Category Archives: Democrat

The Hidden Agenda of Liberlism Part I

“I fear that giving mankind a dependence on anything for support in age or sickness, besides industry and frugality during youth and health, tends to flatter our natural indolence, to encourage idleness and prodigality, and thereby to promote and increase poverty, the very evil it was intended to cure.” Ben Franklin

“That which does not kill us makes us stronger.” Friedrich Nietzsche

How Liberalism Leads to Slavery
by: Joe Leonardi

Liberalism is the scourge of modern society. It’s mantra of entitlement is slowly leading the United States into an inescapable abyss. The liberals hide their treachery in the promotion of human kindness. They claim that their interests are only “what is best for the common people.” Their subterfuge hides a more sinister outcome. Liberals are destroying the independent spirit of humankind.

A recurring theme in American history is that of the rugged individual. The belief that most people unencumbered by an oppressive government not only can, but desire to provide for themselves. In today’s nanny state we are slowly losing this.

There are two primary questions to ask. How do liberals do this and why?

 

The why is easy. Pure, unmitigated power. Through dependence, the liberal seeks to control the masses. It is much the way many of histories most tyrannical despots ruled their countries. While the likes of Stalin, Mao, and Hitler used fear and intimidation to keep their political opponents silent, they also fostered government reliance to keep the masses in check and enslaved.

The how is a little more complicated and, in my opinion, much more malevolent. Liberals, since the progressive era, have chosen Robin Hood economics to demolish the American dream and break the American spirit. Early 20th century progressives sought to steal from the most productive citizens and give their money, transferring it unearned, to the least productive. To accomplish this they required the power to tax all income. To ensure unbridled authority to take from the rich and give to the poor, the progressive movement introduced, passed, ratified and enacted the Sixteenth Amendment. Congress was given the authority to “wet their beaks.” In less than half of a century the American government abolished slavery over a portion of the population and reintroduced it over the whole.

16th Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Image via Wikipedia

In the beginning, this was sold as a tax on only the wealthy — because, to gain popular support liberals, then and now, vilify those who create wealth and earn large incomes, often ignoring the fact that those are the same individuals who create jobs.

Of course, the rich are not the only ones taxed. The ability to tax shackles the American income earner at every rung of the economic ladder. The harder we work, the more we earn, the more we are extorted to give the federal government “their cut.” Taxation is the means the government utilizes to enslave the middle and high wage earners, entrepreneurs and job creators.

Most everyday folks don’t care what happens to these people, because liberals indoctrinate them into the belief that “rich” people don’t deserve what they have and they must be compelled to share what they have earned. What the believers of this fallacy do not realize is that they too are being enslaved by the liberal ruling class.

How? Redistribution. Utilizing this method the lower classes become tacit wards of the state, forever trapped in poverty, begging the omnipotent liberal government to provide.

Locally we have liberal talk show host Steve Corbett, who wants free health care, free swimming, free skateboard parks, free everything for everyone. Well — nothing is free. The hard working income earners and producers will be over-taxed to provide these gratis services.

The simple truth that these liberal slave masters don’t want you do know is that the more you are “given,” the less you have. Soon the United States will resemble much of Europe. People will be locked into the class to which they are born. Upward mobility will be a thing of the past. Those that do not earn their way in our society will be placated with all the basic necessities of life. Their ability and desire to provide for themselves will no longer matter. They will have been stripped of inherent traits that made America and Americans the envy of the world.

Stalin, Lenin and Mikhail Kalinin (photo from ...

Image via Wikipedia

When Stalin died much of the free world rejoiced in the departure of a ruthless, cold-blooded tyrant. However, the populace of the former Soviet Union wept in fear. They cried out, “who will take care of us?” They did not need to be beaten into submissive servitude — NO, they were conciliated into it.

Will this be our dreadful, dire destiny? Do we yearn to be hand fed from cradle to grave; or do we “yearn to breathe free?”

When did adversity, hardship and struggle become dirty words. I want the opportunity to succeed or fail based upon my decisions, based upon my drive, based upon my actions. I want the freedom to live my life unrestrained by government sanctioned slavery. Don’t you?

