Follow Dr. Waddy
Tragically, Google has suspended the service that allows blog readers to subscribe by email to the blogs of their choice. This means that, in order to keep up with all the WaddyIsRight excitement, you might want to add "WaddyIsRight.com" to your favorites and visit this site OBSESSIVELY! I can't think of any better use of your time, can you? Alternatively, send me an email at email@example.com and I will try to get you subscribed from my end.
Saturday, December 30, 2017
Greetings from Florida, friends. I am somewhat distracted from our common crusade against the Bolshevist horde, as I bask in the glow of the sub-tropical sun. Nonetheless, before I left Rochester, I found the time to write this article, which I dare say is one of my most important. Revelations continue to percolate to the effect that it is the Democrats who tried to "steal" the 2016 election by conniving with Russian spies. The time has come, therefore, to expose their shamelessness. Read on in American Greatness:
Wednesday, December 27, 2017
I wrote recently about Tom Steyer's ad blitz designed (at least superficially) to promote the impeachment of President Trump. In fact, as I opined, Steyer's real objective was to promote himself. Below you will find the first article I've encountered making the case for a Tom Steyer Presidential bid (!). Why mess around with the Senate or the governorship of California when you can go straight to the top? Steyer has doubled down on his impeachment outlays, and that's no surprise -- he is indeed getting traction with angry liberals (is there any other kind?). Conservatives should take this threat seriously. My best guess is that 40% of the country will believe ANY negative story or claim made about Donald Trump. By no means is "Russia collusion" the worst they can dream up. In my view, there ought to be a vigorous counterattack taking place against the impeachment zealots, and against the loonier elements in the Democratic Party. Republicans and conservatives never win anything by default. The left is organized and motivated, and we need to match them, stroke for stroke.
Sunday, December 24, 2017
Friends, it goes without saying, I suppose, but I'll say it anyway -- MERRY CHRISTMAS! I hope you and your family have a wonderful holiday. It's a season to be hopeful, thankful, reverent, and maybe a little joyous (time permitting). Above all, it's a time to revel in the fact that, flawed as we miserable humans may be, God loves us anyway! Talk about a stroke of luck...
As we prepare to welcome 2018, let's also reflect on all we've accomplished as Americans in 2017, which was a big year for our country. The media is working feverishly to convince us that this is the darkest age that man has ever known. Piffle! Here is a brilliant summary of many of the things that have gone right under President Trump:
Monday, December 18, 2017
Friends, I personally was surprised when the acerbic gadfly Al Franken announced his intention to resign from the U.S. Senate. As the world's foremost debating society, the Senate was an ideal platform for Franken, whose delight in mocking conservatives and Republicans was all too evident. How could a blowhard like Franken ever give up the limelight? It seemed inconceivable, even if he had been, because of the sexual harassment and misconduct allegations against him, hoisted on his own petard.
Now, though, it appears my instincts may be proven correct. Recent reports indicate that there is a groundswell of support among Democrats and leftists for the idea that Franken should...un-resign! As you will see in the article below, the argument is that Franken was railroaded, and surely he deserves due process before his political career is forfeited. Quite right, but it is curious that liberals are discovering their fondness for one of the core principles of American justice after the defeat of Roy Moore, whose political life was ended by unproven accusations, which he steadfastly denied. This leads us to ask: was Franken's resignation mere political theater, designed to give Democrats the moral high ground, so as to allow them to deal the deathblow to Moore, and thus pick up a critical seat in the Senate? Or, alternatively, do Democrats simply dismiss the need to give conservatives and Republicans the same due process that they (occasionally) acknowledge is the birthright and constitutional prerogative of most Americans. There was no hand-wringing on the left, after all, about Moore's rights, presumably because the left was happy to assume his guilt -- and they viewed any means that came to hand to destroy him politically to be worth trying. Contrast this to the left's reaction to the innumerable allegations of sexual harassment (and worse) leveled against Bill Clinton. President Clinton was vigorously defended by liberals, and his accusers were viciously attacked, most stridently of all by avowed feminists like Hillary Clinton. The only consistency to the leftist line on sexual harassment and impropriety that I can detect, therefore, is this: conservatives who are accused of any crime whatsoever are automatically guilty, end of discussion. (President Trump will know what I am talking about.) Liberals who are similarly accused are entitled to a presumption of innocence and due process, probably (but possibly not, if they are white males and the news cycle is distinctly unfavorable to them). Liberals who are important to the left's political viability, however -- a Democratic President, for instance, or a Democratic Senator in a state with a Republican Governor -- are not only presumed innocent; they must be innocent, because the alternative (of giving conservatives a temporary political advantage) is unacceptable, principles be damned! This is, I think, the only formulation of leftist "justice" that makes any sense, given the evidence at hand...
Am I wrong? Believe me, I wish I was. My gut tells me, though, that the liberal line on sexual harassment and impropriety is the same as their line on everything else: all is relative, in their eyes, and what it is relative to is the overriding assumption that leftist ideology, and leftist ideologues, must not be deflected from their long march to victory. The achievement of a leftist utopia, therefore, justifies the negation of any and all countervailing conventional moralities. It also justifies a scorched earth approach to political combat, according to which whoever gets in their way will be burnt to a cinder. In my opinion, any conservative who does not fear immolation at the hands of these "progressive" zealots is simply not paying attention.
