Who is Dr. Waddy and What Does He Stand For?

Who, you may ask, is Dr. Nicholas L. Waddy, and how did he get so smart?

Dr. Waddy is Associate Professor of History at SUNY Alfred.  He specializes in 20th century European and African history.  He is the author of a novel, Jewel of the East, set in 18th century India, as well as a European history textbook, The Essential Guide to Western Civilization, published by RoutledgeHe is a lifelong observer of American and world politics, and has served as a Republican committeeman, a campaign volunteer, a newspaper columnist, and, once upon a time, as an intern at the Heritage Foundation and the American Enterprise Institute.  Since October 2016 he has been regularly writing articles and speaking out publicly in support of American values and conservative ideals.

What Does He Stand For?

Truth, Justice, and the American Way, of course!  More specifically, he is a nationalist conservative who advocates:

  1. minimal government and maximum liberty
  2. strict adherence to the Constitution and respect for states' rights
  3. Obamacare repeal
  4. border security and the cessation of all illegal immigration
  5. immigration reform and lower levels of legal immigration
  6. tax reform and simplification
  7. religious freedom and respect for people of faith
  8. school choice and reducing the federal role in education
  9. fighting back against Hollywood and the liberal media
  10. a strong defense, but also non-interference in the affairs of others nations
  11. sensible trade agreements that preserve American jobs
  12. traditional marriage
  13. the abolition of affirmative action and other forms of race and gender preferences
  14. the right to keep and bear arms.
  15. 100% support for conservative Republicans nationwide.
This is by no means an exhaustive list, as Dr. Waddy has an opinion on every issue under the sun!  Stay tuned.

Dr. Waddy can be reached at:


  1. As a new subscriber I welcome your insights into national and world political issues into my world.
    As a former employee of an educational institution I find it hard to believe that your political view is tolerated at our workplace.
    Keep getting the word about liberal thinking out so people may judge it for its lack of values.
    I refuse to participate in the PC movement. My parents were both born in the USA so that makes me a Native American.
    I once was employed as a telephone repair "MAN".
    While on a job site. Rochester city school. I heard a teacher refer to a staff member as a part time person. You can imagine the look I got when I asked what the person was the rest of the time.

  2. Thank you, Dan! I appreciate the kind words. You're absolutely right -- most educational institutions are extremely PC and would be mortified if one of their employees spoke up for conservative values or (much worse) President Trump. I guess my "courage" is explained to a large degree by the fact that I have tenure, but I'm sure my views still make me persona non grata in some quarters. So be it. It's a free country, right? Please keep fighting the good fight, and comment anytime!

    1. Yes, and many far-right conservatives are AGAINST tenure. So, the very people who support you are against the job protection you have earned. I don't agree with your analysis but if you are a scholar and deserve tenure, then so be it.

  3. Hi! I'm not sure if I should post here, but wanted to let you know how I have changed in just the last couple of months. I was usually a moderate democratic, because I felt that the 'poor' americans, of which I and 1 of the 3 of my children are, could ask for help with health care insurance and affordable housing, and in the last few years, find that, for instance, wait lists of 10years and beyond, while also seeing there are more and more immigrants who are housed, (not knowing these are illegal but suspect that). I am now seeing the light.. with the Democrat socialists resistance against closing the border, arresting illegal my age, 66 and struggling with ss and part time income...I am finally seeing the light as to what the democratic socialists are doing. I researched this whole illegal immigration issue and am astounded. I joined an organization called 'Alipac', who are for funding the building the wall, enforcing capture and prosecution of illegal immigrants who are violent criminals and drug,human trafficking and I just got an email from them that 'Facebook' and Google, are blocking their website and accounts. I find all of this sooo scarey. The more people like you that I find, the more I feel I'm not alone. Is there some way to expose this? Also, I am astounded that what I'm finding is this 'George Soros' billionaire funding the liberal, open border immigration into many countries, now funding organizations within the US as a front to opening our borders.

    Thanks! So appreciate what I have found on your site.

  4. Hi Joanne. It's great to hear from you! Welcome to the blog, and I hope you'll post often.

    I can understand how you feel. These days it does seem as though the Democrats are more interested in protecting the interests of foreigners than American citizens... Many of them also harbor an "open borders" agenda that they're only occasionally honest about. Politics these days can be pretty ugly, but if there's one good thing about that ugliness it's that it's drawing out the Left and forcing them to expose their own radicalism. Hopefully Americans will see their choice this fall as one between treason/impeachment/resistance/socialism and, well, sanity. We shall see.

    I don't know anything about Alipac, but I'd like to learn more. Assuming the organization is on the level, I'd be interested in writing about it (and about your decision to join)...

    Please stay in touch!

  5. Dr. Waddy:

    You refer to "the left" here on your blog responses, but "the Left" in your Olean Times Herald commentaries. Is there a reason why you capitalize the word in one setting, but not in the other? Or are you referring to different entities?



  6. Hi Dan. Welcome and/or welcome back!

    Good question. Honestly, that's largely a matter of personal preference. I generally try to capitalize "the Left," because I like capitalizing things, and it makes them seem more ominous... On the other hand, many editors will remove that capitalization, so I probably preemptively remove it myself from time to time. Either way, capitalized or uncapitalized, it refers to the same thing, and the same group of people, although I would be the first to admit that "the Left" as a movement is a somewhat vague concept. As the old saying goes, I know it when I see it...and I know I don't like it!

    Thanks for the question!

  7. Doesn't really seem like you stand for anything, just an anti-Obama stance that has so little basis in policy or realistic governance that it shows you only have snake oil to peddle (at best). At worst, you're dumber than those you criticize for blindly drinking the Kool-Aid that Trump and Roger Stone sold you.

  8. I find it illogical that the election was manipulated for the democrats. I think if that would have happened they would have made sure they gained in the house and took the senate. I volunteered for 5 days and worked the polls and I was working with both Democrats and Republicans and our one goal was to make sure everyone got to vote that was registered. I saw no "funny business", rather just patriotic Americans giving up there time to make our democracy work. I think all the whiners that cried when Hillary lost in 2016 and the current bunch of whiners should volunteer and work the elections.

  9. Welcome, Slackerboy! I commend you for working the polls on election day. That's a great service to our democracy. And I don't know where you served, but it's entirely plausible that there was no "funny business" in your area. Much of the shenanigans this year clearly impacted mail-in voting, which you may not have been involved with. I also think there's little doubt that all or most Republican and Democratic votes were counted. The interesting question is: were additional votes counted that ought not to have been?