Beware the modern, moderated, boisterous beatnik beating the drum for a free, fanciful, easy existence. Because the cost of “free” — is freedom.

Joe Leonardi

Leave a comment

Filed under Barack Obama, Barak Obama, Conservative, Democrat, Democratic, Freedom, Liberal, Liberty, Michael Savage, MSNBC, NeoCon, Steve Corbett

The Tucson Tragedy

Sarah Palin at a campaign rally in Raleigh, NC.

Image via Wikipedia

It is Sarah Palin’s fault!

Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and other right wing talk radio were the trigger!

Those angry tea-party folks are at the cause!

What complete nonsense!

Everyone seems to blame everyone.  Yet, for some reason, no one wants to blame the alleged gunman.

Am I missing something?

I was listening to morning local talk radio. Nancy Kman stated something to the effect that we should be more cautious in what we say and that certain words could be responsible for triggering a mentally unbalanced person.  That sentiment immediately brought before me a thought of abused women who stay in relationships.  One I knew in particular, after she left, would say; “As long as I didn’t push his buttons he wouldn’t hit me, for the longest time I thought that it was my fault he hit me, you know…. because I would do or say something that would upset him.”


I have to wonder is this what we have come to in society.

Are we all to be so afraid that the wrong word, the wrong comment, the wrong treatment of someone who MAY be unbalanced will spur him or her onto a shooting spree?

Are we now to apply what is obviously flawed logic in an abusive situation to society at large?

Are we now to reason that we are responsible for another’s illegal and immoral actions?

I am responsible for myself and in turn, no one is responsible for me.  I cannot, nor should I be, responsible for the actions of others and in turn no is responsible for my actions.  We can’t control anyone but ourselves.  It is one of the main points I focus on with people who seek my assistance in losing weight.  It is as true in maintaining one’s health as it is in anything else in life.  You can only control you, attempting to control someone else is futile.

Additionally, I have to ask how we are:

ONE supposed to know someone is unbalanced and TWO what would be THEIR trigger.

I had a brief flirtation with the world of politics.  I ran a losing campaign for Congress and I spent a brief period of time acting as a political analyst for WYOU.  In the grand scheme, I was an insignificant blip on the radar.

However, I can relate three occasions that happened during my campaign that caused me some concern. Two of the three involved the same person, so I will relate those together second.

The first incident occurred in Monroe County; I was campaigning at some type of event in which there were many vendors.  I was introducing myself, when at one of the booths; the person behind the stand asked my party affiliation.  When I answered, I was immediately assailed with a verbal onslaught of how George W. Bush was responsible for the 9/11 attacks.  No efforts at reason were helpful; this person just continued raising her voice louder and louder until I simply walked away.  The trigger was nothing more than my party affiliation.

The other two occurrences happened at separate times, but by the same person.  The first time I was at an event in Lackawanna County, a volunteer was walking ahead of me asking people if it was okay if I introduced myself and spoke with them for a few moments.  One of the people we talked with was very eager and I spent several minutes with him.  His passion was obvious, and as long as I listened, everything was calm.  After a significant period had passed, I advised him that I understood his concerns; I had even jotted down a few notes, and I would look into what he had told me.  I went to walk on to the next person and I guess that was the trigger. He became agitated.  He claimed that I was not interested in what the people had to say.  I nicely tried to reason with him, that there were other people who wanted to speak with me.  Finally, he seemed to relax, I’m not sure why, but he did and I was able to go on.

The second episode occurred when I was campaigning with my then wife.  We were out doing a downtown tour when I caught a glimpse of this same person heading straight at us.  The speed he was approaching alarmed me and I immediately placed myself between him and my then wife. Immediately a verbal barrage of accusations assailed me about our last meeting.  He claimed I hid the fact that I was a republican and his verbiage increased in both vitriol and volume.  I attempted to engage him in conversation, but anything I said just amplified his anger. Finally, my now ex-wife whispered to me… and I am paraphrasing, “Subdue him or call the police.”  I am not sure why, but something else captured his attention and we were able remove ourselves.

I would guess if either meant me harm, they would have done so.