Here, then, is the promised article. Waddy reports, you decide:
Wednesday, December 13, 2017
Hi, friends. Well, it happened -- the Democrat Doug Jones defeated Judge Roy Moore in Alabama. The Republican Senate majority is now a puny 51-49. That's a bummer, and it will make it harder to achieve many conservative goals, but life will go on, and, as I explain in my latest article, the results of the 2018 mid-term elections are anything but a foregone conclusion. To make a long story short, Alabama, and America, will rise again! Read all about it here:
When Moore is Less: What We Can Learn from Roy Moore's Defeat
Doug Jones' narrow win over Judge Roy Moore in deep-red Alabama will come as a disappointment to many conservatives. Republicans must also fear that Jones' win signals impending doom for GOP candidates across the country in 2018. Such is unlikely to be the case.
First, the circumstances in the Alabama race were, to put it mildly, unusual. The accusations of sexual impropriety leveled against Moore were devastating, especially in the context of his ambiguous denials. We may never know how much truth there is in the various allegations, but there is no doubt that they accomplished their objective, from the perspective of the Washington Post: they defeated Roy Moore. Granted, Moore was already a weak candidate with a checkered past, and, absent the sexual misconduct story line, he would only have won narrowly, but he would have won, all the same. Needless to say, though, Democrats cannot count on every Republican candidate in 2018 being credibly accused of pedophilia, so these peculiar dynamics will never be reproduced.
Second, Moore lost in large measure because he was critically handicapped by a lack of conservative and Republican support. Numerous Republicans called on Moore to drop out of the race and/or suggested that he should be expelled from the Senate if he won the election. For several critical weeks the National Senate Republican Committee severed its ties with the Moore campaign. Likewise, although President Trump eventually declared his support for Moore, he did so with a focus on Doug Jones' liberalism, rather than on Moore himself, and he refused to visit Alabama. Most importantly, Jones received a torrent of donations from across the country, while Moore's fundraising languished. Jones was able to outspend Moore on the airwaves approximately 6 to 1. Arguably, the only thing that could have saved Moore was a heavy investment in negative ads against Doug Jones, in order to level the playing field, but given the lack of establishment support for Moore this was impossible. Democrats also benefited from the fact that, because the special election in Alabama was, at the time, the only election going, they could concentrate their resources and make a maximum effort.
Because of all these singular considerations, it is fairly obvious that the political dynamics in 2018 will be extremely different from those that resulted in Doug Jones' victory. Nonetheless, Republicans and conservatives should not be complacent.
For one thing, Democrats have demonstrated, in Virginia and in Alabama, an ability to mobilize their core constituencies. It would appear that the media's efforts to keep liberals in a holding pattern of continuous frothing rage are working. Somewhat surprisingly, even black voters responded enthusiastically to Doug Jones' candidacy – or, at any rate, to the opportunity to defeat Roy Moore. This means that it is likely that Democratic turnout in 2018 will be robust.
In addition, conservatives should not console themselves with the idea that they “dodged a bullet” by avoiding Roy Moore's presence in the Senate. True, Moore would have been a potential albatross around the neck of Republicans, but the liberal attack lines against GOP candidates will be unchanged. The left will always label Republicans “anti-women,” as well as racist and homophobic, and they will always find evidence, even if it is contrived or ridiculous, to support their attacks. Republicans should not delude themselves with the idea that, by offering Roy Moore as a human sacrifice to political correctness, they can insulate themselves from charges of bigotry, chauvinism, and lechery. Far from it.
It would appear that, as the Russia collusion narrative gradually unravels, liberals believe that sexual misconduct allegations may yet become the silver bullet that slays Donald Trump. Given the success that the left achieved along these lines in Alabama, we can expect such accusations to multiply even further in number. Of course, this is a double-edged sword for Democrats, since many of their own are susceptible to the same kind of charges.
In the end, while Republicans are right to worry about 2018, especially since the laws of political gravity suggest that a party currently so strong in almost every facet of American political life is due for a comeuppance, they should realize that nothing is inevitable, and indeed 11 months are a very long time in politics.
Perhaps what should comfort Republicans the most is the fact that their present standing in state legislatures, governorships, and in the House of Representatives is so historically strong that Democrats would need to make truly massive gains in order to fundamentally alter the state of the nation's politics. There are innumerable ways in which they can be stymied, and surely, if Republicans can merely fight their way to a tie in the popular vote on election night, they will, by default, be the winners.
In the Senate, moreover, the lineup of contests in 2018 is so favorable to Republicans that they could easily gain seats in that chamber even if they suffer losses in every other political domain. There is ample reason to hope, therefore, that the slender 51-49 majority that Republicans now enjoy in the Senate will soon be growing.
Republicans and conservatives, it may seem that we have arrived at a truly desperate hour, when even the good people of Alabama cannot be counted on to vote for Republicans. The truth, though, is that the country remains fundamentally divided between left and right, blue and red, and Democrats will have no easy time of it taking America by storm. If we keep our heads, we can ensure that they never do.
Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred and blogs at: www.waddyisright.com.
Sunday, December 10, 2017
Friends, sometimes voters face hard choices. They must consider voting for a candidate in whom they do not have complete confidence. They may also have to weigh serious charges against a candidate, which may or may not be true, and which will almost always be politically-motivated. If you live in the great state of Alabama, you know exactly what I mean. Here is my analysis of the choice that Alabama voters face on Tuesday, December 12th:
Roy Moore for Senate – For Now...
On Tuesday, Alabama voters face a difficult choice. They can vote for Republican and conservative Judge Roy Moore, accused of sexual misconduct. They can vote for the Democrat, Doug Jones, and potentially scuttle the barely functioning Republican majority in the Senate. Or, lastly, they can choose to not vote at all, which is, given the political dynamics, effectively a vote for Jones and for Democratic obstructionism. Of these options, clearly the best is to vote for Roy Moore, as I will explain.
