Subscription

Wednesday, September 30, 2020

American Symbiosis

 


Friends, my latest article is all about why we need Amy Coney Barrett and President Trump both to succeed in October and November.  One without the other puts our country in grave danger.  See if you agree...


Will Ginsburg-Barrett Be a Turning Point for America?


Most political observers understand that the death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a reliable “progressive” voice on the Supreme Court, and the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, seemingly a strong conservative and constitutionalist, to replace her, represents a seminal moment in the history of American jurisprudence. We could be setting up the conditions for many well-established legal doctrines, among them the constitutional right to an abortion, to evaporate in the years ahead. The relentless expansion of federal powers could also be stymied.

Changing the direction of the Court, however, may not be as consequential as it once seemed. That's because all of our political institutions, including SCOTUS, have undergone a steady process of delegitimization in recent years.

Democrats and progressives have long claimed that the existing conservative majority on the Court is anti-democratic, retrograde, and obnoxious. The Left's speculation about court-packing may have accelerated of late, but it's been percolating for years, along with its penchant for impeaching any and all federal officials who stand in its way. Moreover, the electoral college and the Senate are also on the progressive chopping block. And states' rights? They don't stand a chance in the “New Order”.

The sad fact is that Democrats and liberals increasingly foresee a time — and not far in the future, either — when the Republican Party will have sunk beneath the waves of demographic oblivion, and they, the enlightened ones, the paragons of political virtue, the harbingers of enforced equality, will be in a position to push through any change they like.

Hallowed institutions like SCOTUS, in this scenario, if they dare to resist, will be contorted into whatever new shapes the historical moment calls for. The Supreme Court, therefore, in its current sense of a court of last resort that it is meaningfully independent of the executive and legislative branches of government, may not endure more than a few weeks, should Democrats take full control of the White House and Congress in January 2021. Audacious reforms, like abolishing the filibuster and packing SCOTUS, which seemed like plot elements in dystopian fiction not long ago, are now relatively easy to imagine becoming the law of the land.

And this brings us to what could be Amy Coney Barrett's real importance in American history.

Since Democrats seem determined to undermine the current system of separation of powers, or any other political contrivance that stands in the way of their hegemony, securing a temporary conservative majority on the Court, or a larger such majority, fades into insignificance. After all, the Court is just one election away from collapsing in a heap, like every other institution we hold dear.

What will perpetuate this newly fortified conservative majority, then, and maintain our current system of democratic and constitutional government in good health, is not winning the current nomination fight — it is keeping the Democrats out of the White House and denying them a Senate majority. This is what ultimately will determine the fate of our Republic, for, if we empower those who want to “transform” America, by undermining its traditional institutions, we can expect those institutions to be destroyed. Indeed, we will have voted to destroy them.

When Judge Barrett appears before the Judiciary Committee of the Senate in October, therefore, her immediate and most obvious task will be reassure the Senate sufficiently to ensure her confirmation and get her on the Court. Her more fundamental task, however, will be to create the conditions for Republicans to win the 2020 election. For, increasingly, the latter seems a necessary precondition for the former, in the sense that a Democratic President and Congress would soon make mincemeat of the judicial norms that undergird the integrity of SCOTUS itself. Justice Barrett, without President Trump to back her up, would soon find herself spinning her wheels in a “reformed” judicial system whose purpose is to rubber-stamp the dictates of leftist politicians and bureaucrats. She might as well retire the moment she takes up her gavel, for all the good she will do.

What this means, therefore, is that, as the nation teeters on the brink, as the polls tighten, and as both sides await the verdict of the American people in November, everything may hinge on the woman whom fate has made the inevitable centerpiece of our political discourse in the closing weeks of the campaign. Either she will acquit herself well, and both she and Trump will sail to victory, or she will falter, and the executive-judicial axis of conservative constitutionalism that currently stands as a sentinel against leftist overreach will soon collapse.

Make no mistake, winning a Supreme Court seat, but losing the White House and the Senate, is tantamount to winning nothing at all. Barrett must be made to understand these stakes.

Can a 48-year-old mother of seven deliver — can she be the savior our nation needs in this, its moment of peril? I believe she can.

Already she has distracted the Democrats and the Left from following their preferred playbook for the terminal phase of the election campaign. Instead of focusing the attention of the voters on an endless string of invented Trump scandals, now the Democrats face the unenviable prospect of engaging in verbal fisticuffs with an intelligent, courageous conservative woman. Assuming Barrett can stand up to the punishment that the Left will surely inflict, she can and will emerge on the other side of this melee victorious.