The question must be asked; how is one to know the trigger?  In retrospect, I don’t believe either of those folks to be mentally unbalanced, they were passionate about their convictions, but they saw my party as the cause of what was wrong and in turn, I became the object of their anger.  Yet, if someone is genuinely unbalanced, inflammatory words or actions may not be something as forthright as calling someone an enemy or having a target over a congressional district.

One life lesson I have learned is that you CANNOT apply rational logic to irrational people — that itself is a striking contradiction.

Dr. Joe Leonardi

Leave a comment

Filed under Congress, Congressman, Conservative, Democrat, Democratic, Freedom, Liberal, Mass Murder, MSNBC, National Public Radio, NBC, NEPA, Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, The House

Tucson Arizona Tragedy

Since my failed run for office and my short-lived career as a political analyst, I infrequently comment on politics. However, I am bothered by what has become an apparent attempt to politicize a terrible tragedy.  The attempted assassination of a member of Congress and the senseless death of six innocent bystanders is something that should be above politics. Yet, sadly, it is not.

I have read much speculation and I submitted a column for my friend Dave Yonki’s site for his Write on Wednesday feature, which I will repost here after it runs.

Preparing for that column, I was doing research on Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the alleged gunman Jared Loughner.  There is a lot of information out there and there is much speculation and opinion; however, I came across the following item from My Fox NY Website in reporting about Jared Loughner.

“The suspect’s mother works the Pima County Board of Supervisors in Arizona, the briefing added.”

When I did a search for more information there was really nothing out there other than the above line almost thrown on as an after thought.

Now, for those of us who live in Northeast Pennsylvania, we scratch our heads when we read something like that.  Here in good old NEPA, our elected and appointed officials have been running up quite a record of scandal and corruption — so maybe, just maybe we are a little more skeptical.

You see, a person who has had run ins with the law and has no police record and was able to purchase a handgun and has or may have (because I’m not sure if that is just bad grammar and I can’t find another source) a relative working in government, well…. we immediately become, what’s the word I’m looking for???? …. Suspicious.

Sarah Palin at the Time 100 Gala, in Manhattan...

Image via Wikipedia

 

So is there anyone else out there besides me who finds this somewhat interesting?

 

What makes me even more interested, is that Sheriff Dupnik really seems to being trying to direct attention onto conservative talks show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh and conservative candidates such as Sarah Palin.

Now, I have no idea how politics works in Tucson Arizona.

I am not saying there is anything nefarious going on.

I honestly don’t have any idea.

So, if the question would be is there some kind of political connection?  To that I don’t know the answer.

However, what I find curious is that no one seems to be asking the question.

1 Comment

Filed under Congress, Conservative, Democrat, Democratic, Liberal, Liberty, MSNBC, Northeast Pennsylvania

MY HOME TOWN, MY NEW TOWN — PITTSTON

“Now Main Street’s whitewashed windows and vacant stores
seems like there ain’t nobody wants to come down here no more”

from Bruce Springsteen’s  My Home Town

MY HOME TOWN —  PITTSTON
Joe Leonardi

I am planning a move back into my hometown of Pittston, PA, with that I re-post the following column that appeared in the Pittston Sunday Dispatch a few years ago.

During my run for Congress our grass roots, shoe leather campaign brought us to downtowns all over NEPA.   Eventually one of those tours brought us to the town where I was born and raised.  When we hit Pittston the usual meet and greet was enhanced by me giving a guided tour of my hometown.  I noticed I was continually saying, “and over there used to be this, and over there used to be that.”  “In that vacant lot was this and that parking lot used to be that. “  I have to admit, a tear touched my eye as I realized all that has been lost since my youth.  Then a smile touched my face as I realized all the possibilities.

What went wrong?  Well in Northeast Pennsylvania the answer is easy.  We were a one industry region for a long time. When the Knox Mine disaster deposed King Coal, not only mining jobs were lost, but all the jobs and industries that supported anthracite fell away.

After Knox the next industry to dominate Pittston was the garment industry.  We had numerous dress factories that were teeming with work.  So much work that many women sewed from home. Then the next knock down came in the form of the North American Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA for short.  When NAFTA was being bandied around I was one of its most vocal supporters. I laughed heartily when Presidential candidate H. Ross Perot spoke of the giant sucking sound that would be heard throughout the land.  Well if you want to see the aftermath of that giant sucking sound, go to Pittston.