There are currently 52 Republicans out of 100 Senators, giving the Republicans a precarious majority, and in many instances a wholly insufficient one, given the filibuster. Mitch McConnell failed to push a repeal of Obamacare through the Senate largely because of this flimsy majority. The tax bill only passed by a razor thin 51-49 margin. Since the election, moreover, the only thing the Senate has done with a degree of efficiency and dispatch is approve President Trump's cabinet appointments and judicial nominees. Even this will become difficult, however, if Democrat Doug Jones prevails and becomes Alabama's next Senator. In short, the ability of conservatives to accomplish anything whatsoever in Washington, D.C. hinges on maintaining and expanding the Republican majority in the Senate. That conservatives would acquiesce to shrinking this majority is inconceivable. This is ample reason to vote for Roy Moore.
In addition, as Americans, we should remember that Roy Moore is entitled to a presumption of innocence. Various women accuse him of various misdeeds. Some of these allegations are relatively inconsequential; some of them are extremely consequential, amounting to sexual assault and child abuse. It is possible that Roy Moore is guilty of the former and innocent of the latter. If so, this would surely matter. It is possible that he is wholly innocent. It is also possible, we must admit, that he is guilty of everything of which he has been accused, and maybe of even worse. We do not know for sure, and that is the point: we cannot condemn a man solely on the basis of accusations. Evidence must be weighed, and due process must be applied.
What would due process look like? It could occur in the context of a Senate Ethics Committee investigation, or one or more of the women who accuse Moore could sue him in civil court, perhaps arguing that he has defamed their character by denying their truthful allegations, and then a jury would have the opportunity to decide the case. This would be infinitely preferable to trying Moore in the court of public opinion, and thus allowing the moral conscience of the Washington Post to decide who is eligible to become a U.S. Senator.
If Moore was to be proven guilty of any crime, then presumably he would resign from the Senate, or he would be deprived of his seat by a two-thirds vote of his colleagues. Alabama's Republican Governor would then appoint a (suitably conservative) replacement, and we would be right back where we started. In the interim, therefore, electing Roy Moore to the Senate does no obvious harm.
Alabama voters are justly hesitant to vote for a man accused of sexual impropriety. They should remember, however, that it is impossible to know the heart of any political candidate with absolute certainty. Any politician could turn out to be a sexual predator, a homicidal maniac, a serial arsonist, or even a lawyer. We live in a fallen world, and thus it would be folly to expect that any potential officeholder will embody perfection. Nevertheless, we should always give our fellow men and women the benefit of the doubt.
Along these lines, we should not lose sight of the fact that Roy Moore is a principled conservative, who has demonstrated a willingness to make personal sacrifices in order to uphold his most deeply cherished beliefs. (And these beliefs are, after all, the real reason why liberals detest him.) Twice, Moore has been removed as the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama. Both times, this was because of his adamant refusal to comply with judicial orders he thought were wrong. Although dedicated to the law, in other words, Moore recognizes a higher law, which he is unwilling to transgress. This makes Moore, arguably, a bad judge, but it does not make him a bad man. Even liberals admire civil disobedience, when they sympathize with the underlying cause.
Roy Moore's granite resolve, I would argue, does not make him unfit to be a U.S. Senator. It makes him uniquely fit to be a U.S. Senator, especially in an age when few other politicians are willing to jeopardize their power and perquisites to serve a higher cause. The question, then, is whether Moore's alleged misdeeds negate his obvious merits. Only time will tell, and for now, therefore, Alabama voters should base their choice on what we know about Judge Moore – that he is a devout Christian and a steadfast conservative – and not on politically-motivated and largely unsubstantiated allegations.
Alabama voters should pick Moore, secure in the knowledge that, if the allegations against him are ever proven true, then there is a system in place to remove him, and the people of Alabama, not the press, will once again decide who gets to represent them in Washington, D.C.
Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred and blogs at: www.waddyisright.com.
Wednesday, December 6, 2017
Tuesday, December 5, 2017
Friends, the kneeling and black power salutes have abated somewhat, but what price is the NFL prepared to pay to keep a lid on its un-patriotic players? Check out this article, which details the NFL's plans to steer its charitable giving to radical leftist organizations linked to George Soros. Sadly, this is a common ploy on the left: essentially, businesses and organizations are given an ultimatum either to donate to leftist causes (and institute quotas) or face unending charges of "racism!", "sexism!", etc etc. Jesse Jackson was a master practitioner of this form of P.C. extortion. It's sad, needless to say, to see the NFL succumb to these tactics. In the end, the only way to defeat them is to fight fire with fire. By that I don't mean to fight extortion with extortion, but rather to use the power of the purse to motivate organizations like the NFL to straighten up and fly right. In short, if fans refuse to watch the NFL, or attend games, or buy merchandise, advertisers will in turn pressure the league to show more respect to the flag and cease patronizing radical groups. This can be a winning strategy, but in all likelihood it will necessitate canning Roger Goodell. When that happens, we'll know the tide has finally turned.
Friday, December 1, 2017
Hi friends. Dr. Waddy is at it again -- calling out the Left for its dastardly deeds. Today I published an expose of Tom Steyer in The Daily Caller. Steyer is the billionaire who is funding tv and internet ads calling for the impeachment of President Trump. His reasoning is of course specious, but his agenda is even more frightening. His contempt for democracy and for the rights of conservative Americans is also boundless. This is a man who you need to keep tabs on. Elite leftists like Tom Steyer will impose judicial tyranny on us, if they get half a chance. Read on, and arm yourself with knowledge!
Saturday, November 25, 2017
I hope you had a wonderful Thanksgiving holiday with all the trimmings! Now, feast your eyes on my latest article, published in an exciting new venue, American Thinker. It's about Elon Musk, who you may know for his ventures in space travel, solar energy, and electric sports cars. Musk is also a prodigious consumer of government funds, and my piece tells that side of the story. Read on:
But that's not all!!! I offer you this special bonus -- an article in National Review that summarizes President Trump's many accomplishments to date. It's the perfect antidote to all the naysaying you'll encounter in the mainstream media. Enjoy!
