Monthly Archives: October 2007

How to Halt Hillary

“Not only are we going to New Hampshire … we’re going to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota and New Mexico, and we’re going to California and Texas and New York! And we’re going to South Dakota and Oregon and Washington and Michigan. And then we’re going to Washington, D.C. to take back the White House, Yeeeeeaaaaaargh!”
— Howard Dean, Iowa concession speech

How to Halt Hillary
by: Joe Leonardi

The above quote was made when people still thought, even though upset in Iowa, Howard Dean was still going to be the Democratic nominee for president. It demonstrates many things. Notably, that one bad moment on camera can take you, in the blink of an eye, from champ to chump. However, most importantly it demonstrates that pre-election polls don’t mean a thing.

Senator Hillary Clinton, in all the national polls, is leading her democratic primary opponents. That is great, there is just one problem. The primary or the general election are not nationwide elections. To capture the nomination a candidate must, in each statewide primary, win a majority of delegates. As I have stated earlier, presidential elections are a series of statewide elections, not one national referendum.

Will Hillary win the democratic nomination? I still don’t believe so, but I don’t know and honestly I don’t care. As a republican, I can’t vote in the democratic primary — not that my state, Pennsylvania, will matter much by the time we finally get to the booth.

With this years general election coming to an end next week, the 2008 election cycle will heat up. It looks like January third the games will begin. So it is just about time to cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.

To date the Hillary machine has been running a safe, conservative, error free campaign. She is the front runner and as already stated, the perceived nominee on the board’s blue side. It begs a certain questions.

Why is Senator Clinton the presumed nominee? Why would anyone vote for her? Her public persona is one of an abrasive, cold, distant, power hungry individual. She projects a stoic, non-caring, emotionless facade. Though independent and educated she demonstrates neither. She allowed herself to be continually duped and embarrassed and oft opened herself up to possible exposure to sexually transmitted diseases via her husband’s womanizing. So what makes her an attractive candidate for president.

The answer — former President Bill Clinton.

It has been intimated by many and flat out said by a few that the reason democrats are high on Hil is to get Bill back in the White House.

Here is my advise to the other democratic nominees, start telling this one simple truth. A vote for Hil is not, I repeat not, a vote for Bill. Hillary Clinton’s first term will not be Bill Clinton’s third.

Hil is not Bill. For those who have forgotten — William Jefferson Clinton is probably the best pure politician to walk the planet. He had and has an easy charm. He is educated, intelligent and articulate. Bill Clinton could read the classified ads of a newspaper and draw you in as if he were reading Shakespeare or Hemingway. I remember watching his televised States of the Union and sitting upright, being drawn in by his masterful oratory. It was only after I focused on the words that I remembered, I didn’t agree with a thing he said, but still, I listened.

Bill Clinton, in person, could put friend and foe alike at ease. He was a man with whom whether you agreed or disagreed — you appreciated the fact that he wanted to be president to do something for the American people.

Hillary Clinton possesses none of her husband’s charm, oratory abilities, kindness nor presence. She is where she is today soley because of her marriage to Bill Clinton.

Whereas greatness brought Bill Clinton to the presidency, Hillary pursues the presidency because she thinks it will bring her greatness.

Again, I advise all the participants in the democratic primary, if you want to rally the base and win the nomination, shout it loud and clear Hillary Clinton is no Bill Clinton. Make your slogan — A vote for Hil is not a vote for Bill.

Advertisements

36 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Conservative, Democrat, Democratic, Election, Hilary Clinton, Liberal, President, STDs, White House

Valerie Plame — I’m still right and correct

I have received a few emails asking me how I feel about Valerie Plame’s book coming out. I remain baffled how this is a right/left, conservative/liberal, republican/democrat issue. I said it all back in March, so I am reposting this under a new title. It is the exact column I wrote back then. Time has not changed my feelings. I have read that someone on another board claims that Richard Armitage was not part of the administration. I suggest anyone who feels that way do a Google search. Mr. Armitage was Dep. Sec. of State from 2001 until 2005, the Novak article came out in 2003. I’m not sure in what world 2003 doesn’t fall between 2001 and 2005, however here in the real world consecutive numbers fall in succession.

Joe

“Loose lips sink ships.”
My Boot Camp Company Commander

Libby’s Guilty —– Big Deal
By: Joe Leonardi

I. Lewis Libby, I refuse to call an adult Scooter, has been convicted of perjury, obstruction, and lying . Special prosecutor Fitzgerald has reportedly said that there will be no further indictments, that the investigation is “inactive.”