Now, on a smaller scale, it is about to happen again. With the closing of Seton Catholic the downtown will loose those that work for and attend the school.  Once again, a stinging jab to the fortunes of good old Pittston.

It is easy to sit back and identify what went wrong. The breakfast counters, barbershops and bars are full of those more than willing to point out who or what was responsible.  For the most part they are pretty accurate, well maybe not the folks in the bar at 2:00AM, but I digress.

What can we do to make it better? What made a smile touch my face as a tear touched my eye? What gives me hope for Pittston?    Possibilities of a resurgence in downtown Pittston, that’s what.  Downtown Pittston has many advantages:

One – It is centrally located between Scranton and Wilkes-Barre.
Two – The Susquehanna runs along side it.
Three – It has relatively easy access to interstate 81, access that can be made                    easier.
Four – It has good infrastructure, a great fire department and police force.
Five – It is full of good, honest, hardworking people.
Finally, for the sake of this discussion anyway, it has buildings and land.

Perhaps it is time to take a new line of attack regarding downtown redevelopment.  Past thinking has always been to grow downtowns we must lure businesses, usually retail, to the downtown.  I say we take a new approach.  Let’s turn downtown Pittston into a middle to upper income residential area.  We need to encourage investors, builders and developers to take to the downtown and create townhomes, condominiums and apartment buildings.  When these buildings are in place and people are given incentive to live there, then the specialty shops will come. The boutiques, gourmet restaurants, cafes, professional offices and such will move in to service and supply the new populace.  We can make Pittston an oasis of residential and specialty businesses smack in the middle of a great old coal town.  (And we should never be ashamed of our coal mining roots, but that’s for another column)

A different idea?  Maybe, maybe not?  However, we need to start thinking outside the box.  We must create a strong incentive for people to want to come downtown. In the process perhaps we can start a new economy so our graduating children can stay….in our hometowns.

Joe Leonardi

Leave a comment

Filed under Coal, Coal Miner, Democrat, Democratic, Northe East PA, Northeast PA, Northeast Pennsylvania, Paul Kanjorski, Pennsylvania, Pittston, Steve Corbett, Sue Henry

President Barack Obama

President Barack Obama??

by: Joe Leonardi
“I fear that giving mankind a dependence on anything for support in age or sickness, besides industry and frugality during youth and health, tends to flatter our natural indolence, to encourage idleness and prodigality, and thereby to promote and increase poverty, the very evil it was intended to cure.” Ben Franklin

“That which does not kill us makes us stronger.” Friedrich Nietzsche

“Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death.”
Patrick Henry

“There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
James Madison

The United States Under President Barack Obama
by: Joe Leonardi

Barack Obama’s brand of liberalism is a scourge of modern society. It’s mantra of entitlement will lead the United States into an inescapable abyss. Senator Obama and his merry, marauding band of liberals hide their treachery in the promotion of human kindness. They claim that their interests are only “what is best for the common people.” Their subterfuge hides a more sinister outcome — the destruction of the independent spirit of humankind.

A recurring theme in American history is that of the rugged individual. The belief that most people unencumbered by an oppressive government not only can, but desire to provide for themselves. In today’s nanny state we are slowly losing this.

There are two primary questions to ask. How do liberals do this and why?

The why is easy. Pure, unmitigated power. Through dependence the liberal seeks to control the masses. It is much the way many of histories most tyrannical despots ruled their countries. While the likes of Stalin, Mao, and Hitler used fear and intimidation to keep their political opponents silent, they also fostered government reliance to keep the masses in check and enslaved.

The how is a little more complicated and, in my opinion, much more malevolent. Liberals, since the progressive era, have chosen Robin Hood economics to demolish the American dream and break the American spirit. Early 20th century progressives sought to steal from the most productive citizens and give their money, transferring it unearned, to the least productive. To accomplish this they required the power to tax all income. To ensure unbridled authority to take from the rich and give to the poor, the progressive movement introduced, passed, ratified and enacted the Sixteenth Amendment. Congress was given the authority to “wet their beaks.” In less than half of a century the American government abolished slavery over a portion of the population and reintroduced it over the whole.

