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 nlwaddy@yahoo.com and I will try to get you subscribed from my end.

Saturday, July 6, 2019

Great Minds Think Alike



Friends, ever since Patrick J. Buchanan challenged George H.W. Bush for the Republican presidential nomination in 1992, I've been an admirer of his.  He ran again in 1996.  Throughout his career he's been an unapologetic voice for nationalist conservatism.  He cut his political teeth in the Nixon White House and served Presidents Nixon, Ford, and Reagan admirably as an advisor.  He's written countless articles and books, focusing especially on issues of foreign intervention (which he generally opposes) and immigration (of which he's generally skeptical).  He celebrates and defends Western Civilization.  He is, in short, a great American, and while for years he was, in truth, a voice crying out in the wilderness, in the Age of Trump he seems more like a prophet and a sage.

Imagine my pleasure, therefore, upon reading this article by Pat Buchanan, which repeats many of the themes you've seen in this blog over the last few days:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/07/05/trumps_patriotism_vs_the_new_anti-americanism_140719.html

Remember, Buchanan lived through the turbulent Vietnam War and Watergate years, when many American leftists competed with each other to show disrespect to America and its symbols.  Is history repeating itself?  Will the anti-Americanism of the Left smooth the path for a long-term Republican, conservative resurgence?  We shall see.

In other news, I continue to applaud the decision of the Trump administration to redouble its efforts to include a citizenship question on the 2020 Census.  The Supreme Court DID NOT invalidate the idea of adding such a question -- it merely invited the administration to revise its rationale.  The question is perfectly reasonable, needless to say, and it ought to be asked, so that future redistricting efforts can be based on eligible voters or, better yet, actual voters.  Why are the Democrats so afraid of "one man, one vote"?  Because they don't much care for the American electorate in the first place.  That's why they're desperately trying to import a new electorate.  It's victory at any price for the Dems.  Let's not allow them to hold the Census hostage to their whims.

http://www.rollcall.com/news/whitehouse/doj-trump-push-ahead-fight-census-citizenship-question

And kudos to Italy's Interior Minister Matteo Salvini for taking a hard line against illegal immigrants and the "aid workers" who enable them.  Italy is facing a migration challenge not unlike our own at the southern border.  Italy is also starting to figure out that, if you give migrants what they want (the ability to live in Europe), they will only come in larger numbers!  On the right we call this "common sense."

https://news.yahoo.com/migrant-rescue-boat-docks-italys-155555066.html

8 comments:

  1. Dr. Waddy: The left is convinced that it is the future and it follows in their minds that any obstacle to that is by definition unjust. It took alot of them some persuading to get them to participate in our established electoral process and many of them have given up on it since 2016. "Whatever it takes" was their motto in their salad days and since 2016 especially, its obvious they have reembraced it. Buchanan could be right in suggesting that the electorate could react to this by denying them, well, election, eg. in 2020. That would greatly accelerate an already clearly shown turn to alternate forms of "election" or empowerment which the left presumes to be just.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dr. Waddy; My father was in N. Africa during WWII and he said "if you want to see absolute hell on earth go there". My understanding is that most potential immigrants to Italy are from that region. This is a poignant, poignant situation; one cannot fault those poor souls who wish to enter a modern civilized country, yes, for their children's sake, more than anything. But they bring with them perceptions and problems which threaten the very heart of Italy's culture. Why, I ask, does the "U.N." not effect the relief of the wretched within their own countries? But no, its too busy working for Israel's destruction.Why, if Israel were to administer the totality of N. Africa under "U.N." authorization, the lot of the poor would be improved immensely,because Israel is" an island of civilization in a sea of barbarism". Of course that's not going to happen but it shows that that "world organization" is incapable of effectively addressing the problems of the destitute. Nor is any one country, because its government is responsible first to its population for defense of its integrity and its culture.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jack, I agree with your analysis of the Left as on the verge of a meltdown. That's why I was so disappointed with the results in 2018. We missed a great opportunity to drive the lefties off the cliff. Let's not miss a beat in 2020.

    You're right that one can hardly blame Libyans, Eritreans, and other unfortunates for thinking life would be better in Italy. It would, and it is. But the solutions to Third World poverty don't lie in mass migration. The irony, of course, is that by any objective measure life in the Third World has improved dramatically in recent decades...but illegal migration is up. That's because it's a business and, for the Left, an ideological imperative.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dr. Waddy: I very much credit your evaluation of factual third world emigration. It increases my agony at the plight of those primitive unfortunates. That they have been inhumanly exploited by the sociopathic of that world is, understandably, a glimpse into a world we cannot have conceived but that was that of which our 16th and century 17th century direct ancestors were familiar.

    I would refer back to my misgivings about the U.N. in wonder of why they have not addressed this.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jack, to borrow a phrase from Jesus...the poor will always be with us. Granted, the poor aren't as poor as they used to be, but wealth inequality is a constant throughout history. African peasants today flock to Paris for the same reason that the huddled masses surged towards ancient Rome two thousand years ago. Rome largely put up with them. We may choose to do the same...bot today the means of transport are far more efficient, so we may find ourselves buried under a human avalanche.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dr. Waddy: The relatively less well off will,I agree, always obtain.That is in the essential nature of humanity. Efforts within the last 100 years to force income equality have generated unshirted hell and are tragically and now, with experience of the same,inhumanly advanced.They fly in the face of human nature, which assures differing talent, motivation and outcome.They had no benefit to the wretched. But destitution itself can be eliminated; many countries have already proved that and I think you have pointed out progress in that. Aw, why should anyone care if someone else has more as long as they have enough? And enough is enough! At some point civilizations cross a line over which life becomes reasonably enjoyable. We crossed it in the '20's with a huge roadblock to be and which was, overcome. Who cares about "equality"? Decent housing, enough food, health care, ample leisure, freedom from deadening physical labor etc.; compared to a most knowable past, what a blessing that is!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Amen, Jack! Material want is now almost unknown in the West, in the sense of being deprived of basic necessities. That's another way of saying that most of the "misery" of our modern underclass is self-inflicted and/or socially-constructed. An attitude adjustment, in itself, would put most poor people on the right track, although it wouldn't fix all their problems instantaneously.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dr. Waddy: Shock Incarceration worked to help change people suffering from spiritual poverty, not material want, by emphasizing the impossibility of positive life without both. When reasonable standards of economic well being are met, as they are, mostly, in our country, then continued dysfunction shows paucity of other necessities which must be embraced as such by voluntarily responsible individuals and families and by education professionals too: eg.intolerance of crime and criminals, respect for children and the elderly, respect for religion (fear of God's wrath can help), gratitude for our very real freedoms coupled with critical respect for duly constituted authority and the relative well being we enjoy contrasted with the fundamental misery of the wretched of other lands.

    ReplyDelete