In doing so, she will find that she has accomplished far more than merely advancing her judicial career and the narrow cause of originalism. She will have bought America four more years of sane, responsible government. She will have held the fanatical forces of leftism at bay. She may even have planted the seeds for a civil war within the Left that will lastingly disrupt, or even permanently disable, the threat it poses to America itself.

Judge Barrett may well hold the fate of our nation in her hands. Let us hope and pray that she is up to the challenge.

 

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

 

And here it is at American Greatness:

 

https://amgreatness.com/2020/10/01/will-barretts-nomination-be-a-turning-point-for-america/ 

The Home Stretch

 


Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show with me and Brian O'Neil was taped before the epic presidential debate, but we still managed to cover a plethora of timely topics.  Brian and I discuss the state of the race, the New York Times' allegations of tax avoidance against President Trump, ballot harvesting in Minnesota and the potential for a contested election, the Democrats' no-win situation in opposing the SCOTUS nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, the nature of "libertarianism", and where Rand Paul stands on the political spectrum.  Whew!  What a lineup, huh?


Historically, Brian and I talk about the signing of the Munich Pact in September 1938.  My view is that Neville Chamberlain was not the dolt that history has portrayed him as.  Hindsight is 20/20.  In addition, we cover President Wilson's embrace of female suffrage in 1918.  In fact, many states had already granted women full voting rights even before the 19th Amendment was passed.  One could make the case that the extension of the franchise to women was an inevitability by that stage.  The consequences, as I point out, were myriad, including giving a big shot in the arm to the prohibition movement.


Check it out!  Free speech may not be around for much longer, so we might as well make full use of it while we still can, right?


https://wlea.net/newsmaker-september-30-2020-dr-nick-waddy/

Tuesday, September 29, 2020

No Holds Barred

 


Friends, we always knew Trump was a warrior, and he proved it tonight!  No one could say he lacked for courage, or bombast, in his assault on Biden and the Democrats.  He threw dozens of punches, and in my view he landed plenty.  He also refused to let Biden have a moment's peace.  Was he scrupulously polite and observant of the rules?  Well, no....but he was Trump!  What else can we expect of the man after all these years?  


My overall impression of the debate is that it will change remarkably few minds.  For those who find Trump abrasive and arrogant, it will confirm for them that they have always been right.  For those who believe that Biden is confused, corrupt, or evasive, they will find plenty of ammunition in the debate as well.


There were certainly questions that I wish Trump had answered differently or better.  I've always felt that Trump could make a much stronger case on race.  He ought to call out the Dems and the Left for playing the race card endlessly and shamelessly.  He ought to point out the Republicans' superior record on racial justice and equality, compared to the Democrats.  He ought to talk about how left-wing policies have failed people of color time and time again.  But he generally doesn't make these points, and it's a shame.


Trump tried his best to tie Joe Biden to the radical left.  He tried to force Sleepy Joe to choose between moderation and appealing to progressives.  Of course, Joe won't choose.  He'd prefer to triangulate.  He'd prefer to deflect.  In many cases, he'd prefer not to answer at all, as on questions about court-packing and who he might nominate to SCOTUS.  Biden has gotten away with a lot.  At least, when Trump is in the room, Biden gets called on his sophistry and his sly machinations.


In the end, those who expected Biden to fall flat on his face in the first debate were disappointed.  The Biden campaign will be alive and well after this tumultuous tête-à-tête. Probably the polls won't shift much in either direction.


The ball, in my view, is now clearly in Amy Coney Barrett's court, and in that of the Senate Democrats who must decide how aggressively to oppose and criticize her.  I suspect that will be the deciding factor in November.


There is one chance that the debate could fundamentally alter the race, however.  Trump stridently pursued the issue of Hunter Biden's dirty dealings with a variety of foreign actors, in Ukraine, Russia, and China.  The media has been utterly silent on that narrative for many months now.  Can they continue to ignore the story, when Biden is advancing the transparently false claim that Hunter never took any money from anyone?  We shall see.


Buckle up, America!  A contentious election just got...contentious-er!


Plus, Trump made it clear that the drama won't end on Nov. 3rd.  He expects a "rigged election", and that means that this knock-down-drag-out fight may not be over until Jan. 20th.  And even that may be optimistic!  Just sayin'...


***


Here's an independent analysis of the debate, with which I would mostly agree:


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/09/30/what_that_was_about_144337.html

 

 It's true that Biden faced a very low bar in terms of expectations.  He cleared it.