In the beginning, this was sold as a tax on only the wealthy. Because to gain popular support liberals, then and now, vilify those who create wealth and earn large incomes, often ignoring the fact that those are the same who create jobs.

Of course, the rich are not the only ones taxed. The ability to tax shackles the American income earner at every rung of the economic ladder. The harder we work, the more we earn, the more we are extorted to give the federal government “their cut.” Taxation is the means the government utilizes to enslave the middle and high wage earners, entrepreneurs and job creators.

Most everyday folks don’t care what happens to these people, because liberals indoctrinate them into the belief that “rich” people don’t deserve what they have and they must be compelled to share what they have earned. What the believers of this fallacy do not realize is that they too are being enslaved by the liberal ruling class.

How? Redistribution. Utilizing this method the lower classes become tacit wards of the state, forever trapped in poverty, begging the omnipotent liberal government to provide.

In the liberal mind, we are unable to make the appropriate decisions concerning our own lives or our own welfare. Awash in the justification that they have to “force” us to do what is best for ourselves, they go forth to legislate personal conduct. The elitist that populate the liberal leaning mind set are, in their own minds, all knowing. To be good citizens, we must be automatons — blindly, blissfully following their educated, egalitarian ways. Of course, to be considered equal, you must embrace their self aggrandizing viewpoint.

To the liberals, laws should go beyond protecting the public safety. Laws, under the control of government, should determine the way free citizens conduct their daily lives. From parenting, to education, to morals, to religion, to body habitus — it is the liberal, via the regime, who decides for everyone.

What egomaniacal motivation allows one to think that no one is entitled to make their own mistakes? Take their own chances? Live their lives within the law?

We should be allowed the option to find our own way. However, to the liberal, that can not stand. They demand that if we do not willingly choose to learn from their innate, intelligent, insight — then under the omnipotent, oppressive, ominous hand of government our will must be broken.

The liberal defenders of freedom only believe in freedom, if it agrees with their doctrine of cohesive, communal behavior. They do not simply imply they know what is best for everyone, they are fanatically convinced that they are correct. If those of us, who embrace living in a free society, don’t abide by their definition of “what is best,” then they demand government should be the instrument to force it upon us. Because, according to them, government has a responsibility to control us, the simple, unenlightened, uninformed masses.

I am often baffled, that the same group of ideologues who strongly believe it is a woman’s right to murder an in-utero baby, are so interested in controlling people once they are born.

Does anyone not get the connection, that controlling the masses, for our own good or not, is government sanctioned slavery? How many times have groups of people been told that, their confinement and restrictions were for their own good?

We must defeat those who want to shackle us! We must reignite the fire that existed at the birth of our great nation! We must prevent the destruction of autonomy. We must embrace the emphatic proclamation of Patrick Henry. We must demand liberty!

Local liberals expound: free health care, free swimming, free skateboard parks, free everything for everyone. Well — nothing is free. The hard working income earners and producers will be over-taxed to provide these gratis services.

The simple truth that these liberal slave masters don’t want you do know is that the more you are “given,” the less you have. Barack Obama’s United States will resemble much of Europe. People will be locked into the class to which they are born. Upward mobility will be a thing of the past. Those that do not earn their way in our society will be placated with all the basic necessities. Their ability and desire to provide for themselves will no longer matter. They will have been stripped of inherent traits that made America and Americans the envy of the world.

When Stalin died much of the free world rejoiced in the departure of a ruthless, cold-blooded tyrant. However, the populace of the former Soviet Union wept in fear. They cried out, “who will take care of us?” They did not need to be beaten into submissive servitude. No, they were conciliated into it.

Will this be our dreadful, dire destiny? Do we yearn to be hand fed from cradle to grave; or do we “yearn to breathe free?”

When did adversity, hardship and struggle become dirty words?

I want the opportunity to succeed or fail based upon my decisions, based upon my drive, based upon my actions — I demand the freedom to live my life unrestrained by government sanctioned slavery!

Don’t you?

Beware the modern, moderated, boisterous beatnik beating the drum for a free, fanciful, easy existence, because the cost of “free” — is freedom.