Friday, November 24, 2017
Recently, as you will know, Trump hit Asia like a typhoon, uprooting complacency everywhere he went. His firm and unapologetic adherence to America First principles, coupled with unswerving respect for the peoples and cultures of Asia, were just what was needed. My most recent article praises Trump's accomplishments during his Asian tour, and repeats my earlier call for a strengthening of U.S. missile defense capabilities, to give President Trump maximum leverage in dealings with rogue regimes like the one in North Korea. More importantly, missile defense gives the USA the ability to defend itself from nuclear attacks -- and in that sense every component of our missile defense systems is worth its weight in gold! Luckily, though, these systems aren't made of gold -- in fact, they're remarkably cheap, given what they can do. All the more reason to make them stronger.
Here's the article, which has so far appeared in American Greatness and the Lockport Union-Sun and Journal:
Thursday, November 23, 2017
Tuesday, November 21, 2017
Greetings! As many of you know, I am concerned, like so many Americans, about the rise of China, and I wholeheartedly support President Trump's agenda of recasting our relationship with China to protect U.S. interests and American jobs. We should anticipate, however, that many big corporations will be more concerned with their bottom lines than they are with U.S. national interests. Qualcomm is a case in point. It is increasingly becoming a Chinese company rather than an American one. The stakes are high, because Qualcomm, and companies like it, possess technology secrets that underpin American strategic and economic dominance. We cannot afford to see these advantages compromised. Luckily, President Trump is showing a lot more vigilance in the protection of our national interests than any President in recent memory. That's no reason for complacency, though. Read my article, and you'll have a better understanding of the dangers that we face:
Wednesday, November 15, 2017
Friends, containing the growth of big government is an endless task. Even most Republicans in Washington are lukewarm fiscal conservatives and states' righters, and most Democrats are a lost cause. It turns out some in Congress, in fact, would like to work some federal magic on the mixed martial arts scene, which, as you probably know, is flourishing. Let's tell Uncle Sam to mind his own business, shall we? Here is my analysis of the issue, published in Townhall (another new venue for Waddy prose):
Tuesday, November 14, 2017
I would like to recommend the article below, which sets in historical context the modern leftist/socialist claim to carry the banner of anti-racism. There are indeed historical connections between leftist ideology and racism, and certainly there is no lack of evidence that Marxist ideas can inspire mass murder. Where the author falls short, however, is in his failure to recognize the fact that race has become the ideological touchstone of the modern left -- that literally everything and everyone the left dislikes is now "racist". Moreover, the knee-jerk anti-white prejudices of the left are themselves racist, albeit a form of racism that probably the likes of Marx and Engels never foresaw.
Monday, November 13, 2017
Friends, you didn't think for a moment that the transgender movement was the endpoint of liberal wackiness, did you? Oh no. There's more to come. Much more. Witness this article about a man who is, in addition to being transgender, "transracial". He was born white, but identifies as Filipino. Now, here's where it gets interesting, because the law is very clear about who can be defined as "white", "black", "Hispanic", etc., based on ancestry, because, lest we forget, many tangible benefits provided by government are based on one's race or ethnicity. Thus, we can't have (loathsome) white people redefining themselves as (noble) minorities willy-nilly, now can we? Moreover, as this man admits, he fears being accused of "cultural appropriation". In other words, people of color sometimes jealously guard their cultural uniqueness, which they are unwilling to share with unworthy white people. Issues like these, needless to say, tie up liberals in knots. You might recall the white woman who redefined herself as black, and became, for a while, the head of the NAACP chapter in Spokane, until she was laughed out of town. Why, you ask, is every transgender individual to be celebrated to the nth degree, while people who are "transracial" are suspect, in liberals' eyes? You would think, given that gender is much more rooted in biology than race is, that it would be easier, not harder, to make a claim of bring transracial, but such is not the case. The question, as always, is one of leftist sensitivities. Leftists like the transgender crowd. Years of propaganda have convinced them that transgender people can be permitted into the hallowed halls of victimhood, and thus every transgender person, even if they betray their country, is a hero. Perhaps in a few years liberals will feel the same about transracial folks. I doubt it, though. Much as liberals profess to disbelieve in the reality of race, it is such a defining characteristic in their eyes, and minority status is so precious to them, that they will be loath to share it with anyone who doesn't make the grade. Mark my words: the political and legal definitions of gender and sex will get slipperier and slipperier -- but race will remain inviolate.
Saturday, November 11, 2017
I hope you're all having a happy and/or solemn Veterans Day! FYI, today I appeared on WLEA's "Top Story" program, and the main topic of conversation was the recent election results in Virginia, New Jersey, etc. My position is that, far from signaling the ruin of the Republican Party, the real takeaway is that the political dynamics haven't changed much from November 2016 to now. Listen in and decide for yourself:
Saturday, November 4, 2017
My most recent article addresses a critical problem that all too often the mainstream media completely ignores: rural poverty. One of the best ways to create opportunity for rural Americans is to bring broadband internet to every corner of this nation. It's a technical challenge, but we're making considerable progress, and more may be coming. Read on for additional details.
Incidentally, one of this blog's most faithful and insightful followers, who you will know as Jack, pointed out to me that an additional benefit of bringing broadband internet access to millions more Americans is that they will be empowered to access information, education, and entertainment NOT approved by the mainstream media and/or the corporate/academic/Hollywood/Washington elite. Now THAT is a goal worth embracing, wouldn't you say?
