.  Facebook's lack of respect for free speech and open dialogue, and for views that conflict with leftist orthodoxy, is upsetting and deeply worrying, given the pervasive influence of social media and Big Tech.  It's a very bad sign for the health of our democracy and for the future of liberty.  I'm in such a black mood, in fact, that I posted a long rant on Facebook -- my last political declaration ever on that platform, as I solemnly avowed.  See what you make of it.

"Here's the bad news: I'm about to go on a political rant.
Here's the good news: it's the last one you'll ever see from me on Facebook.
Today the Facebook "Oversight Board" announced that it was upholding, for now, the "indefinite suspension" of Donald Trump's Facebook and Instagram accounts imposed in the wake of the Capitol Riot on January 6th. It did challenge the "indeterminate and standardless penalty" of "indefinite suspension" and require Facebook to clarify its position regarding Trump within six months. Facebook could, in the end, decide simply to ban Trump permanently. It probably will.
Progressives and Democrats will cheer this decision. They will cheer it because they hate Trump, and anything that hurts Trump fills them with joy. That is a short-sighted position to take.
Trump was "suspended" in the first place because he is supposed to have encouraged or condoned the Capitol Riot, and because he violated Facebook's (and Twitter's, and YouTube's, get the idea) policy on "civic integrity". The policies designed to suppress violent and hateful content, and "misinformation", are, however, moving targets, and the response to Trump's tweets and posts certainly did not accurately reflect the objective meaning of the words he shared. Trump NEVER called on anyone to use violence. At the rally before the riot, he asked his supporters to remain peaceful. He later called on the rioters to respect and obey the Capitol Police, and to go home. He sympathized with their cause, undoubtedly, but he did not endorse their methods. In the days after the riot, Trump posted innocuous tweets like, "I will not be attending the inauguration." As leftists are wont to do, they applied the most tortured reasoning to conclude that, "I will not be attending the inauguration" actually means "I won't be present on January 20th. Kill them all! Kill them all!" Needless to say, Facebook and other social media companies never applied the same "logic" to Democrats and progressives who voiced support for BLM, despite the fact that BLM demonstrations often become violent and lead to illegality. Facebook's "indefinite suspension" of Donald Trump was not, therefore, based on the fair application of an objective standard. It was based on animus towards Trump, and towards the movement that he represents. Facebook and other social media companies espied, in the days following the Capitol Riot, an opportunity -- a chance to rid themselves permanently of a man they despised, and to cleanse American political life of Trumpism. They jumped at the chance. That's what happened in January of this year. Since then, Facebook, and other social media companies, have simply dug in their heels and refused to admit that they were wrong.
We should reflect on what this "policy" means. It means that, whether you like Trump or not, a man who is respected by and represents a large fraction of the electorate is excluded from political debate on some of the most important platforms in our democracy. It means that, going forward, Facebook and other social media companies will claim total discretion in deciding what information is "misinformation", what transparently non-violent tweets and posts are, in fact "violent", and which voices are admissible in public life, and which are not. Conservatives are worried, because seemingly no conservative is safe in the universe of social media, now that it has become a safe space for progressives. Progressives themselves ought to be worried, however, because, if they think that the arbitrary power of social media companies, which is now used against Trump, can't and won't be used against them, they're very naive.
The sad part is that we had another choice, another path that we could have followed. We could have upheld the principle of free speech and freedom of conscience. We could have declared that the domain of social media is and should be, like the internet as a whole, open and unfettered, and that anyone would be free to share whatever ideas they pleased, the only rule being "caveat emptor". We could have treated the American people like adults, challenging them to "moderate" their own content, and regulate their own consumption of information and opinions. Instead, we chose to demand of "the authorities" that they remove, disable, censor, suspend, or cancel whomever says things we don't like, regardless of the consequences to quality discourse and to diversity of opinion, which is, for some strange reason, the only form of "diversity" we can't abide. In short, we took the easy way out. We'll surely regret it, in time, but apparently not yet.
So...does this mean I'm leaving Facebook? Not at all. Facebook is a wonderful thing. Half the planet is on it for a reason. It's a great platform through which to connect with new people, cultivate friendships, bond with family, and record one's accomplishments, hopes, and dreams. I will use it for all those purposes.
What it isn't is a free and open space for dialogue and debate. Instead, it's a place where political discourse is rigged, and where, in essence, progressive views are welcome, and conservative views are not. What Facebook appears to want from conservatives like me is that we should post vacation photos and cat memes all we like, but on matters political we should...shut up. I plan to oblige.
What I won't do, of course, is retreat from political life, stop voting, or silence myself in platforms where debate and discussion remains open and vital. Neither should anyone else. The stakes are much too high.
I hasten to add that this has NOT been a post about Donald Trump. It's been a post about the kind of democracy and society we want to live in, and whether we can tolerate views and opinions that differ from our own, or whether we insist they they be banished from our sight. It saddens me immensely that Facebook, and America and the West more generally, have chosen to go down this dark path of intolerance. We will rue the day! But, apparently, as I said, we're not there yet."
-- Nicholas Waddy, Facebook Post, 5 May 2021 