Joe Leonardi

1 Comment

Filed under Conservative, Democrat, Democratic, Election, Liberal, President, Republican

How Liberalism Leads to Slavery

How Liberalism Leads to Slavery

“I fear that giving mankind a dependence on anything for support in age or sickness, besides industry and frugality during youth and health, tends to flatter our natural indolence, to encourage idleness and prodigality, and thereby to promote and increase poverty, the very evil it was intended to cure.” Ben Franklin

“That which does not kill us makes us stronger.” Friedrich Nietzsche

“Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death.”
Patrick Henry

“There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
James Madison

How Liberalism Leads to Slavery
by: Joe Leonardi

Liberalism is a scourge of modern society.

How dare I make such a bold statement!

Unfortunately the mantra of entitlement espoused by progressives is slowly leading the United States into an inescapable abyss. The liberals hide their treachery in the promotion of human kindness. They claim that their interests are only what is best for the common people. Their subterfuge hides a more sinister outcome.

The destruction of the humankind’s independent spirit.

A recurring theme throughout American history is that of the rugged individual — the belief that most people, unencumbered by an oppressive government not only can, but desire to provide for themselves. In today’s nanny state this sense of independence, this sense of individualism is slowly, surely, strategically being destroyed.

There are two primary questions —  how and why?

The why is easy; pure, unmitigated power. Through dependence, the liberal seeks to control the masses. It is much the way many of history’s most tyrannical despots ruled their countries. While the likes of Stalin, Mao, and Hitler used fear and intimidation to keep their political opponents silent, they also fostered government reliance to keep the populace in check and enslaved.

The how is a little more complicated and, in my opinion, much more malevolent. Liberals, since the progressive era, have chosen Robin Hood economics to demolish the American dream and break the American spirit. Early 20th century progressives sought to steal from the most productive citizens and give their money, transferring it unearned, to the least productive. To accomplish this they required the power to tax all income. To ensure unbridled authority to take from the rich and give to the poor, the progressive movement introduced, passed, ratified and enacted the Sixteenth Amendment. Congress was given the authority to wet their beaks and in less than half of a century the American government abolished slavery over a portion of the population and reintroduced it over the whole.

In the beginning, this was sold as a tax on only the wealthy. Sound familiar? Of course,  it does, because to gain popular support liberals, then and now, vilify those who create wealth and earn large incomes, often ignoring the fact that those are the same who create jobs.

Of course, the rich are not the only ones taxed. The ability to tax income shackles the American earner at every rung of the economic ladder. The harder we work, the more we earn, the more we are extorted to give the federal government their cut. Taxation is the means the government utilizes to enslave the middle and high wage earners, entrepreneurs and job creators.

Most everyday folks don’t care what happens to these people, because liberals indoctrinate them into the belief that rich people don’t deserve what they have, thus, they must be compelled to share their earnings. What the believers of this fallacy do not realize is that they too are being enslaved by the liberal ruling class.

How?

Redistribution.

Utilizing the above method the lower classes become tacit wards of the state, forever trapped in poverty, begging the omnipotent liberal government to provide for their needs.

In the liberal mind, we are unable to make the appropriate decisions concerning our own lives or our own welfare. Awash in the justification that they must force us to do what is best for ourselves, they go forth to legislate personal conduct. The elitist that populate the liberal leaning mind set are, in their own minds, all knowing. To be good citizens, we must be automatons — blindly, blissfully following their educated, egalitarian ways. Of course, to be considered equal, you must embrace their self aggrandizing viewpoint.

One of our local, lofty, liberal talk show hosts has often opined that we need government to control our lives. Yes, he actually states that.

To paraphrase, he has said that since citizens are unwilling to live the right way, it was up to government to persuade us. He is in favor of smoking bans in eateries, not solely for the health of those who work in the restaurant industry, but to stop people from smoking — period. If it were up to him the tobacco industry CEO’s would be imprisoned.

He intimated that the government should tell people how much they should weigh and how physically fit they should be. Since people were unable to make the right decisions, government must make those decisions.

To the liberals, laws should go beyond protecting the public safety. Laws, under the control of government, should determine the way free citizens conduct their daily lives. From purchasing health insurance, to parenting, to education, to morals, to religion, to body habitus — it is the liberal, via the regime, who decides for everyone.