Here's the aforementioned article, published first in the Olean Times Herald:
Wednesday, November 1, 2017
Recently, General Kelly got himself in hot water for daring to praise (gasp!) General Robert E. Lee, the scrupulously honorable commander of the Army of Northern Virginia. I feel General Kelly's pain, insofar as I too have been lambasted for having the temerity to state the obvious about Lee. Here is a fine analysis of the issue of Lee's legacy:
Tuesday, October 31, 2017
Friends, you may be concerned about the indictments of Paul Manafort and Richard Gates that were issued this week by the Special Prosecutor investigating Trump-Russia "collusion". Well, don't lose any sleep over them. The substance of the charges has nothing to do with collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, and it has absolutely nothing to do with President Trump himself. The purpose of these charges is to capture headlines and to put pressure on Trump associates to give Mueller what he wants (dirt on Trump)...or else! In reality, though, Mueller's case against Manafort appears to be weak, and in any case whatever nuisance charges Mueller contrives to press, President Trump has the pardon power to quash them, if need be. Now, maybe Manafort is a sleazebag. Stranger things have happened. In that case, he deserves justice. The bottom line, however, is that, lacking evidence to support their broader conspiracy theories, all the left has is threats, bluff, and spin. Unfortunately, sometimes that's enough. Should Mueller be fired? Probably that would be counterproductive. If you want my opinion, though, Trump should fire Rod Rosenstein, who is the Deputy Attorney General who brought us the Special Prosecutor in the first place. He also gave Mueller his exceedingly vague mandate, which ensured that he could investigate Trump and friends for anything and everything, but that he wouldn't dream of prying into any Democratic scandals, corruption, "collusion", or miscellaneous malfeasance. The terms of this inquiry are indeed an outrage, and the Obama administration's, the DNC's, and the Clinton campaign's subversion of the justice system and the intelligence community in order to blacken the name of their political adversaries ought, by rights, to be the bigger story, and the real focus of any Special Prosecutor. Alas, such is not the case. Anyway, to get you up to speed on the significance of the latest developments, I recommend these two excellent analyses:
Oh, and Happy Halloween! Don't let those ghoulish lefties give you a fright...
Monday, October 30, 2017
Behold, my latest article, published in Morning Consult (thanks to the editors!), which concerns the newest front in the left's ongoing campaign to subvert democracy. That's right -- I said it -- the left wants to subvert democracy. They can talk all they like about phony Russia conspiracies, but the simple fact is that liberals have no compunction about overruling the will of the people and accomplishing their goals through the courts. Indeed, they think, and are not shy in saying, that the law and the constitution are "ever-changing". Friends, that means that the left gets to reinterpret the law and the constitution as they please to suit their agenda. It also means that when people like Donald Trump win elections, the left will use the courts to prevent them from exercising power. We saw that just today, with a federal judge's injunction against President Trump's order excluding transgender people from the military. Now, every American can decide for themselves what they think about the issue on the merits, but shouldn't the elected representatives of the people, and not unelected judges, have the final say? Well, liberals think not. My article is about leftist efforts to sue the pants off of energy companies, which they blame for climate change, and don't think that they'll stop there. Gun manufacturers -- liberals have their eyes on you too. President Trump can expect to be confronted with a Great Wall of judicial activism and obstruction as long as he's President. The Supreme Court will have to work overtime to clear away some of this judicial troublemaking. As conservatives, we'd like to think that winning elections will guarantee us the opportunity to accomplish our policy goals, but with the courts, lawyers, the media, the education system, Hollywood, and corporate America largely arrayed against us, nothing comes easy. Brace yourselves, therefore, for a long, hard slog!
Tuesday, October 24, 2017
Partly thanks to President Trump's aggressive moves against ISIS, that repulsive force is now in retreat, and as a "state" it is close to collapse. Now is no time for complacency, however. Behold, my latest article, which reflects on the latest developments in the Middle East, and on prospects for further progress:
Thursday, October 19, 2017
Friends, the North Korean regime is, as we all know, unpredictable, volatile, and unrelenting hostile to the United States. It is also armed with nuclear weapons and is working hard to develop the capacity to deliver them to our shores. Complacency is not an option. If President Trump decides we need to take out North Korea's nuclear and missile programs with airstrikes, I will support him. Whatever we do in North Korea, though, we need the capacity to defend ourselves from ICBMs. That is the subject of my most recent article. Check it out, and thanks to The Daily Surge for publishing it!
Tuesday, October 17, 2017
Once again, this week I was interviewed by Brian O'Neil for the Newsmaker program on WLEA in Hornell. This time we talked about the war against ISIS, gun control, media bias, the NFL anthem controversy, the Vietnam War, and a host of other issues. No stone was left unturned. Listen in, and be amazed!!!
Sometimes the self-delusional heights to which lefties ascend are, well, downright funny. Some liberals, believe it or not, still haven't given up on the Clinton campaign. This joker has formulated a way for Hillary Clinton to replace Trump in the White House... Priceless! The fact that so many leftists are inclined to believe this nonsense only makes it more uproarious. Enjoy!
Saturday, October 14, 2017
President Trump's radio address this week was an eloquent defense of Old Glory. It seems incongruous that a U.S. President should have to explain why, in America, we ought to respect our own flag, but these are the times we live in... Fortunately, in the NFL, we seem to be winning the battle. The real litmus test will come if a Dallas Cowboys player decides to defy Jerry Jones. Then the rubber will meet the road... Stay tuned!
Wednesday, October 11, 2017
Behold, my latest article, about an issue of trade fairness and the rule of law, combined with a few of my thoughts on the NFL anthem controversy... Enjoy!
