Sunday, March 31, 2024

Never Say DEI


Friends, tonight I share with you a wonderful essay about the pernicious influence of DEI thinking, and "disparate impact" analysis specifically, on America and Western Civilization as a whole.  The Left sees racism and discrimination everywhere, and thus they are insisting that traditional metrics of merit be discarded so that equitable outcomes, based on whatever standards of equity they devise in the moment, will ensue.  The article below is on the long side, yes, but please hang in there and read it.  You won't be disappointed.

The Ick Factor


To all my friends out there on the internets, I wish you and yours a very happy "Trans Visibility Day", which this year superseded "Easter", whatever that is.  May the Great Bunny of Neo-Marxism and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion bless you and remain with you always -- unless you're "ultra-MAGA", in which case he's probably going to come for you in the night...

Just for good measure, HAPPY EASTER, too!!!

Friday, March 29, 2024

The Baby Deficit


Friends, my latest article is an essay on the incredibly bright future that humans now seem to have in store, thanks to technological advances, but it is a future that is clearly imperiled by our seeming disinterest in our "prime directive" as a species: human reproduction.  In other words, I ask the perenial question: babies, what are they good for???



In other news, check out this article, which examines the economic consequences of New York State Attorney General Letitia James' legal crusade against Donald Trump.  Increasingly, progressives are stretching the law to its breaking point in order to attack their political enemies.  Some New York businesses are worried that they could be next on the chopping block.


Finally, Elon Musk likes to ponder mankind's long-term future, as I do, and what he has to say in this interview is quite fascinating: 

Wednesday, March 27, 2024

Digital Monopolies and the Fate of Mankind


Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show is exceptionally thoughtful, which is saying something, because me and Brian O'Neil always get you thinking, no?  For instance, we talk about the burgeoning segmentation of culture, as people surf the net, and stream, and dive down rabbit holes, in dramatically different ways than their neighbors.  Just a few decades ago, we were all watching just three tv channels, and look at us now!  The democratization and decentralization of both information and culture are in many ways a wonderful development, but as I point out the platforms that deliver all this magnificent content are controlled by just a few companies, and by a handful of techie masters of the universe who have more power over our lives than someone like Joseph Pulitzer or William Randolph Hearst ever dreamed of.  So, in a sense, we're freer than we were, and much less free, simultaneously.  To put it succinctly, we live in interesting times!

Brian and I also discuss the political ramifications of Dem/progressive lawfare waged against Donald Trump, the viciousness and petty personalization of much modern "journalism", the privacy rights of the British royal family, the pros and cons of "ranked choice voting", RFK, Jr.'s bold choice of a running mate, the massive reduction in the size of the bond DJT has to post in the New York fraud case, and the outrageous mistreatment of Ronna McDaniel by the left-wing nutcases at NBC/MSNBC.

Whoa, Nelly!  What a show!  You people out there in radio-land are gonna love it.




In other news, Disney and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis have decided to bury the hatchet, in a move that strongly suggests that both sides are tired of the posturing and no longer see either a business or a political advantage in persevering with the feud.  Disney remains, in my view, a woke behemoth that is threatening the future of American and Western culture, but it's highly doubtful that the state of Florida, by itself, can change the trajectory of our popular culture, much as it may wish to try.  At the end of the day, only consumers can hit Disney where it truly hurts, and they already are.  The next few years will reveal which Disney executives prefer: turning a profit, or virtue-signaling.  The jury is out.


Finally, in yet another sign of the apocalypse, adult diapers now outsell diapers for babies in Japan.  The reason, of course, is that there are no babies in Japan, or at least precious few of them.  The preciptious decline in fertility there presages where we will find ourselves throughout the Western world all too soon.  What's more, as the article points out, every countermeasure that the Japanese government has devised has failed to reverse the trend.  One has to wonder how many Japanese will be left in 50 or 100 years, and whether Japanese society will still be viable.  At least here in the USA, we can let in five "newcomers" for every baby we manage to squeeze out (as it were).  In Japan, where immigration is taboo, there is literally no substitute for procreation.  Either the Japanese will get busy making babies, or they will get busy dying as a nation and as a people.  It's that simple.