 

And another analysis -- this one way more Trump-friendly:

 

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/09/30/nolte-donald-trump-won-the-first-debate/


And, in other news, there's a suspect in the attempted murder of two Sheriff's Deputies in Los Angeles County.  If the suspect were a white supremacist, you better believe the media would be all over it.  Unfortunately, he's a person of color and a gangbanger -- so, in other words, just the type of violent criminal that the media stridently asserts doesn't exist.  Expect a total press blackout, therefore.


https://www.foxnews.com/us/compton-shooting-charges-filed-in-ambush-against-2-deputies-earlier-this-month

Saturday, September 26, 2020

Beep, beep! Beep, beep!

 

 

What's that sound, you ask?  It's the insistent screeching of the Soviet Union's trailblazing satellite: Sputnik 1.  Less metaphorically, it's the sound of ME, as I'm extensively quoted in an outstanding Sputnik News Agency article about the Black Lives Matter movement.  Take a gander at what I had to say about BLM and its prospects in the post-election period:


https://sputniknews.com/analysis/202009231080542683-how-black-lives-matter-is-losing-its-veneer-of-a-peaceful-social-justice-movement-/

 

In other news, President Trump, as expected, has named Amy Coney Barrett as his nominee to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court.  The consensus is that she'll be a solid conservative, and she'll be very hard to beat in terms of the nomination fight.  The Dems are struggling to find narratives that they can deploy against her...but how hard they try to tarnish her good name remains to be seen.  The upshot: SCOTUS is about to get measurably greater, better, and more faithful to the Constitution.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-pick 


Finally, President Trump recently made a stop in Virginia, and it has me wondering whether that state could be in play in November.  Democrats are inclined to scoff -- almost as much as they scoffed at the idea that Trump could win in Wisconsin, Michigan, or Pennsylvania in 2016...  Personally, I say we should play on as big a map as possible.  Win 'em all, Mr. President!  The momentum is moving in our direction, and this nomination struggle, combined with the upcoming debates, means the dynamics are growing more favorable by the day.  I'm optimistic!


https://richmond.com/news/state-and-regional/govt-and-politics/at-newport-news-rally-trump-attacks-northam-pledges-heavy-play-for-virginia/article_622e9ce1-839c-54db-8dbd-b170c4ed4554.html

Friday, September 25, 2020

Could CBS Be Next On The Chopping Block? Say It Isn't So!

 


Friends, the sad truth is that the America-haters are winning: they're pushing successfully for changes to school curricula, for the removal of "offensive" statues, and for the renaming of buildings, streets, football teams, and other cultural artifacts, all to advance the narrative that traditional America was a bastion of oppression and racism, and our country needs to transform itself before it can be redeemed.  Case in point: Columbus statues have been coming down by the dozen this year, and the rise of BLM explains much of the historical carnage:


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/christopher-columbus-statue-removed-cities/

 

My view: Columbus wasn't perfect, and he was implicated in some serious crimes, from a modern perspective, but our contemporary American society and indeed Western Civilization is predicated on Columbus's exploits.  It would be futile and hypocritical to disown the man who made our country and our world what it is.  What's more, blaming Columbus for "genocide" is absurd.  He had no intention of committing genocide, and didn't engage in genocidal behavior himself.  It was mostly European diseases that killed millions of Native Americans, and the LAST thing Columbus would have wanted to do was annihilate his work force.

 

What's the title of this post all about?  CBS is the Columbia Broadcasting System.  Its name thus perpetuates (and celebrates) the "genocide" of Native Americans.  I say, BAN CBS!  Burn it to the ground (peacefully, of course)!

 

In other news, is it possible that Mini-Mike has met his match in the Florida Attorney General?  Mike Bloomberg is spending millions to pay the fines and penalties owed by Florida felons.  That will allow them to vote, and he assumes they'll vote for Democrats (lawless desperadoes normally do).  This may, however, be a violation of Florida law...and it's certainly a violation of the spirit of the law recently passed by the Florida legislature, which mandates that felons pay off their debts to society before they regain the right to vote.  Bloomberg seeks to bypass that legal and moral obligation.  At the very least, those who benefit from Bloomberg's blood money SHOULD NOT be permitted to vote in November.