Your thoughts???

In other news, Trump himself is reacting to Facebook's decision...and not happily, as you might expect:

He's finding workarounds to his eviction from social media, but if you ask me these Plan Bs don't really cut it.  The audience for social media is HUGE.  No conservative politician or thought leader can truly prosper in modern society unless he can leverage social media.  The Trump phenomenon seems to defy most laws of gravity, but I doubt it can defy this one. 

You may also want to check out this excerpt from a book on climate change.  This scientist is very brave to defy the doom-and-gloom orthodoxy of climate catastrophe.  The least we can do is listen to what he has to say:

Here's an intriguing tidbit: the Biden administration is considering subsidizing the nuclear power industry.  On one level, this comes as no surprise, since Biden is throwing money in all directions anyway -- why not chuck a few wads of cash into the reactor chamber too?  On another level, though, it's counterintuitive, because lefties have been blocking the expansion of nuclear power for decades.  One of the main reasons we're so dependent on fossil fuels, in fact, is because the progressives drove a stake through the heart of the nuclear power industry back in the 80s.  Will the green fascists grow irate over this move, therefore?  Will Biden be hoisted on his own petard?  We shall see.

Finally, the U.S. trade deficit reached another record high!  Hooray!  What this means is that our primary export -- money -- is in greater demand than ever.  For the moment, in other words, the Chinese are sending us loads of crap, and all they want in return is U.S. dollars -- you know, those silly little green things we print by the trillions?  What a deal!  Make it rain, Uncle Joe...  Surely, this gravy train will never end.  Right?  RIGHT?  RIGHT??? 

Monday, May 3, 2021

The Democratic Party: Racist To The Bone?


Friends, we Republicans and conservatives love to remind Democrats that, for most of America's history, theirs was the party of racism and segregation, whereas the GOP was founded on an anti-slavery, egalitarian agenda.  Of course, these are the 2020s, not the 1920s, so these historical allusions wear thin after a while.  Nonetheless, the Dems are still obsessed with race, and they never waste an opportunity to exploit racial grievances or inflame racial animosities.  


For instance, the bar for leveling accusations of racism has been lowered by the Dems, as we all know.  Disagree with the Bidenist agenda in even a minor way?  Why, you're a racist monster, of course!  Care about election integrity?  Why, you're reimposing "Jim Crow"!  Sure.  The funny thing is that one of the main justifications that Dems and progressives use for their constant cries of "Racism!" is the concept of "disparate impact".  Why, for example, is Voter ID "racist"?  Because, they say, black people are less likely to have ID.  Ergo, voter ID laws are a way to disenfranchise black people.  Never mind that such laws apply equally to everyone, and that virtually everyone has ID -- even a slight demographic variation in the impact of the law (proven or theoretical) is enough to condemn it as "racist".

Consider, then, this excellent article, which points out that Democratic pro-lockdown policies, and especially the insistence of blue states and cities that public schools must meet virtually rather than in person, has had devastating effects on the educational attainment of millions of children.  Moreover, these blinkered, irresponsible policies have disproportionately affected minority children.  Ergo, by the Dems' own logic, school closures and educational lockdowns are RACIST!  That's right: they're even ALL CAPS racist!  (That's pretty darn racist.)