What egomaniacal motivation allows one to think that no one is entitled to make their own mistakes? Take their own chances? Live their lives within the law? What mind set seeks to control others down to the minutia of what condiment a person tops a sandwich? Don’t laugh, with the passage of the recent health care legislation, these extreme examples may one day become reality.

It is an inalienable right that we be allowed the option to find our own way. However, to the liberal, that can not stand. They demand that if we do not willingly choose to learn from their innate, intelligent, insight — then under the omnipotent, oppressive, ominous hand of government our will must be broken.

The liberal defenders of freedom only believe in freedom, if it agrees with their doctrine of cohesive, communal behavior. They do not simply imply they know what is best for everyone, they are fanatically convinced that they are correct. If those of us, who embrace living in a free society, don’t abide by their definition of what is best, then they demand government should be the instrument, under fines and penalty of law, to force it upon us. You must realize that they genuinely belive that government has a responsibility to control us —the stupid, simple, unenlightened, uninformed, muddled masses.

I am often baffled, that the same group of ideologues who strongly believe it is a woman’s right to murder an in utero baby, are so interested in controlling people once they are born.

Does anyone not get the connection, that controlling the masses, for our own good or not, is government sanctioned slavery? How many times have groups of people been told that their confinement and restrictions were for their own good?

We must politically defeat those who want to shackle us! We must reignite the fire that existed at the birth of our great nation! We must prevent the destruction of autonomy. We must embrace the emphatic proclamation of Patrick Henry. We must demand liberty!

Locally, we have a talk show host who wants free health care, free swimming, free skateboard parks, free everything for everyone. Well — nothing is free. The hard working income earners and producers will be over-taxed to provide these gratis services.

The simple truth that these liberal slave masters don’t want you do know is that the more you are given, the less you have.

Soon the United States will resemble much of Europe.

Upward mobility will be a thing of the past.

People will be locked into the class to which they are born.

Those that do not earn their way in our society will be placated with all the basic necessities of life. Their ability and desire to provide for themselves will no longer matter. They will have been stripped of inherent traits that made America, and Americans, the envy of the world.

When Stalin died much of the free world rejoiced in the departure of a ruthless, cold-blooded tyrant. However, the populace of the former Soviet Union wept in fear. They cried out, “who will take care of us?” They did not need to be beaten into submissive servitude. No, they were conciliated into it.

Will this be our dreadful, dire destiny? Do we yearn to be hand fed from cradle to grave; or do we “yearn to breathe free?”

When did adversity, hardship and struggle become dirty words? I want the opportunity to succeed or fail based upon my decisions, based upon my drive, based upon my actions. I want the freedom to live my life unrestrained by government sanctioned slavery. Don’t you?

Beware the modern, moderated, boisterous beatnik beating the drum for a free, fanciful, easy existence, because the cost of  free — is freedom.

Joe Leonardi

7 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama, Conservative, Democrat, Democratic, Election, Liberal, President, Republican, Steve Corbett

Qualifications

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
United States Constitution

“We need someone who’s been tested, because the United States presidency is one the toughest jobs in the world, she is the best qualified candidate.” Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty

Qualifications

by: Joe Leonardi

I have a good friend who is a huge Hilary Clinton supporter. This person consistently tells me that Hilary has been the most qualified democrat running for office.

I am not so sure.

I admit that I do not care for Senator Clinton. She rubs me the wrong way and I don’t think that I could ever cast a vote for her — even if she were a republican.

She is talking up the qualifications issue against Senator Obama, but I am curious how she will deal with the experience and qualification issues if she wins the primary.

Senator John McCain is considerably more qualified than either Democratic contender.

Does experience and qualifications give us an insight on to what kind of president we will get?

I say no.

I wrote in an earlier commentary that the two most qualified Presidents of my lifetime were Presidents Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush. Both were one term presidents and looking back, both were poor presidents. They both lacked, though should have possessed, solid leadership qualities.

Senator Clinton would like Democratic primary voters to vote for her because, she claims to be the most qualified and experienced candidate. As I wrote earlier, presidential elections have little to do with either. It is likability and a person’s innate ability to lead.