Monday, March 25, 2024

Church Isn't As Churchy As It Used To Be


Friends, the decline of church attendance in America continues apace, and in fact that pace has quickened of late.  Now just 30% of your countrymen attend services "every week" or "almost every week"...and even fewer youngsters, needless to say.  Of course, attending church, and being a person of faith, aren't the same thing.  From one perspective, all those empty pews could even be a good sign.  I shall explain.  By and large, Americans go to church to experience fellowship (no big downside there), and to listen to their preachers preach (potentially big downsides here).  In that vein, there is evidence that, especially in mainline Protestant churches, clergy may be significantly more leftist than their congregants.  I know that, in my denomination -- the Episcopal Church -- you aren't likely to hear anything even vaguely conservative emanating from the mouth of your rector.  Ergo, one could see some of the decline in church attendance as Christians (along with everyone else) spurning sociality itself, as well as the tiresome woke pontifications of pastors.  Maybe this explains some of the decline in church attendance, but there is more going on, surely.  The sad truth is that religious faith more broadly is waning, according to every objective measure.  If you're a believer, that has to trouble you.  Even if you're not, you might wonder what force of social and cultural and moral cohesion could possibly replace traditional Christianity.  If anyone has an answer, I'd love to hear it! 

Sunday, March 24, 2024

Alternative Viewpoints? Who Needs 'Em?


Friends, in a fascinating development, NBC/MSNBC is now affirming that it has no plans to put its recently hired commentator, Ronna McDaniel, former RNC chairwoman, on the air...ever!  That's because the networks' on-air talent, which leans extremely left, won't abide sharing the limelight with a Trumpist.  I guess you could take the view that, as alleged journalists, these news personalities have an obligation to hear out even people whose views they find objectionable.  You could take that view, but if you did you'd be embracing a vision of "objective" journalism that withered and died long ago...


Lastly, I highly recommend this essay, which asks an increasingly relevant question, not just socially, but philosophically: would most people prefer to live in the "real world", or in a digitally contrived simulation that gives them everything they want?  Would YOU, more specifically, prefer the one or the other?  Think carefully, because, if you stew in one-sided news coverage, or scroll through cat videos on YouTube all day, you might already be living more in an alternate reality than you are in the real deal.  For that matter, if you've always got your nose in a book, the same applies.  People have always wanted to escape from reality.  The difference is that, now, the forms of escape are more ingenious, convincing, and comprehensive than ever before...and they will only get more so.  It puts mankind in a fascinating predicament. 

Saturday, March 23, 2024

Forbidden Fruit


Friends, some mighty interesting things have been happening the last couple of days.  For instance, the Department of Justice decided to bite the hand that feeds it, i.e. Apple, one of the wokest of Big Tech companies.  I was amazed to learn that about two-thirds of all smartphones sold in the U.S. are Apple products.  What are you thinking, America???  Apple doodads are way over-priced, and in any case every dollar you give Apple goes straight to the sacred cause of destroying Western Civilization and replacing it with drag queens playing women's sports.  I mean, come on!!!  On a more serious note, I agree with the DOJ's decision to go after Apple, and frankly I think most of our Big Tech companies have attained monopoly positions in their various fields.  What's curious is the timing of the DOJ's suit, because you would think it would undermine, potentially, Apple's loyalty to Team Blue.  Then again, maybe it will reinforce it, by underlining for Apple the consequences of disobedience...  After all, anti-trust cases come and go, and this one could easily go bye-bye if Apple plays ball.


In other news, we here at WaddyIsRight wish the Princess of Wales the very best as she recovers from cancer treatment and abdominal surgery.  Now, I'm not sure that having cancer, or admitting that you have cancer, is all that "brave", as per Rishi Sunak, but Kate is a lovely person, or seems like one, so I hope she makes a full recovery. 

Another disgruntled Republican is resigning from the House, which means that our already scant majority is getting scanter.  Could the Dems really win back control of the House even before the November elections?  It's not beyond the realm of possibility, especially if we don't learn how to hold our own in special elections!


Finally, former RNC chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has got herself an analyst's gig at NBC/MSNBC, which is, as any observant conservative will tell you, where Republicans go to become Democrats.  This strongly suggests that Ronna was a RINO all along, and that we are well rid of her. 