Friday, October 6, 2017
Thanks to Ken Burns, the Vietnam War is once again in the public eye, and I seek to set the record straight in my latest article, coming soon to a newspaper (or a conservative website) near you... See what you think:
The Vietnam War: A Noble But Ill-Fated Crusade
Given the renewed public interest that Ken Burns' The Vietnam War has generated, now seems like an ideal time to revisit some of the lessons of that conflict. In particular, I wish to dispel two oft-repeated myths: that the U.S. effort in Vietnam was hopelessly morally compromised, and that the U.S. effort was doomed to failure. Neither of these notions, which have become conventional wisdom on the left, stand up to serious scrutiny.
First, with respect to the moral foundations of U.S. involvement in Vietnam, we must begin by acknowledging the context: in the midst of the Cold War, America was committed to a strategy of “containment”. That is, from Truman to Reagan, every U.S. President sought to prevent the spread of communism and Soviet influence by supporting non-communist governments around the world. In the early 1960s, President Kennedy decided that the U.S. needed to take a stand against communist infiltration in South Vietnam, partly because we had recently been embarrassed by the communist takeover in Cuba and the defeat of the CIA-backed Bay of Pigs invasion there. U.S. credibility was on the line: having pledged our support to those who were fighting communist subversion, we would have looked impotent and unreliable if we allowed South Vietnam to fall to the communist North.
Lest we forget, communism was a force for evil of unparalleled strength and ruthlessness. Communists held sway over a significant portion of the planet for only about 70 years, but in this time they killed approximately 100 million people. Those who suggest the appeasement of communists, or the abandonment of South Vietnam, must therefore explain where in the world they would have been willing to take a stand against such a formidable enemy – and if the answer is Georgia, or Oregon, or Connecticut, then we must ask: how much greater would the casualties have been in such a war, if the advance of communism had been allowed to proceed unhindered to our very shores? Vietnam was arguably of trivial importance to the United States, yes, but its very triviality made it an ideal location to fight a holding action against the communist menace.
The related argument that the means that the U.S. employed to fight the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army were immoral is equally specious. True, American soldiers sometimes committed war crimes, and Vietnamese civilians were killed by U.S. bombing raids in the North, but the more salient point is that civilian casualities always represented a failure of U.S. precautions, which were designed to preserve innocent life, whereas for the communist enemy such casualties represented deliberate murder on a lavish scale. The Viet Cong assassinated its political opponents, obliterated thousands of villages, and massacred civilian prisoners, intentionally and repeatedly, in order to terrorize the people of South Vietnam. There is no moral equivalence between the United States of America and the Viet Cong. Anyone who says otherwise has been watching entirely too much network news.
Moreover, whatever moral compromises the U.S. may have made in supporting a flawed regime in South Vietnam, the consequences of abandoning our friends and allies in that country to their fates under a communist dictatorship were infinitely worse. The fall of South Vietnam to the communist North in 1975 led to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians, including “boat people” who died attempting to flee a communist-instigated apocalypse. Make no mistake, therefore – those who advocated a U.S. abandonment of South Vietnam, who consider themselves advocates of “peace and love,” have blood on their hands no less than the soldiers who fought there.
Finally, with respect to the notion that victory was not possible in the Vietnam War, I invite the reader to consider the events of 1972, which prove that victory was not only possible, but easily within our grasp. By 1972, the U.S. policy of “Vietnamization” had dramatically improved the fighting capabilities of the South Vietnamese army (ARVN), which permitted a vast reduction in the number of U.S. troops deployed. In late March, the North mounted a massive conventional invasion of the South, hoping to take advantage of the U.S. drawdown. This invasion was defeated, and much of the North Vietnamese Army was shattered, by ARVN counterattacks, supported by U.S. military aid, advisors, and airpower. In November 1972, as if to seal this victory, the American people dealt George McGovern, the avowedly anti-war Democratic candidate for President, a historic thrashing. He won one state to President Nixon's forty-nine. The “Christmas bombings” of December 1972 gave the North Vietnamese the last push they needed to sign the Paris Peace Accords of 1973, ending the war with an American victory, i.e. a successful containment of communism in southeast Asia. All that was required to consolidate this triumph was an ongoing American commitment to support our friends in South Vietnam. It was, therefore, the ultimate abandonment of this sacred duty, instigated by leftist propaganda and communist disinformation, that led finally to North Vietnam's conquest of the South in 1975. Had President Nixon remained in office, and had Congress not underminded U.S. support for South Vietnam, it is my firm belief that that country would never have fallen.
The Vietnam War today serves as a prism through which one can view almost any question of U.S. foreign policy, national security, or even morality and popular culture, and there is still much to be learned by studying the conflict. The lessons, however, are certainly not as simple as the ex-hippies who dominate academia and the mainstream media would have us believe.
“The Vietnam Syndrome,” as President Reagan described it, which has hobbled our country for decades, persists even today. Among its most pernicious effects has been to instill in the American people the false belief that America itself is evil, and any mission we undertake overseas must be rooted in selfishness, greed, ignorance, and racism. The truth about the Vietnam War, however, is that we fought it for a noble cause, and, in the end, sadly, by ceasing to believe in that cause and in ourselves, we snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.
Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History in the State University of New York and blogs at: www.waddyisright.com
Tuesday, October 3, 2017
Hi, friends. I was interviewed by Brian O'Neil at WLEA in Hornell once again for the Newsmaker program, and you can listen to the show here:
We covered a lot of ground, talking about the shooting in Las Vegas, tax reform, Puerto Rican relief efforts, the failure of Graham-Cassidy, as well as reflecting on the Confederate flag and my travels in Croatia and Bosnia this summer. I hope you enjoy it!
Sunday, October 1, 2017
The collective insanity of NFL players abated somewhat this week... Bottom line: the vast majority of NFL players agree with President Trump: it's patriotic and respectful to STAND during the national anthem.