Well all is right with world, correct? The Democrats and the Left are awash in a celebratory glow, so much so that Senator Harry Reid has decided that the Constitution now gives him the power to tell the President who he can pardon. The Republicans and the Right are overwhelmed with indignant anger; White House spokespersons Limbaugh and Hannity are now convinced the the jurors are all filthy liberals. All of this is just, I hate to say, a disgrace.

I don’t care either way about Lewis Libby. Did he perjure himself ? Did he lie to the FBI? Did he obstruct justice? Maybe, the jury thinks he did, but I don’t care. What bothers me about this entire mess is that a CIA agent was outed. She was most likely exposed for political retribution and this trial and conviction is more of the same. We should be ashamed of all involved.

I served in a branch of Naval Intelligence, and while not an operative, I learned the importance of National Security. I learned the seriousness of protecting intelligence. I also was extremely aware, if not involved in, that the most dangerous off all was HUMINT; human intelligence. Of course, the fact that a person possibly engaged in HUMINT was exposed has been lost in the wake of the trial. I’m sure that the hearing, book and movie deal will reveal all from the Wilson’s side, but for now and through most of this, we have neglected the true tragedy of this saga.

Valerie Plame was an employee of the CIA. At the time of this disclosure there had been claims and speculation that she was or was not covert. The right claims that she wasn’t and the left claims she was. Nonetheless, it doesn’t matter what her status was at the time. The simple fact of the matter is, at one time or another, she MAY have been covert. That is what makes her name being disclosed obscene and irresponsible if not possibly treasonous. Intelligence gathering is an ongoing endeavor and in most cases operations rarely cease. They build upon each operation forming layers upon layers.

If Ms. Plame was a covert agent at any time during her service, her status must be protected. Why? Because, any agent who had been affiliated with her through any previous operation can now be at risk. This is common sense. However, in D.C. and the politics of personal destruction this doesn’t matter. Her name and position were given to a prominent CONSERVATIVE columnist, Robert Novak. Mr. Novak subsequently published this tidbit in his column. Novak claims he learned of Plame’s CIA affiliation from Richard Armitage and confirmed it with, I know here was the big surprise, Karl Rove —- shocking. If these two gentlemen didn’t know that it was wrong to give out Valerie Plame’s affiliation they should have been immediately fired and never allowed to serve in government again. The reason, they must be stupid. Not to let Bob Novak off the hook, he should have used reasonable judgment and quashed the story. I don’t know about most people, but I am an American first and it is simply wrong to release something that common sense tells you could be a danger to national security.

Bob Novak is a columnist, commentator and pundit of great renown. If he got scooped on this story it would have done nothing to his reputation, his status or his earning potential. However, to those of us conservatives who genuinely put America first, he has fallen to the level of — Al Franken.

The members of the Silent Service are dedicated individuals who function with little recognition. Their reward is the knowledge that their efforts ensure the safety and security of the United States. These brave agents are well aware that they live in a clouded, mysterious sphere of cloak and dagger activities, though I’m sure they never expected members of their own government to use the dagger on them.

Joe Leonardi

12 Comments

Filed under cheney, Conservative, Democrat, Fair Game: My Life as a Spy, Google, Joe Wilson, Liberal, plame, President Bush, Republican, Rober Novak, scooter, Secretary of State, valerie plame, White House

Birth Control for Children?

“This isn’t encouraging kids to have sex. This is about the kids who are engaging in sexual activity.” Richard Veilleux, executive director of the Maine Assembly on School-Based Health Care

Birth Control for Children?
Joe Leonardi

For years those on the left have been preaching the need to make condoms available in schools. They have used the argument that teens are going to engage in sex and the need to protect them from HIV/AIDS was and is important. For the purpose of this conversation, I will concede as fact that in today’s age with many sexually transmitted diseases back on the rise — we need to teach our children the importance of utilizing a latex barrier to help prevent those diseases.

Considering that many of these infections, most notably HPV, demonstrate a link with cervical cancer, the argument that condoms can potentially save lives, from a health care stand point, is valid. So why is an educational institution willing to discount past thought and encourage the practice of unprotected, potentially lethal sex? Why are we willing to send the message to a child that, yes, you are sexually active and the most important thing is to avoid getting pregnant, take this pill or wear this patch and all will be okay?

So if the child opts for the birth control pill or patch over a condom; who will be responsible if a child contracts HIV? Will it be the school district, the doctor or the child who wrongfully thought they were “protected?” One of the benefits to the safe sex message is that properly used condoms can possibly prevent pregnancy as well as disease. Abstinence actually does prevent both but liberal thinking does not allow, into the conversation, that fact.