Wednesday, March 20, 2024

Grand Old Party Animals


Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show with me and Brian O'Neil contemplates the supreme irony that the GOP, which was founded in opposition to slavery and to affirm the humanity and the rights of African-Americans, is now seen by almost all progressives as inveterately racist...for no better reason than that it strokes their egos to see it that way.  C'est la vie.  In terms of current events, Brian and I also cover: NATO's foibles and why we should reconsider our membership in the alliance, the struggle in the courts over Texas' bold new law aimed at curbing illegal immigration, the degree to which illegal immigration is a national versus a regional issue, the "bloodbath" hoopla, the vexing problem of federal government/Big Tech collusion in the "moderation" of speech, the viability of Kamala Harris as Joe Biden's running mate, and the risks (real and imagined) to Social Security and Medicare in election year 2024.

Man, that lineup is hot hot hot!  Watch that you don't get burned, okay?




In other news, former Governor of Vermont and candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination Howard Dean says he thinks that ultimately Joe Biden will win reelection "handily".  Now, that doesn't reflect any objective reading of the polls.  Dean's reasoning is that anyone and everyone who's voting for Nikki Haley now surely won't pull the lever for Donald Trump in November, because no sensible, decent person would.  Polls are demonstrating, however, that Trump has a firmer grip on the Republican base than Biden has on the Democratic base, especially considering the field of third party candidates from which voters can choose.  Dean's reasoning may be delusional and self-interested, but a lot of Democrats and progressives will think similarly.  It's so obvious to them that Trump is a menace that they will assume that most Americans will see it the same way.  This leftist complacency, in fact, is one of the greatest assets that Trump has, going into the home stretch.


Finally, almost as important as who wins the presidential election will be who wins control of the Senate, because, if Biden gets reelected but loses the Senate, his ability to do additional harm to the country will be drastically curtailed.  In that regard, the map is highly favorable to Republicans, and the strength of Larry Hogan, a Republican, in Maryland must be giving the Dems fits.  They absolutely cannot afford to lose a seat in a state like Maryland.  The bad news for the GOP, of course, is that Hogan is a RINO, par excellence.  If he wins, he would be a very inconsistent and unreliable ally for a (potentially reelected) President Trump...but he would be a heck of a lot better than a Democrat.  This points to a fascinating dynamic in a second term for Trump: the extent to which RINOs and Trumpers could reconcile in the interests of the country. 

Tuesday, March 19, 2024

Abbott, Texas Ranger


Friends, the great state of Texas got a tentative win at the Supreme Court today, as the high court will allow its anti-illegal immigration law to take effect, meaning Texas can begin arresting "newcomers", which is apparently the new P.C. term for border hoppers.  Lefties say that only the federal government can enforce immigration laws.  Well, they say that now that a lefty is president -- wait a year and they might say something totally different!  Conservatives say Texas is subject to "invasion" and has the right to defend itself.  We won't know for months what the Supremes ultimately make of this matter on the constitutional merits, but for now Texas can start rounding up illegals and detaining them.  My guess is Texas will run out of jail cells mighty quick!  I can see the A.P. stories already.  How much you wanna bet that the words "concentration camps" will figure prominently in mainstream media analysis?


In other news, Trump has dared to disagree -- publicly! -- with the great conservative thinker and editorialist, Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy.  Whoa!  Hey, Donald, you can commit all the felonies you like, but some things are sacred, no?  What Trump said is that, as long as our NATO partners pay their own way, we should stay in NATO to help protect them.  Well, you know what I think: our "partners" haven't needed our protection for decades, because their nemesis, the Soviet Union, no longer exists.  Trump has repeatedly taken NATO to task, yes, but he hasn't been willing to pull the plug on America's membership in the alliance.  I'd like to see him take his criticism of NATO to the logical conclusion, obviously, but of course I understand why, politically, it would be hard for DJT to follow my advice.

Sunday, March 17, 2024

NATO? None For Me, Thanks!


Friends, my latest article is hot off the digital presses, and it's an argument for why NATO is making European and global security worse, not better -- and why the the U.S. should therefore withdraw from the alliance.  I say it's about time those mealy-mouthed Eurocrats stand up straight and provide for their own defense!  Who's with me?