 

https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2020/09/23/florida-ag-calls-for-criminal-inquiry-into-bloombergs-16m-felon-voter-donation-1317995 


And, you may well ask, how confident can we be that a vote cast for Trump will be duly counted?  This story puts that question in perspective:


https://www.yahoo.com/gma/us-attorney-battleground-pennsylvania-investigating-023800972.html

 

The most secure way to vote, as always, is in person at a nearby polling center.

Thursday, September 24, 2020

A Narrow Escape


 

Friends, despite the seemingly decisive win for Trump implied by the map above, the 2016 election was darn close -- too close for comfort, if you ask me.  In the key states of Florida, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, Trump's margins were razor thin.  By the same token, Hillary's wins in Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Nevada were also very narrow.

 

My latest article isn't about electoral politics, per se, however.  It's about how the death of RBG brings into clearer focus why those of us who voted for Trump in 2016 did so, and why we were right to do so.  The fate of our country, had Hillary prevailed, would have been bleak indeed.  A liberal-dominated Supreme Court would have twisted the Constitution and the law out of all recognition, and you and I would have been lucky to escape with our lives and our liberty (that is, our ability to remain un-incarcerated).  Certainly the Left would have stacked the deck for all future elections, such that our chances of ever overcoming "progressive" tyranny would have been slim.


See what you think of my analysis, therefore, which appears in Townhall:


https://townhall.com/columnists/nicholaswaddy/2020/09/24/the-death-of-rbg-vindicates-my-vote-for-trump-n2576814

Wednesday, September 23, 2020

Enough to Ruin Your Whole Day

 

 

Friends, this week's Newsmaker Show with me and Brian O'Neil explores in depth the prospects for President Trump's upcoming nominee to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg on the Supreme Court.  We evaluate some of the leading candidates, and the likelihood that they would be approved by the Senate.  Equally importantly, we ask the question of how the politics surrounding the presidential election will be affected, and the role that a new Supreme Court Justice would play in potentially refereeing the election itself, if the result is contested, as seems increasingly plausible.


In terms of "This Day in History", Brian and I talk about the 1944 election and whether FDR was candid with the American people about his poor health (he would die in office just a few months later).  We cover the discovery of oil in the Persian Gulf region, as well as the Soviet development of atomic weapons under Stalin.  Once the Reds had "the bomb", the world would never be the same, and you and I would never again be entirely safe from sudden incineration!


Check it out.  It's top-quality analysis, as always!


https://wlea.net/newsmaker-september-23-2020-dr-nick-waddy/

 

***

 

In other news, it turns out that those ridiculous face shields that you see people wearing are about as useful as donning wool socks to protect yourself from the coronavirus.  Of course, that doesn't mean people will stop wearing them.  They're a potent form of virtue signalling, and that's what counts these days, right?

 

https://www.foxnews.com/health/plastic-face-shields-do-not-stop-spread-covid-19-study 


Also, Republicans are starting to salivate at the prospect of a presidential campaign dominated by Dem/leftist assaults on a likeable, upstanding female Supreme Court nominee.  I must say, I'm inclined to agree that the Dems are between a rock and a hard place!


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/09/23/a_circus_senate_hearing_gop_sees_gain_if_dems_act_up_144278.html

 

Are the Dems SCOTUS hypocrites?  You betcha!  Not that the media cares.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bidens-evolution-on-supreme-court-vacancies 


And, in case you forgot, the border with Mexico was a mess when President Trump took office.  He's got it squared away now.  Do we want to go back to the days of no wall, and tens of thousands of phony refugees arriving in our communities every month?  I don't!


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dhs-chief-wolf-border-crossers-single-adults

Monday, September 21, 2020

Stifle Your Hacking, America!

 

 

Friends, the gamesmanship over the Supreme Court vacancy continues apace.  Personally, I trust that President Trump will pick a superb nominee -- and I trust that Mitch McConnell will steer him/her, probably her, through the process, sooner or later.  The Dems are squirming for good reason.  We have them at a major disadvantage here!  Don't sweat it too much when some Republicans aver, "Well, maybe we ought to wait..."  Wily old Mitch knows what he's doing.