Another question to pose; is the child of legal age to make a medical decision for herself? The child is not of age to enter into a legal contract, so is the young girl now able to sign a medical informed consent form? Will an eleven year old be able to understand the plausible side effects? Even if they do comprehend and experience an adverse reaction; will they tell their parents? Considering the medication was given without parental knowledge it would not be a stretch to think that the child would not tell the parent.

What about possible drug interactions? If the parent takes the child to the family doctor for another condition and the family doctor is unaware the child is on the birth control pill and prescribes another drug, if there is a negative reaction — who is responsible?

We are now seeing, in post menopausal women, a possible link between breast cancer and hormone replacement therapy. What can of worms are we going to open when we introduce adult level hormones into an immature reproductive system and body? Does being on the pill make one more susceptible to breast cancer?
From drgreen.org, “According to Dr. Leslie Bernstein, et al., looked at many studies, some showing a risk from birth control pills, others showing no risk at all. They did a careful meta-analysis of all the data and concluded that the risk of breast cancer does increase with prolonged use of the pill. (Relationship of hormone use to cancer risk. Monograph of the National Cancer Institute 12:137 1992). At 120 months or ten years of use the relative risk was 1.38. These women were 1.38 times as likely to get breast cancer as those who had not used the pill.”

If these children, start on the pill prior to the age of eighteen, stay on it until they are twenty eight, they will be past the ten year mark. If they develop breast cancer who is liable? Did the child, at eleven years old, understand the potential risk of developing breast cancer into their thirties, forties, or fifties and beyond. Again, can the child make an educated, responsible, informed, consenting decision? I say no! And I say shame on the doctor who irresponsibly, without parental knowledge and consent, prescribes a controlled, hormone based, medication to a child.

This decision negatively impacts true safe sex efforts, parental responsibility, parental rights and puts children at greater potential risk. One must question the motivation behind this decision. Is it about the children? Are the proponents well meaning, but short sighted? Or is there another agenda?

When you examine the facts — this zeal to prevent pregnancy, via prescription drugs, could potentially prove fatal.

Joe Leonardi

13 Comments

Filed under AIDS, Birth Control, Cancer, HIV, Liberal, Maine, Maine Middle School, Pregnancy, STDs

The Man, The Myth, The Legend — Nobel Prize Winner Al Gore

I’d kill for a Nobel Peace Prize.
– Stephen Wright Comedian

The Man, The Myth, The Legend — Nobel Prize Winner Al Gore
by: Joe Leonardi

First and foremost, I would like to Congratulate Al Gore on winning the Nobel Peace Prize. His victory has sparked renewed calls for him to run for President circling the internet he invented. I know, I know all you Gore-a-maniacs will yell he never said that, he just implied it.

Al Gore deflects calls for his entry into the race by suggesting he is having too much fun.

Translated. Ya’ll are nuts, I’m making way too much freaking money and I don’t have to do a dam thing to earn a penny of it.

Citizen Gore has been a master salesperson for the carbon credit industry. He has used a combination of fear and guilt to CONvince people to pay to pollute. In a nutshell carbon credits work like this: people who over-pollute, like celebrities and former politicians who have ten thousand plus square foot homes for two or three people, utilize private jets and get driven around in gargantuan, gas guzzling limos can alleviate their gullible guilt by paying to pollute. Yes, I know they are buying “offsets” that go into green industries.

Please. These liberal elitist are sending the message, to the majority of Americans who live pay check to pay check, that it is okay to pollute if you can afford to pay for it. I have a novel idea — pollute less.

Nobel Prize winner Al Gore has made statements to the effect that the work he is doing is too important to stop now; or he needs to keep the issue of global warming in the public eye.

My response — Huh?

The U.S. Presidency is the most visible bully pulpit in the world. If Gore wants to change the world’s attitudes about global warming; what better position could there be?

Sorry my bad, that gig only pays four hundred grand a year and it requires… well it requires work.

I know many people like Al Gore and that is fine, it is their opinion. I like Al Gore too, out of office. I will admit that Gore does not lack the qualifications. I may not agree with him but his resume, if not his ideology, is impressive. However, former Congressman, former Senator, former Vice-President Al Gore will not run for President for one major reason — if he loses again, he doesn’t get to cry about how he really was the next President of the United States.

My Gore supporting friends have never gotten over the 2000 election. I often like to point out one nagging fact the Al-a-holics never discus. If then Vice President Al Gore won the state of Tennessee, his home state, the state that sent him to the Senate twice, he would have been President of the United States of America.

We like to think of the presidential election as a national referendum, however it is not. Our system turns the race for president into a series of state wide elections. The goal of which, by calculated electoral math, is to attain a majority of the electoral college.