Hilary Clinton is not likable and she has never demonstrated any genuine leadership abilities.

The president of the United States must be an individual that can muster people to his or her cause. To bring the populace, elected officials and heads of state together for the common good. That person must be able to lead people of all political persuasions.

Leadership has nothing to do with education, experience, or qualifications.

Leadership is an inherent, intangible trait.

It appears Senator Obama has that trait and Senator Clinton is attempting to blunt that effect by claiming she is, and has been, the most qualified democrat in the race.

The following are brief biographies of two individuals. These biographies are snapshots of their qualifications to be President.

The first one:

-Roughly 1 year of structured education
-Elected to a state’s General Assembly four times
-Elected to U.S. House of Representatives only once
-At various times was a farmhand, clerk, flatboatman, store owner, surveyor, postmaster and a lawyer
-Served in a state Militia as a Captain and private

The above resume’ is relatively unimpressive.

No real education, a few years in a state assembly and two years as a U.S. Congressman and not much of a military career.

This person was Abraham Lincoln.

The President that saved the Union.

One of four Presidents on Mount Rushmore.

Arguably, one of the greatest Presidents in United States history.

If we follow Senator Hilary Clinton’s logic, based upon his prior qualifications, he should never have run, let alone be elected President. We should be thankful that Hilary and her advisers were not around in the 1860 election.

Next we have the following:

-Bachelor’s degree from Tufts
-Master’s degree from Tufts’ Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy
-Elected to U.S. House of Representatives seven times
-Former Ambassador to the United Nations
-Former U.S. Secretary of Energy
-Twice elected Governor
-Served as Chairman of the Democratic Governors Association
-Authored two books
-Taught at New Mexico State University, Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government and the United World College
-Nominated five times for the Nobel Peace Prize
-Former Chairman of Freedom House, a private, non-partisan organization that promotes democracy worldwide

The above resume is quite impressive. Who’s bio is it?

It is that of Governor Bill Richardson. The first person of Latino descent to seek the office of the President.

Looking at this snapshot —- the Governor is extremely qualified to be President of the United States.

He is well educated.

He has legislative experience.

He has executive branch experience.

He has experience in educating others.

He has extensive foreign policy experience. Instead of hanging out with foreign heads of state with his spouse, he actually worked with these leaders. More importantly, Bill Richardson negotiated the release of U.S. servicemen, hostages and political prisoners.

Unfortunately, to the supporters of Senator Clinton, Governor Richardson is a man. So though eminently qualified, he should not have been and was not seriously considered to be the democratic party’s nominee.

We must be honest, Senator Clinton is not looking to be the most qualified person to be President. She and many democrats are looking just for a woman, any democratic woman, to be President. So, intellectual honesty be dammed. The Hilary democrats want a woman, no matter how qualified the man is that she has run, is running or will run against.

If the phone rang in the White House at 3 a.m. and democrats were concerned about the right person for the job, Bill Richardson would still be in the race and he would be the front runner going into Super Tuesday Jr.

Governor Richardson was the most qualified democrat in the primary, yet he did not receive the support of his party or the voters.

I asked my friend, the one who believes that Hilary is the most qualified to be president, why this person had not gotten behind Governor Richardson. My friend’s answer was — “Because I can’t take someone who has such a bad toupee serious.”

So much for qualifications.

The Democrats may decide as early as March 4th who their nominee is. I think it might be Barack Obama.

Politically, Senator Obama is extremely liberal. Policy wise he is everything I am opposed to. However, he is bringing republicans to his side. Like the Reagan Democrats of the eighties, there is currently a movement of republicans for Obama. They even have a catchy name, they are called Obamicans.

I am not on that bandwagon just yet.

I don’t know if I ever will be.

Senator Obama makes you believe he can pull our country out of the depths of misery and hell that President George W. Bush has placed us.

The question is, can he?

I don’t know the answer.

I do know that another divisive figure in the White House, such as Senator Hilary Clinton, can not.

Joe Leonardi

2 Comments

Filed under Barack Obama, Bill Richardson, Conservative, Democrat, Democratic, Election, Hilary Clinton, Liberal, President, President Bush, Republican