In other news, the CDC is confirming that the coronavirus is spread mainly through the air.  The findings, as reported in this article, are still vague, however.  Coughing is bad.  Close contact is bad.  Masks are good.  Ventilation is good.  Okay, but how do we calibrate our risk?  How do we know what situations are too risky, and which countermeasures are most effective?  The science is evolving, but not as quickly as I would like.


https://www.foxnews.com/health/airborne-particles-aerosols-coronavirus-cdc

 

Speaking of which, some of the countermeasures we've been taking have clearly been effective, because influenza infections seem to be way down since March.  That's good news -- it means we haven't been chasing our tails -- but it would still be nice to know which mitigation strategies are the best.  I know the latest trend is to view masking as the be-all-and-end-all of coronavirus containment, but the experience of the Nordic countries would suggest that this generalization is off the mark.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/health/flu-season-mild-covid-19-precautions-cdc 


Lastly, check out this article.  It isn't remotely Trump-friendly, but it explores some intriguing scenarios that might unfold in a contested election.  The Congress could indeed be on the hot seat, but, as I understand it, it would be the present Congress that would certify, or not certify, the results produced by the Electoral College -- the next Congress would have nothing to do with it.  Any way you slice it, an extra Supreme Court Justice could really come in handy right about now!


https://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/election-2020-nightmare-094500888.html

Saturday, September 19, 2020

SCOTUS Pandemonium!

 

Friends, the speculation and gamemanship following in the wake of the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has already reached a crescendo, and it hasn't even been a day since RBG passed away!  Hold on to your hats, America.


Here is some analysis from our good friends at Fox News.


Trump, for his part, seems determined to move forward ASAP:


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-urges-republicans-fill-ginsburg-vacancy-without-delay

 

Some Republican Senators, on the other hand, especially if they're facing reelection, might be more circumspect about the process:

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ginsburg-vacancy-puts-pressure-on-trump-critic-republicans-in-senate 


Democrats, meanwhile, are anxious, to say the least, and they're already contemplating extreme reactions, if a Trump nominee is confirmed:


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/markey-pack-supreme-court-abolish-filibuster-ginsburg

 

https://www.foxnews.com/media/ginsburg-death-burn-it-down-threats 


Finally, we still face the likelihood of a contested election, which the Supreme Court would be called upon to referee.  Now that court is down to just eight Justices.  What does that portend for the outcome of the election?


https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ginsburg-vacancy-could-complicate-possible-contested-election-some-say

 

My take?  My preliminary reaction is that Trump and the GOP must choose a replacement for Ginsburg, but we need not be in a rush to fill the seat before the election.  Ramming a nominee through the Senate could complicate the reelection of critical GOP Senators, after all.  If the battle is over before the election takes place, moreover, it also removes the impetus for some Republicans and conservatives to vote.  The important thing is that we confirm a new and reliably conservative, constitutionalist Justice soon, meaning before any major cases involving a contested election are weighed by the Court.  What that means to me is that we can start the process ASAP, but a vote in the Senate need not come until the middle of November, at the earliest.

 

In terms of the election itself, obviously this turn of events raises the stakes -- as if they needed to be raised any higher!  In truth, though, I feel as though RBG's passing will energize Republicans and conservatives.  It seems to me that progressives and Trump-haters were already energized -- not by Biden, of course, but by the opportunity to "get" Trump.  Republicans and conservatives, however, are not united around Trump.  Most are, but some are clearly tempted to sit out the election or to hold their noses and vote for Biden.  This Supreme Court nomination battle should crystallize for them why, even if they don't always approve of Trump, we need a conservative majority, and hopefully an expanded conservative majority, on the Court -- and thus we need Trump to win!  My gut tells me that these unforeseen developments will help bring some malingering conservatives, reluctant to do their duty and vote for DJT, "home" to the GOP.  We shall see. 


P.S. You must read this great article about the widespread nature of BLM protests and the frequency with which they have degenerated into violence.  It really puts paid to the notion that BLM is pacific in its methods.


https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/16/study-up-to-95-percent-of-2020-u-s-riots-are-linked-to-black-lives-matter/

Friday, September 18, 2020

The Notorious RBG Gives Way To...DJT?

 

 

Friends, today we say good bye to one of the staunchest liberal justices in recent memory: Ruth Bader Ginsburg.  Although you and I would undoubtedly disagree with, oh, 99.9% of her rulings, we have to give her credit as a survivor, as a firebrand, and as a committed "progressive".  Her passing sets up what is sure to be one of fiercest nomination battles of all time.  How Republicans handle this remarkable opportunity -- to shape the Judiciary for a generation, and to guarantee conservative, constitutionalist rulings as far as the eye can see -- will dictate the future of the nation, not to mention the fate of Joe Biden and Donald Trump in November. 

 

Whoa, Nelly!  Get ready for some fireworks, America!


https://www.npr.org/2020/09/18/100306972/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-champion-of-gender-equality-dies-at-87