NATO Has Lost Its Way

Way back in the year 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization was formed for the excellent purpose of defending the West (meaning mainly Western Europe) from attack from the USSR. Formally and legally, NATO was a defensive military alliance. All members agreed that, if one of them were attacked, all would rush to its defense. In practice, this bound all Western Europeans together, forbade them from going to war with one another (a rather important proviso, given recent unpleasantness), and, most importantly, committed the the United States to remain engaged in European security and to place all member states of NATO under its nuclear umbrella.

There was, in a sense, an implicit transaction here: the Europeans would acknowledge and respect American military and strategic supremacy, even placing their own forces (usually) under the command of an American “Supreme Allied Commander”, and in return the U.S. would provide the bulk of the armed forces and the financing that would keep Europe free.

This was, at the time, a very elegant solution to an extremely pressing problem: the aggressive posture of the Soviet Union, a conventional and nuclear superpower and a communist pariah. By these methods, the security of the West was maintained – if not exactly “guaranteed”, because no one knows what would have happened if the Soviets had called NATO's bluff – for the next 40+ years.

In 1989-91, the raison d'ĂȘtre of NATO suddenly disappeared. The USSR released its grip on its Eastern European satellites, which sloughed off communist overlordship in record time, terminated the Warsaw Pact, and it even officially dissolved itself, freeing its constituent “republics” to become newly independent states. All of these states, moreover, abandoned communism, demilitarized themselves (to varying degrees), and established friendly relations with the West.

Now, at this point, you would think that a defensive military alliance that had been formed in opposition to the expansionist tendencies of an empire that had entirely ceased to exist would...itself disband. If it chose to wind up its operations slowly, out of an abundance of caution, you would think that it nonetheless would – in line with its commitments to the leaders of the new “Russian Federation” – avoid any moves that would threaten to reignite old tensions, such as expanding to the east.

You would be wrong, however, because, almost as soon as the USSR's death rites were performed, the Western political and military establishment began to plot the enlargement of NATO – almost as if growth, in itself, could counteract the newfound pointlessness of the organization. Not for the first time, Western elites refused to take “Yes!” for an answer from their erstwhile enemies. NATO expansion was duly pursued, with the clear corollary that Russia would be permanently unwelcome. The unmistakable message to the Russians was: NATO is still in business, and its business – its only business – is containing you.

It is in this context that the current war between Russia and Ukraine should be viewed. American, Canadian, and European leaders, having secured more than a dozen new members for the NATO Bloc in Eastern Europe, decided to push even farther to the east. A coup was engineered that overthrew the Russian-friendly administration in Ukraine, and the political, military, intelligence, economic, and cultural elite of the West committed itself to the seduction of Ukraine and its incorporation into a now sprawling web of Western dominance. Russia's timid response to previous waves of NATO/Western expansion lulled these inveterate Russophobes into the naive assumption that Ukraine, too, could be annexed without difficulty. We all know what consequences this arrogant and shortsighted policy has had for the people of Ukraine.

Two things must be made absolutely clear: one is that NATO, for all the bluster about it being as strong today as ever before, has literally never been put to any practical use. Throughout the Cold War, and in the years since, it has never gone to war on behalf of any of its members, which is its only formal and legal purpose. Its only military operations to date have been symbolic contributions to Western misadventures in places like the Balkans, Afghanistan, and Libya, unconnected to its core responsibilities. It is still, to this day, a defensive military alliance, even if it behaves sometimes more like an expansionist empire.

Second, because of its defensive institutional focus, NATO has no bonafide commitments in Ukraine, and no legal standing to intervene in the conflict. Thus, NATO's support of mostly American, British, and German military and economic aid to that country is purely rhetorical, not practical. Just like during the Cold War, the Europeans expect America to solve their perceived strategic and military problems for them – but, unlike during the Cold War, this time the U.S. is under no treaty obligations to oblige, since the relevant “victim” of Russian aggression is a non-member state.

The lesson here is simple: NATO has long since outlived its usefulness. In fact, NATO and the Western military alliance have, by their aggressive, intemperate, and inept machinations in Ukraine, placed both that country and all nations of the world in much greater peril than they would have been in had Western leaders had the foresight to disband NATO in the early 90s.