It's telling that we're getting some black power salutes mixed in with the kneeling, by the way. A race-blind America is not at all what many of these leftists have in mind...
It's telling that we're getting some black power salutes mixed in with the kneeling, by the way. A race-blind America is not at all what many of these leftists have in mind...
Saturday, September 30, 2017
Greetings! Your conservative hero has been hard at work, holding high the torch of liberty, so that more and more Americans can see it... Earlier this week, I appeared once again on the Newsmaker program of WLEA in Hornell. Brian O'Neil was my excellent host. We talked about many issues, including the NFL controversy, North Korea, Graham-Cassidy, and the Vietnam War. You can listen to the broadcast here:
Yesterday, a slightly modified version of my recent article about Graham-Cassidy also appeared in American Greatness. You can find that gem here:
Dr. Waddy is doing his best to defend conservative values in as many media markets as possible, and he plans to cast an even wider net in the months to come. Stay tuned!
Friday, September 29, 2017
Voila -- my latest article, about the failure of the Graham-Cassidy Health Care Bill, and the great difficulty we conservatives will have in reversing the relentless expansion of government. The article has already appeared in the Olean Times-Herald and will doubtless appear elsewhere soon. Enjoy!
The Failure of Graham-Cassidy is a Wake-up Call to America
With the annoucements by Senators Paul, McCain, Collins, and Cruz that they would not vote for the Graham-Cassidy Health Care Bill, which aimed to repeal and replace Obamacare, the latest Republican effort to undo President Obama's signature achievement once again met with failure. There is a lesson to be learned in this debacle about the insidious cunning of modern liberalism.
Above all, the reason why numerous Republicans shy away from repealing Obamacare, and why almost every association of doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies opposed Graham-Cassidy, is the same reason why virtually every expansion of government since the dawn of the 20th century has remained in place, and virtually every attempt to shrink government has failed. Simply put, liberals know what they are doing. Every new government program, and every new line in the budget, creates a constituency – a “special interest”, if you will – that thereafter will bitterly oppose the revocation of whatever preferment they have received. Obamacare is no different. It unleashed a vast new revenue stream for the states, which receive federal money to support their health insurance exchanges, and which receive even vaster amounts of federal money to support the expansion of Medicaid. Any attempt to dismantle Obamacare will thus endanger the fiscal well-being of the states – and, by extension, the profits of doctors, hospitals, and insurance companies. Not surprisingly, craven politicians are loath to take this step.
Say what you will about Obamacare, but at its heart is the expenditure of gargantuan sums of taxpayer dollars in order to subsidize medical care for poorer Americans. On some level, this is of course a noble cause, but the political and financial reality is that Obamacare did not fundamentally alter the dysfunctional dynamics of our health care system. It merely poured money into it in order to expand access. Thus, Obamacare has had the effect of enriching numerous people, like doctors, hospital administrators, and insurance executives, who were already rich, but, naturally, could stand to be richer... The same is true for all government programs. Even the most well-meaning of social services serve ultimately to transfer government funds into the hands of the private sector providers of food, housing, child care, counseling, cell phones, and, yes, medical care, to the relevant beneficiaries. True, many, even most, Americans support shrinking government in the abstract, but their tepid support for government cutbacks cannot prevail in the face of the much more passionate and organized opposition that emanates from the constituents, which is to say the recipients, of government spending. The designers of Obamacare surely knew this: they knew that, once a vast new government entitlement program was created, it would be virtually impossible to destroy it. The millions of people who had gained access to health insurance, and more importantly the handful of multi-millionaires and billionaires who had gained new profits, wouldn't stand for it. And here we are. This is why government spending, as a percentage of GDP, has been growing in a nearly continuous fashion since the beginning of the 20th century, and why all the hot air emitted by politicians about cutting the size of government has led precisely nowhere.
The sad truth is that conservatives need to accept two harsh realities if we are ever to make any progress in reversing the tide of government expansion. One, the Democratic Party will never cooperate with efforts to restrain government, because government spending is the bread and butter of Democratic politics, and an ideological commitment to finding governmental solutions to every conceivable problem is a defining characteristic of modern liberalism. Democrats will reflexively oppose any and all attempts to cut government spending, and they will inevitably describe such proposals as “inhumane” and irresponsible. And two, Republican politicians, despite their rhetoric, are by no means reliable “yes” votes on bills that aim to cut federal spending, return power to the states, or otherwise dent the growth of government. Republican Congressmen and Senators are invariably afraid of being labeled as “heartless” for seeking spending cuts (or even for opposing spending increases), and, truth be told, government largesse benefits Republicans almost as much as it benefits Democrats. Every politician, even President Trump, seeks to gain popularity by showering the needy (and sometimes just the grasping) with public funds... This is how Washington works – nay, how America works – whether we like it or not.
If there is any answer to this curse of steady government expansion, it is the election of more true conservatives to public office. Indeed, the failure of Graham-Cassidy may ultimately be reducible to the fact that Republicans lost two Senate seats in 2016, and thus their majority became precariously thin. In 2018, we have a golden opportunity to expand the Republican majority in the Senate. That might allow for real reform – and for the fearsome dragon of Obamacare to be slain at long last.
Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History in the State University of New York and blogs at: www.waddyisright.com.
Thursday, September 28, 2017
It seems that the (left-leaning) networks are -- gasp! -- taking a side in the controversy over standing or kneeling (or not appearing at all) for the national anthem... Check it out:
Wednesday, September 27, 2017
Hi friends. There's some polling data out on whether football fans agree with President Trump, or whether they agree with the anthem-kneelers. The results are predictable. See for yourself...
Once again, the media gets it wrong, and Trump gets it right!