Forget the Florida fiasco, which I will admit it was, if he won Tennessee he would have won. The 2000 electoral college results Bush 271 Gore 266. Take Tennessee’s 11 electoral votes away from Bush he gets 260, give them to Gore he gets 277— Al Gore is victorious. I know it lacks the conspiracy theories we like so much. This simple truth takes the blame away from the evil Supreme Court and mean republicans and makes Al Gore responsible for his own loss.

Sacrilege?! How dare I suggest Gore actually lost instead of being robbed.

Al Gore had previously won two Tennessee state wide elections, but he lost the state wide election for Tennessee’s electoral votes in 2000. It makes you wonder — What do the people of Tennessee know that we don’t?

Wishing for Al Gore to run is like me wishing there was a conservative candidate for president. Neither is going to occur.

Gore must maintain the illusion that he is a legend — if only in his own mind.

Joe Leonardi

11 Comments

Filed under Al Gore, Democrat, Democratic, Election, Environment, Gore, Liberal, Nobel Prize, President, Primary

Barack the Magic Miscreant

“You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin,” Obama
said. “Shortly after 9/11, particularly because as we’re talking about
the Iraq War, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism,
which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national
security, I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest.” Barack Obama

Barack the Magic Miscreant
by: Joe Leonardi

Does Senator Obama have the right not to wear the U.S. Flag lapel pin?
Of course. Does he have the right to say that he wants to demonstrate
his patriotism a different way? Of course. Does he have the right to
intimate that other politicians wear it for political gain? Again, of
course he does and he may be right. Does he have the right to demean,
debase and devalue the patriotism of every day American citizens? The
first amendment says yes. Should he be held accountable. Dam right.

I read about this quote, but I waited it until I watched it replayed
on “This Week,” before commenting on it. I wanted to not only read
what he said, I wanted to observe him say it.

I listened to the Senator’s words, but I also noted that he spoke
methodically — carefully choosing each word. When the clip
ended, I rose from the comfort of my chair and walked out of the room.
I was angry, so incensed I needed to walk off my ire fueled energy. I
could not believe that a man that I actually liked, one whom I thought
could have been a good president, though I vehemently disagree with his
politics, could genuinely be so far out of touch. If he fooled me,
I’m sure he fooled others. Thank God his facade faded prior to any
elections.

I always thought he had his finger on the pulse of the average
American. I thought he could unite America in a way she has never been
united before. Now, I realize he is nothing more than garbage. Yes, I
wrote the word garbage. I know, I know — I realize that I risk
insulting garbage, but since garbage does not have consciousness I’m
guessing I am on safe ground. I also know I keep things respectful,
but the Senator has lost my respect.

Not only should this sad excuse for a Senator be defeated in the
Democratic primary, he should be voted out if he attempts to return to
the Senate. He needs to summarily exit civic life and become a private
citizen.

My mom wore her U.S. Flag pin proudly and daily. She wore it after
9/11 because of my prior service and because one of our patients was
called to Iraq. After he returned she continued to wear it because she
felt for every mother who had a son or daughter serving in Iraq.
However, mostly she wore it because she was proud to be an American.

My mother didn’t live her life in the public eye. She was a middle
class mother of three who loved her family, loved her friends and loved
our country. Should the fact that she wore a U.S. Flag pin on her
blouse imply, Senator Obama, that she possessed pretended patriotism?

I wore a U.S. Flag pin prior to by entrance into the political foray as
a Congressional candidate. I was proud to wear it because, though I
disagreed with our President, I was proud to have served our country.

I saw no reason to stop wearing it when I entered the race for
Congress. Yes Senator, I showed my patriotism through the action of
running as you have and are still doing, however, did that mean that I
couldn’t display my support for my fellow Americans? Did it mean I
could not demonstrate my pride for being a citizen of our grand
country?

I continue to wear my lapel pin, not only because of my patriotism, my
former candidacy , my service in the United States Navy, but also
because my mother always wore hers. It has become something I do to
remember a special woman. A woman who consented to have her son enter
the Navy at age seventeen. A woman who worried about one of our
patients during his time in the middle east. A woman who felt sorrow
at the report of every service person who died in action. A woman who
loved our country.

Barack Obama is the worst example of a politician, of an American and of
a human being. This mental miscreant should voluntarily vacate his
public presence. He has become an example of what happens to many
politicians when they get to D.C.. He has forgotten that government
service is not bout the self, it is about the populace.

The majority of Americans display the flag not to demonstrate
their patriotism — their patriotism drives them to display the flag.

Joe Leonardi


			

7 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama, Democrat, Democratic, Election, Flag Lapel Pin, Liberal