The only things that continued U.S. membership in NATO will achieve are: the prolongation of unnecessary conflict in Eastern Europe, the encouragement of Western Europe's most destructive fantasies about its ability to dominate the entire continent, the financial overcommitment of the United States to the provision of security to various European countries wholly capable of achieving it (and paying for it) themselves, and the stoking of a toxic animosity between Russia and the West, which is quickly metastasizing into distrust and resentment that most of the non-Western world feels towards the United States and its European allies.

For all these reasons, the next president of the United States should do what George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton did not have the wisdom or the courage to do in the early 90s: he should withdraw the U.S. from NATO. He should also suspend aid to Ukraine and definitively end the program of Western strategic expansion that began almost as soon as the Soviet Union fell apart.

For the first time in almost a hundred years, let us abandon the architecture and the mindset of incessant conflict, and let us instead give peace – or at least minding our own business – a chance.

Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy is an Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred and blogs at: He appears on the Newsmaker Show on WLEA 1480/106.9.


And here it is at World Net Daily: 




In other news, the mainstream media is clutching its pearls over Donald Trump's colorful allusion to a "bloodbath" in the auto industry if he isn't reelected, because of Chinese competition.  Well, as usual, the establishment journos are spinning these remarks to make DJT look like a bloodthirsty fascist maniac.  To be fair, his exact wording is open to various interpretations, but the only one that leftists cotton to is the one that's the most scary, needless to say.  The depths to which Trump's detractors will sink in the next few months to portray him as unhinged and dangerous will, we assume, set new records for mendacity and hyperbole, which is saying something, given the long record of willful distortions to which Trump has been subjected.  Will any of it move those stubborn independents?  Maybe.  Of course, they've heard it all before, but we can't deny that even the most shameful lies acquire a certain currency in public discourse, if they're repeated often enough... 

Finally, a Washington Post columnist is getting worked over by "progressives" after she had the temerity to suggest that it might be in the best interests of Democrats, and the country, if Kamala Harris were to make way for a more competent and politically popular running mate for Joe Biden.  No kidding!  It shocks me to the core that the Dems are seemingly hellbent on retaining BOTH of the clunkers at the top of their ticket.  That's so unnecessary and reckless.  They claim that nothing matters except keeping the demon Trump out of the White House.  Well, if that's what they think, how about putting up a candidate (or two) that people actually want to vote for?  But what do I know...

Thursday, March 14, 2024

Tick-Tock for TikTok


Friends, Congress may be getting closer to forcing the sale of TikTok by its Chicom parent company.  Would that company, in fact, sell, and if so who would buy TikTok?  That's a critically important question, because we decidedly don't want the U.S. government forcing the sale of a major social media platform to a bunch of leftist creeps, which is a horrifyingly plausible scenario, I fear...  Elon, are you listening???


In other news, Democrats and progressives are, as usual, whipping up fears that Republicans will gut Social Security and Medicare.  Of course, Trump and his GOP allies are highly unlikely to trim these popular programs, although part of me wishes they would, because unless they are put on a firmer fiscal foundation they're both in danger of insolvency in the medium or long term. 

Finally, those dastardly Dems aren't dumb.  Evil, sure, but not dumb.  They realize what the polls are telling them: the presence of a wide range of third party candidates in the presidential race is lessening Joe Biden's chances of victory.  The solution?  Attack those third party candidates as "spoilers" and, if possible, sue them into oblivion and/or get them off the ballot.  Oh, these Democrats sure do love "democracy", as long as the people get only one choice at election time.

Wednesday, March 13, 2024

El Presidente Kennedy


Hola, amigos!  No, that title isn't a reference to the near certainty that RFK, Jr. will be our next president (ha!), but to John F. Kennedy's "Alliance for Progress", a form of outreach to Latin America.  That's just one of the topics that Brian and I cover on this week's Newsmaker Show.  We spend most of our time knee-deep in current events, including rank-and-file Democrats' (un) surprising openness to a strategy of refusing to certify a (hypothetical) Trump win in November, the persistence of inflation and the ambiguity of the country's overall economic situation, the sticky question of what to do about TikTok, the unserious nature of Democratic proposals to raise taxes on the rich, the high cost of migration, the No Labels phenomenon, and more!

