Author Archives: Robert Leonardo

The New Capitalism

The theme through out this election was the economy. After all, America’s economic situation has looked grim for some time now. High unemployment, rising gas prices, slow growth, and just a general fear of the future has dominated the news. Thus the Romney campaign naturally focused on what was seemingly president Obama’s greatest weakness, his economic inexperience, and his failed policies. Governor Romney, and most of the conservative pontificaters like Carl Rove and Dick Morris, figured focusing on just the economy would be a winning strategy, as most Americans vote with their wallet.

This thinking would have been spot on, accept the GOP operatives unwittingly left one critical component out of their strategy that snatched victory away from governor Romney–Capitalism had been redefined, and accepted by at least half of the electorate to include government as part of the American business enterprise. The voting block for traditional free enterprise had been narrowed. Many Americans no longer had the stomach for the kind of capitalism  governor Romney was promoting.Traditional capitalism, once the hall mark of America, would now be seen as a selfish and dangerous game of survival of the fittest.

Thus  republicans were seen as  representing the party of “greed is good”, a  narrative that president Obama’s team was able to pin  on the republican party, and thus Mitt Romney as there representative. This seemingly selfish worldview had its foundation in  philosopher Ayn Rand, the  author of Atlas Shrugged, and TheVirtue of Selfishness,  who vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan was promoting during the campaign. This hard corp Laissez-Faire capitalism was seen as a “dog eat dog” economic battle ground, where each man was pitted against another in a fight for economic prosperity, winner take all and to hell with the loser.  Of course this was not exactly what our Founders had in mind, nor Paul Ryan, with their vision of free enterprise coupled with the virtue of grace  benefitting all Americans. But governor Romney was not able to communicate this idea, or show the inherent dangers of debt financing and how it would drastically effect the working class–the largest voting block.

Unfortunately though,  some in the GOP, and Wall st. have attached themselves to this rather ruthless philosophy of Randian economics, and conservatives are paying dearly for it. Thus supporting free market capitalism over and above others who have not fared as well has created a bitterness, and an increasing attention to the growing disparity between the rich and poor. President Obama has taken full advantage this economic polarization,which ironically is the fault of many of his policies, and those of the Democrat party.

I believe President Obama saw the 99 percent vs. the one percent rallies as a watershed opportunity to forge a group of disenchanted Americans into a voting block of social change. The president adroitly maneuvered his campaign to show that the economic problems our nation is facing are a direct result of the economic policies that the republicans have fostered all along. Change was in the political wind, and the president smelled it well before the GOP.  Even if he had to ask for  another four years to accomplish his goals, the people were ready to unload old-time capitalism in favor of a government sponsored capital enterprise (stealth socialism). The words president Obama used were the same as Romney’s; economic freedom, liberty , capitalism, but the meanings were vastly different. No longer would the old phrase of “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.” be favorable.  Instead, the presidents vision would be simple, “Give a man a fish from your plenty or Government will do it for you .” The new  capitalism would be about giving, not lending. I have a notion, that in a odd way, this has been part of the problem for the republican party–profit ahead of generosity equals greed to many voters. Perception or the real thing, the GOP free-market ideology was not resonating.

Another area of concern that President Obama had going for him, was that he was seen by his voting block as a peacemaker abroad. The GOP was characterized by the Obama supporters as a colonial oppressors, always looking to take advantage of mineral rich nations and cheap labor.  As cordial and mannerly as Mitt Romney was, he represented a party that President Obama successfully demonized as outdated, oppressive socially, and internationally.

Finally, although I disagree with the President and his supporters on many issues, I think the area that we conservatives can improve on, making our case for economic prosperity much better, is caring for those less fortunate then ourselves. If we truly care about our country, then we need to take a vested interest in those who really need help, as opposed to categorizing fellow Americans without jobs, or disabled, as  a group of malcontents,  or simply just avoiding this group of downtrodden altogether. Corporate America, and our churches can, and must take a greater role in helping the working poor in a number of ways; programs such as grants for job training, building shelters, and food banks to name a few. Some of this philanthropic work does go on, but it is far short of what it could be. In the end, if we want government to truly be limited, then we have to be willing to do more. Had governor Romney even touched base with some of these more gracious free enterprise philosophies, I am certain he would have won the election. This is the New Capitalism, get used to it.


Politics And Religion: Don’t Let The Tail Wag The Dog

Last week I attended a Bible study that was covering post modernism; and its effects on both our culture and the church. I mentioned to our group that one of the negative consequences of this secular philosophy is that most Americans no longer believe in objective moral truth. I attempted to prove my point by walking back the myriad of legislative decisions from abortion to same sex marriage. At this point, I was surprisingly cut off by our speaker, who told me that we don’t want to get into discussing politics. That comment irked me. I thought to myself, how do you avoid politics when discussing the ramifications that post modernism has had on both our church and nation ? Time to review some definitions.

Religion simply defined, is a set of beliefs concerning the cause and nature of the universe along with a moral code conducting the governing of human affairs. Similarly, politics is the principles and opinions on the aggregation and governing of a civilized society. Religion and politics go hand in hand. In fact, show me one piece of legislation (politics) that does not have a moral (religion) component to it. This old wives tale of not mixing religion and politics is a fallacy. Just like the type of diet you prescribe to impacts the health of your body; your religious worldview will indeed affect your political decisions, which in turn effect the course of our nation. No free pass here. Yet, there seems to be a disconnect here for some.