The truth, of course, is that a great many Democratic and progressive policies disproportionately harm minorities.  Defunding the police sure as heck does!  So why do we not hear constant castigation of the Democratic Party as "racist"?  Because, as any woke journalist or professor will tell you, Democrats, progressives, and people of color can't be racist.  They enjoy a sort of qualified immunity granted to them by the high priests of wokeness (who happen to be lily-white, but never mind that).  What a system, right?

In the end, the Dem/progressive worldview, especially on matters of race, is sustained by doublethink and willful hypocrisy.  Whatever and whomever the lefties don't like is RACIST.  Whatever and whomever they do like is anti-racist, ipso facto.  And, if you believe that nonsense, I've got some lovely beachfront property in Karl-Marx-Stadt I'd be happy to sell you...

Sunday, May 2, 2021

A Texas-Sized Rebuke


Friends, there's very good news out of the Lone Star state: voters have chosen two Republicans to participate in a House of Representatives runoff election.  Special elections for the House are more important than ever these days, because the Dems are clinging to such a narrow majority.  In Texas' 6th district, the Dems had a rare pickup opportunity, which they have now officially blown.  What's more, in a district that Trump won by only 3 points, Republican candidates outpaced Democrats by more than 20 points.  That's what we call a favorable trend, you see.  Dems, are you sweating yet?


In other news, the mainstream media is seeing its ratings sink ever lower.  Hooray!  The day that America turns off the network news and cancels its subscriptions to the New York Times and the Washington Post is the day we know that our battle for the country's soul has been won.  Down with "journalism", which stopped being journalistic a long time ago! 

Henry Kissinger, that wise old toad who brought us our famous dalliance with Red China in the 1970s, is now warning of the dangers of future US-Chinese conflict.  Of course, modern China and the old Soviet Union are two completely different kettles of fish, but Kissinger is right on one point: China's economic strength, and our economic dependence on China, makes the PRC a potentially much more imposing foe than the Soviets.  Could there be such a thing as "mutually assured destruction" in economics, though?  Perhaps...


Finally, it looked like the legendary Trump-hater Liz Cheney had survived a leadership challenge back in February, but now the House GOP establishment is souring on her.  She seems determined to keep twisting the knife in Trump's side, at a time when the party wants to refocus on winning in 2022 instead.  I have little doubt that Cheney will be forced into retirement by the voters in 2022, but in the meantime how much mischief can she do? 

Friday, April 30, 2021

Adequacy: Biden Nails It Again!


Friends, I guess Biden gave a speech?  Yes, he gave a a packed session of Congress.  Well, actually it was a sparsely populated House chamber, because most members of Congress weren't allowed inside (CORONA -- eek!).  Anyway, I didn't watch, because we all know what Sleepy Joe is going to say: "Trump: bad.  Me: good.  Free money for everyone!!!"  It turns out, though, that I wasn't alone in being nonplussed.  Sure, the people who watched loved it.  The people who watched were the same crabby, woke, self-satisfied octogenarians who sit at home ogling MSNBC all day.  Once in a while they triple-mask and sun themselves on their porches, but otherwise these people might as well be dead to the world.  They do vote, however, and without a doubt Biden and the Dems can depend on their support.  Low viewership numbers overall for a president's first speech to Congress are not exactly a good sign, though.  There's a big question looming over the Dems, therefore: how much of the enthusiasm that they generated in 2020 will endure into 2022 and 2024???  Based on the reaction to Wednesday night's big speech, the Left should be quaking in its boots.


I did watch South Carolina Senator Tim Scott's rebuttal to Biden.  I was modestly impressed.  Scott did what smart politicians do: he pitched himself as a "common sense" guy.  He told stories from his deprived youth.  He reminded Americans how good they had it under Trump (before the pandemic struck).  He didn't stoke the fires of any intra-GOP feuds either.  The Left didn't like it, of course.  They despise anyone who falls into their "protected classes" and dares to defy progressive orthodoxy.  Why?  Because the "antiracists" are the biggest racists of all, naturally! 