You give us twenty minutes -- we give you the world!*

*"The world" could mean any planet, chosen at random, inclusive of "Earth", depending on the whims of the producers. 


What would a second term for Trump look like?  To me, the first term often looked like a political newbie fumbling in the dark.  Leftists assert, naturally, that on his second try Trump will tyrannize the U.S. more horribly than a thousand Hitlers, but to conservatives the bigger question is whether Trump has learned any lessons from the failures -- yes, they were failures -- of Act One of his presidency.  This article suggests that the reign of Viktor Orban in Hungary could be a model for what Trump hopes to achieve in the U.S.  Well, maybe it could. but this analysis is remarkably short on specifics.  How exactly did Orban establish himself as a right-wing colossus in Hungary, and how exactly would Trump go about duplicating his success?  It's unclear to me that Trump has any elaborate plans for entrenching conservative rule in this country, but, if he lacks them, I would suggest that he find a reactionary brainiac to think them up ASAP, because bluster alone won't even put a dent in the modern Left and its comprehensive domination of our major political, cultural, and economic institutions.

Friday, March 8, 2024



Boy, do I have egg on my face!  But I'm the legendary Nick Waddy, right-wing raconteur, so it's a FabergĂ© egg, and no doubt you'll still be very impressed.  Yesterday, I forgot to post this week's Newsmaker Show.  No matter -- here it is.  Brian and I delve into the rapidly evolving dynamics of the 2024 race for president, of course, and we also cover the ambitions of Nikki Haley, the recent SCOTUS decision on Trump's ballot access, the constitutionality of state laws against illegal immigration, the fading mythology of "President Michelle Obama", and the curious loyalty of Democratic Party primary voters to Sleepy Joe.

When we turn to "This Day in History", Brian and I cover Hitler's reoccupation of the Rhineland and the great solace that interventionists have always found in the lessons of "appeasement", the punishing nature of U.S. bombing in North Korea and North Vietnam, and the legacy of Ayn Rand's brand of libertarian conservatism.


It's one day late, but it's no less riveting for that!

Thursday, March 7, 2024

Talk to the Hand, America!


Friends, you may have noticed that President Trump recently challenged President Biden to debate him, and, in an ordinary election year, we could count on the two major party presidential candidates mixing it up on the debate stage, probably three times or more.  This, however, isn't an ordinary election year.  If the Dems had their way, it would be a pro forma election year, because the Republican candidate would be ejected from the ballot, and third party candidates would be bureaucratically stymied and thus prevented from accessing the ballot.  Ergo, Emperor Joe would win by default.  It may not turn out quite that way, but the incumbent president still seems to regard himself as above participating in any kind of dialogue with Donald J. Trump.  Presumably, Biden wouldn't want to acknowledge the existence of other candidates in the race either.  Biden will say that Trump is a boorish barbarian, so there's no point in debating him.  Will the American people buy that?  Or will they think that Biden is dodging the debates because he's not up to the task?  We shall see.  In any case, it would be fitting for a progressive president to refuse to debate, since progressives in general seem to regard any and all dissent as beneath contempt.  Not a very "democratic" attitude, but there we are.


I've said many times that, the more candidates there are in 2024, the more likely Trump is to win, and Biden is to lose.  It's thus highly problematic for Team Blue that the No Labels sideshow appears close to naming a presidential candidate.  Most of the leading contenders have taken themselves out of the running, so it's not clear that No Labels can be competitive, but, even if it drew 1% of the vote, that could easily be decisive in some states.  I say: bring it on, "centrist" cranks! 

Finally, in what will be an interesting test for free speech in the U.K., authoress J.K. Rowling has been reported to police for calling a transgender "woman" a "man".  I particularly appreciate Rowling's observation that "there is no human right to universal validation".  Amen to that!