Once again, the media gets it wrong, and Trump gets it right!
Saturday, September 23, 2017
Friends, the Graham-Cassidy Health Care Bill, which is probably our last chance to get rid of Obamacare, is hanging by a thread. Senators John McCain, Rand Paul, Susan Collins, and Lisa Murkowski have either come out against the bill or are still wavering. The bill isn't perfect, but a federalist solution to health care is far better than one that puts every key decision in the hands of bureaucrats and swamp people in Washington, D.C.! Please, reach out to these Senators and encourage them to vote for Graham-Cassidy! Appeal to their patriotism, appeal to common sense, invoke party loyalty, threaten to support a primary challenger in the event that they don't vote for the Republican bill -- in short, do whatever it takes. The clock is ticking, and like President Trump each and every one of us needs to pull out all the stops to deliver a win. Together, we can do it!!!
Thursday, September 21, 2017
Friends, you know already that Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is THE source for top-quality political analysis and commentary, but did you also know that he is an Olympic-caliber athlete and champion croquet player? It's amazing, but true:
Monday, September 18, 2017
Yesterday, I wrote about how Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, who have the temerity to TALK to President Trump about fixing our country's problems, will be savagely reviled by far left activists. It didn't take long for the activists to prove me right:
Sunday, September 17, 2017
Mark my words, fellow conservatives -- while many are now talking about Republicans who are horrified that Trump is willing to make deals with Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi, they should be asking a different question: how will the far left react? Believe me, we are seeing just the beginnings of liberal self-flagellation over the issue of whether or not to work with Trump. The sanctimony and prickliness that prevails on the far left is such that anyone who even contemplates negotiating with President Trump will be subjected to harrowing attacks. Brace yourselves, liberals -- and enjoy the show, conservatives! Trump's best strategy has always been to exploit Democratic divisions, and peel away some Democrats who are willing to support elements of his agenda. That's not crazy or hypocritical -- it's political common sense. Republicans should applaud him every step of the way.
Saturday, September 16, 2017
What's that we hear? Yet another liberal commentator declaring that President Trump is THE LEAST POPULAR PRESIDENT EVER, and his poll numbers continue to tank... Of course, this nonsense is designed to discourage Republicans and conservatives, while it buoys the spirits of leftists. Does it work? No doubt to some degree it does, but the truth is that Trump's standing in the polls hasn't changed appreciably since he WON THE ELECTION!!! Read all about it in my latest article:
Trump: He Takes a Licking and Keeps On Ticking
How many times in the last two years have media experts and leftist commentators announced the political death of Donald J. Trump? Surely he couldn't come back from the proposed “Muslim ban”? Surely he couldn't survive the Access Hollywood scandal? Surely the allegations of collusion with Russia, combined with his firing of FBI Director James Comey, would destroy his last vestiges of credibility? Most recently, liberals declared, surely his politically incorrect statements in the wake of the violence in Charlottesville would lead to his undoing?
The reader knows, of course, where this story ends. Each and every time that leftists have sought to write off Donald Trump, as a Presidential candidate, and now as a President, they have been proven dead wrong. Donald Trump weathers every storm – an apt metaphor for a nation that has just weathered two hurricanes – and he emerges, if not unscathed, unbowed and unbroken. More importantly, his visceral connection to his supporters, and their connection to him, survives, even thrives, despite this adversity. Liberals, by now, should know that the Trump phenomenon is not a flash in the pan. And yet they seem to have convinced themselves that just over the next rise will come the definitive, final collapse of Donald Trump. He will be impeached. He will resign. He will be declared mentally incompetent. Perhaps, just perhaps, aliens will kidnap him, along with the cabinet and the Republican leadership, and somehow Nancy Pelosi will end up in the White House. While liberals breathe, it seems, they hope.
Recently, we have seen confirmation that liberals' exultation in the wake of President Trump's Charlottesville comments, which they perceived as endorsements of racism and “Nazism,” were not perceived in the same light by the American people. Since mid-August, when the Charlottesville tragedy unfolded, Trump's job approval and favorability numbers have gone up, shattering liberals' expectations of a polling death spiral.
Moreover, for anyone who thinks President Trump's political goose is cooked, and he could not possibly win reelection in 2020, consider the fact that his favorability ratings now are higher than when he won the Presidency in November 2016. The numbers don't lie – and these numbers, I might add, are based on data aggregated from numerous public polls, most of which, as any Republican will tell you, are skewed in order to minimize Republican support. The important thing is the baseline, however: if Donald Trump can win the Presidency with an average favorability rating in the mid-30s, then he can certainly keep it with a rating in the high-30s. To suggest otherwise would be the height of naivete.
Lately, though, there is even more good news to cheer Republicans and Trump supporters. The Rasmussen Presidential approval numbers (the Rasmussen poll was among the most accurate in predicting the results of the 2016 election) have rebounded significantly since August. Trump's job approval reached an all-time low of 38%, but recently it rebounded into the mid-40s. Democrats, of course, can cling to the numbers in other polls, but they can't deny the trend: far from cratering, President Trump is clawing his way back to levels of approval and favorability that he almost never saw during the campaign.
None of this means that the media's incessant attacks on President Trump have been futile. On the contrary, they have managed to obscure many of the President's successes, and they have magnified his faults and missteps. The bottom line, however, is that Trump is still standing, and his base, by any objective measure, is roughly as large and as enthusiastic as it has ever been.
Try as they might to find the rhetorical “kill shot” that will bring Donald Trump down, liberals keep firing blanks. Maybe, just maybe, their panicked, scattershot approach – expressing maximum outrage at everything, and hoping that one of their phony scandals will stick – is the reason why.
Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History in the State University of New York and blogs at: www.waddyisright.com.