In other news, President Trump is still "100%" considering running for president.  I guess that means he's also 100% considering not running?  Oh my!  More intriguing is the fact that he has said that Ron DeSantis would be a viable pick as his running mate.  Ouch!  Mike Pence's ego must be mighty deflated right about now.  I agree that DeSantis would make a fine VP, but I'm leaning towards the view that he'd make an even finer president...  Could Trump's warm regard for DeSantis translate someday into an endorsement?  We shall see.


The media says that COVID is raging in India, and we all need to pitch in to save the wretched Indians, and to save ourselves, because anywhere that COVID is "raging" it can mutate, and then boomerang on those of us who are vaccinated only against known strains.  Well, there's a certain amount of logic here, I'll admit, but note that the pandemic has been harnessed to advance the agenda of the Left, writ large: big government, and greater global coordination of public policies.  Every crisis -- every single one -- is an opportunity for these hucksters to convince us to forfeit our freedoms.  That's why their media fellow travelers insist that we live in constant fear and loathing: because our anxieties and our animosities fuel the express train to Bolshevism on which we all find ourselves.


P.S.  The curious thing is that, for all the horror of COVID in India, that country, despite its huge population, has reported fewer deaths than we have.  Will that remain the case?


Finally, here's an insightful analysis of how poorly "socialized medicine" has fared in the context of the COVID pandemic.  Pavlich makes a fair point: the Canadians, who we're always told have the best and the most efficient and the most organized health care system in North America, are really struggling to vaccinate their people.  We rapaciously capitalist Americans, however, are doing much better.  Better still, of course, is the performance of the U.K., which does have a socialized health care system.  And then also worth considering is that the U.S. pandemic response is the result of a public-private partnership, and massive amounts of central government spending, not the "free market" left to its own devices.  What can one conclude from this mess?  Not much of anything. 

Wednesday, April 28, 2021

Dem Denouement


Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show expands upon one of my favorite recent themes: the wilting approval ratings for "President" Biden and how this portends major problems for the Dem agenda in Congress, and thus for Dem momentum in general.  Infrastructure is the thin edge of wedge, in my view, indicating a broader trend of Democratic/progressive impotence.

Brian and I also cover such themes as Cuomo's braggadocio in the face of ongoing assaults on his character (emanating mostly from his own party), calls for the resignation of John Kerry as climate generalissimo, and why so many young American are Bidenists.

When we get around to "This Day in History", Brian and I talk about the ouster of Charles De Gaulle in 1969, British reversals in the Mediterranean theater in 1941 and 1942, the significance of the Yalta Conference, FDR's New Deal and the ever-expanding federal government, the complicated legacy of Dwight D. Eisenhower, and Muhammad Ali and the draft.


Listen in right now! Now now now! 


In other news, this one is a must-read.  It's about the dilemma of how to confront the culture of masking, when individual action seems so futile, and collective action is so hard to organize in the absence of individual commitment and courage.  It really makes you think.


It's common knowledge that Americans have been fleeing mostly blue states for decades, moving to mostly red states where taxes are lower, regulations are less onerous, and job opportunities are more plentiful.  You'd think there would be a lesson in that for Democrats, right?  Nope.  Well, a few of them might be contemplating razor wire to keep New Yorkers and Californians from scarpering, but other than that they've got nothing. 

TIPP is a mainstream polling outfit, so its prognostications are inherently...untrustworthy, but be that as it may they've released this data about how few Americans trust, well, them, and I tend to believe it!  Generally, though, Americans' skepticism about the "news" is a good thing, because if they bought the bill of goods that the New York Times was selling them there would be no hope for the USA!!!  These days, if you want "just the facts" you have to go looking for them yourself.