Tuesday, March 5, 2024

Miracles Happen


Friends, DJT is exulting in his big win at the Supreme Court, which ruled unanimously that Colorado cannot unilaterally invoke the 14th Amendment's insurrection clause to strike him from the ballot.  The three liberal Justices were a bit peevish in their concurrence, but basically they agreed that it would be sheer chaos if every state, and every judge, in the country can craft its, or his, or her, own rationale for who's an "insurrectionist" and who isn't.  No doubt today a lot of Dems and lefties are looking like deer caught in the oncoming headlights of a tractor trailer.  Well, don't say we didn't warn you!  Now, will this end attempts to win the 2024 election by alternative means?  No way.  All the court cases against Trump are still alive, as far as I know, and we can't rule out other maneuvers, like canceling the election, declaring martial law, assassinating Trump, the intimidation or bribery of Trump electors, passing laws at the state level designed to prevent the election of "felons" (which Trump will soon be), etc.  I would still be (pleasantly) surprised if Trump were allowed to win the election and become president again, but at least the Supreme Court is on record that the American people ought to have some say in the matter.  And, BTW, I'm genuinely SHOCKED that the three liberal Justices concurred in the opinion.  That took real courage.  They are going to get some cold stares at the next D.C. cocktail party. 

In other news, SCOTUS will also be taking up Texas' new law designed to criminalize, at the state level, illegal immigration.  That will be interesting.  Previously, the high court has always held that immigration policy is a federal prerogative.  Will anything change now that we have bedlam at the border...and a 6-3 conservative majority on the court?  Maybe.  Maybe not.


Michelle Obama has been the GREAT BLACK HOPE to which many a lefty has clung as Sleepy Joe descends into obsolescence.  She is now making her position clear: she will not be running for president, and supports Biden and Kam-Kam.  Oh, the humanity!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

It's just a small state, but it gives Trump extra momentum as he heads into Super Tuesday.  I'm referring to Trump's massive win in the North Dakota caucuses.  One wonders whether, after today, Nikki Haley will finally see the writing on the wall?  Relatedly, will she pivot to a different kind of presidential run?  Maybe a prolonged flirtation with the No Labels folks, at the very least?


Finally, Taylor Swift broke Joe Biden's heart yesterday.  No, she didn't refuse to go on a date with him.  She omitted any mention of Biden, or the Democrats, or indeed any political controversy, as she urged her legions of Swifties to vote.  Swift's (potential) endorsement won't amount to a hill of beans in '24, if you ask me, but you can see why our octogenarian president sorely wants it.  Is Swift smart enough to demure, and to keep her brand squeaky clean rather than sullying it with old man stink?  We shall see.  (That's no offense to all the old men reading this blog, which I think is about 95% of my audience.  YOU have a delightful Trumpy musk to you, whereas Old Man Joe smells like socialism, which is, so I'm told, a mixture of the aromas of boiled cabbage and cigarette smoke.) 

Sunday, March 3, 2024

On A Roll, Baby!


Friends, kudos to Nikki Haley, who won today's Republican primary in the District of Columbia.  Let rhe record show that Haley had accumulated a massive string of defeats, including in her home state, but she is nonetheless the preferred choice of Washington swamp creatures who call themselves Republicans, which of course is a very select group, but still...  Haley's chances of being the GOP presidential nominee evaporated a while ago, but assuming she's running out of stubbornness, or for personal profit, or because she likes attention, or because she plans to say "I told you so" after Trump loses, then this result in D.C. will put something akin to wind in her sails.  Say what you want about Nikki, but she's right about one thing: a lot of Republicans would prefer a nominee other than Trump.  Count me among them.  Having said that, when it's New York's turn to have a Republican primary, I won't be pulling any lever for Nikki.  She ain't my cup of tea.

Friday, March 1, 2024

The Tulsification of the GOP?


Friends, this A.I.-generated image of Tulsi Gabbard says it all.  She's heroic, for sure, but is she blue, or is she red?  Well, she's purple, or rather...ambiguous.  She's whatever you want or need her to be!  My latest article considers her future, and specifically a variety of paths that she could take in 2024.  See what you think!


In other news, Elon Musk is suing OpenAI, trying to force the company to be true to its non-profit, altruistic founding vision.  Musk claims that OpenAI has been seduced by Microsoft and is no longer trying to "benefit humanity".  You may scoff, but it matters a great deal who steers the evolution of AI, and for what general purpose.  I hope Musk gets his way, because it would be nice to see the world of AI stay as transparent and as widely accessible and as democratic as possible.