Was the 2020 election fraudulent?  This is a much more difficult question to answer than you might think, because there are many ways to "cheat" in an election.  It's also fair to say that no election is perfectly fair, and no election is totally bogus (let's face it: millions of the Soviet citizens who "voted" for Stalin or Stalinism actually meant it).  In 2020, in any case, the Dems and progressives certainly manipulated the news and social media to promote Joe Biden and to hurt Donald Trump.  Was that "fair"?  I sure don't think so.  They also manipulated the voting process, violating laws about voting integrity in order to maximize the number of ballots cast by mail for Joe Biden.  Was that "fair"?  I certainly don't think it was.  Now, did they dial in to Dominion's home office with their 80s-era modems and rejigger the election results?  I doubt it.  Did they fabricate ballots in key urban and suburban counties, pulling them out of suitcases if need be?  I doubt that too, only because no definitive proof has emerged and no one has bragged about it or confessed.  At the end of the day, the election was tainted by flaws, at the very least, and given how close the results were in key states it's entirely plausible that our current reigning "president" was chosen not by the people, but by the elites and the election bureaucrats who gamed the system to ensure his victory.  Witness this intriguing article, which shows how different the signature rejection rates can be from one election to another.  What we've never seen is ballot or signature rejection rates by county or by local jurisdiction.  That would be interesting, no?  We simply can't allow election workers to decide, by how strictly or loosely they enforce election laws, how wins and who loses our elections.  This is a problem we Republicans need to get on top of. 

Finally, for those of you looking to escape blue tyranny and move to the heartland, there are more and more incentives to do so.  Small towns want remote workers, in particular.  Could one of these wholesome hangouts be right for you???

Monday, April 26, 2021

Biden's Bathos


Friends, slowly but surely, Biden's poll numbers are sinking, and his disapproval numbers are rising.  This is enormously important, because Biden's leverage to achieve real change -- as opposed to presidential posturing and virtue-signalling -- is predicated on his popularity, such as it is.  Can Biden put some spring back in his step?  We'll see, but being president ain't easy.  If I had to bet whether, say, in November 2022 Biden's poll numbers will be better or worse than now, I'd bet on worse!


In a clear sign that the Dems recognize their growing weakness, and the unpopularity of some of their extreme proposals, they're backtracking and beginning to take Senate Republican initiatives seriously.  In other words, they understand that, without some bipartisanship in the Senate, Biden may already have shot his wad, as it were, with the "American Rescue Plan". 

Is there anyone who can cut to the quick of American dysfunction quite like Victor Davis Hanson?  In this article, he exposes how the "antiracists" are really peddling a new form of straight-up racism, this time with whites as the "bogeymen".  That the "antiracists" are so often insulated from the consequences of their own derangement, not to mention from non-whites themselves, only makes their ramblings that much less credible.


Finally, you know you're doing something right when the Left starts to loathe you, right?  By that metric, Ron DeSantis is THE MAN!  "DeSantis Derangement Syndrome" (DDS) -- not to be confused with DDT, which I hear is also effective against pestilential Dems -- is a clear sign that in Florida's Governor we may have found the next GOP candidate and the next President of these United States! 

Sunday, April 25, 2021

The Bar for "Jim Crow" Keeps Getting Lower


Friends, from the 1870s to the 1960s, blacks in our Southern states felt the brunt of systematic segregationist policies collectively called "Jim Crow".  It was more than a mere policy, frankly.  It was, in effect, a way of life, and one over which much of the population (including poor whites) had no say.  Now, as you know, Democrats and progressives are constantly proclaiming that efforts to reform voting procedures in the Southern states (or in any red state) constitute the re-imposition of Jim Crow.  It's a crock, in simple terms, and a monstrous insult to Republicans, to democracy, and to America in general.  This article does a spectacular job of deconstructing Dem/leftist attacks on voter integrity measures like the one that recently passed in Georgia.  It's longish, but well worth your time.


In other news, it's one thing to support "gay rights", but it's quite another to elevate the celebration of homosexuality to equal status with a traditional virtue/principle like patriotism.  To put it another way, the gay pride flag has NO PLACE flying in front of any public building, and certainly not on the same flagpole as Old Glory.  The Biden administration recently flew the transgender flag (who knew there was such a thing?) at the White House, and now U.S. embassies throughout the world will be flying the rainbow flag ostentatiously, to demonstrate how woke we are as a nation.  Call me old fashioned, but I say the Stars and Stripes ought to be enough on their own.  Who's with me?  Or maybe, next time we Republicans win a presidential election, we should insist that Trump flags fly proudly in front of every public building...  Sure.  Why not.