This brings me back to the speakers motivation in avoiding the political part of our discussion. My assumption is that he was just trying to delicately get through the bible study with out stepping on anyone’s political sensibilities. I can respect that. However, as I thought about it, one question I should have asked was, do you think the Bible contains the mind of God ? If so, can we use the Bible as a guide in today’s post modern world to help us make principled decisions in all aspects of life ? A yes to any of those questions would have opened the door for further discussion which is where I was headed.

As orthodox Christians, we accept the Bible as Gods word—infallible for any age. The problem in our secular culture and specifically the church is that many Christians have stopped the critical exercise of Bible reading. This is in part due to modern scholarship, which has relentlessly chipped away at the Bibles trustworthiness. Hence, trust has now shifted to political affiliations and government programs. This is a mistake.

Even government statistics will flesh out the glaring social and economic demise we have suffered in America over the last fifty years.  Our nation formally separated itself from the Christian worldview in 1962-(63). Since then, the American church and our culture have fallen off a cliff.. This a cause and effect relationship. In the end, we cannot let our political affiliations lead our actions. Instead, we need to face up to the fact that the Bible should be the number one influence in all our actions, political and otherwise. Don’t let it be the other way around.

This article is the opinion of its author and does not necessarily represent the opinion of Anomalous Media LLC,, the staff or other contributors.

Homophobic Contradictions: The Government, Darwin And Jesus



A T-shirt slogan that caught my attention last week, “Jesus is not a homophobe” so intrigued me I googled the word homophobe and according to internet lore it was coined in the sixties by George Weinberg, a Gay activist and psychologist who defined it as an irrational fear of homosexuals, a contagion of sorts. Boy, how things have changed. I don’t fear catching the lifestyle, but wrath from the LGBT agenda, now that’s another story.

The word Homophobe has since evolved from it’s clinical definition to the role of a de-humanizing slang-shooting weapon when referring to people of faith; particularly Christians by those in the Lesbian Gay Bisexual Transgender (LGBT) community, and now recently the Obama administration has joined in on the assault. Is it not always the case that the folks most involved in helping those who are hurting often seem to get the brunt end of the stick ?

So exactly what should governments role be in the matter ? Let me borrow a phrase from Jay Warner Wallace at Please Convince me. Should the government permit Gay marriage ? Should they even go further and promote it ? Or simply prohibit it ? Those are all questions for all of us to figure out, but each one of those questions have consequences. I think we can figure them out right out of the gate.

I see a contradiction in our government supporting the LGBT community and Gay marriage while holding fast philosophically to Darwinian Evolution. A belief in Darwinism is a belief against same sex marriage, and the Gay community–no way around it. Remember The United States government made a philosophical commitment to Darwinian Evolution starting in 1962-(63) when they essentially threw out school prayer and the Bible, thus Creationism as a popular view of our origins began its steep decent. So no surprise we are discussing this.

Let’s think about science for a moment. The very definition of Darwinian Evolution concerning humanity essentially says; mankind evolved from a combination of genetic drift, mutation, and natural selection in such a way so that the survival of the fittest is afforded the right of reproduction. All those in the animal kingdom failing to reproduce the right genes will disappear into extinction. Not a pleasant thought.

So hear this clearly: according to Natural Selection, the major stanchion of Darwinian evolution; is also the damming component that makes support for same sex relationships as a continuing advancement to civil society,  biologically futile. Bottom-line is that same sex couples can not reproduce and thus have no future from a purely Darwinian evolutionary perspective. The Obama administrations support for same-sex relationships is purely political and nothing else.

If your in the LGBT community this is bad news— according to Darwin extinction is the Gay communities destiny; and in the interim they are being played like chess pieces by the Obama political machine. To say it another way–your’e being punk’d.  Yet, the very people you despise–Christians, have been telling you the truth–that Gay and Lesbian behavior is just that–behavior that can and should be changed not according to me, but according to the Creator of the Universe.

Jesus promoted a heterosexual lifestyle. The Bible is chock full of both warnings against this behavior and many others as well. However it is also filled with encouragement, and a way out of the same-sex bondage. Please hear me–there is a way out! Our current government, and Darwinism are not filled with anything but tyranny, strife, and extinction if you take them seriously—I don’t for most of it, but the inability to reproduce from same-sex couples is a fact as well as the Biblical immorality of it. Please think through your decision making and turn from the Gay life style.

Finally, as I think back to the slogan, “Jesus is not a homophobe” I do agree that he was not, and no one who follows Jesus should be either. I can’t say I have been perfect in this. I certainly have my list of sins I have wrestled with, but if I want to follow Jesus’ example then I need to tell the truth even if it is not popular. No, Jesus is not a homophobe  he is a straight talking savior.  Promoting marriage between a man and a women makes biological and ethical sense, don’t you agree ?








Chasing Moses: How The President’s War on Marriage May Dampen His Re-Election Chances.

Is Pharaoh's rainbow about to fade...?

Marriage between a man and a women, once a joyous occasion with no cultural back-lash other then a few of your old buddies (man’s perspective) teasing you about being hen pecked may now be in danger of becoming a cultural litmus test before the “I do”. The politically charged debate is now in the cross-hairs of the ever-ready Obama war machine.

President Obama, has managed a War on Guns, a War on Women, a War on Big oil, a War on Wall St., and amazingly a War on Terror; tapping out the number one villain in the world Osama Bin Laden. Only Pharaoh could boast so much—until one day he met a man called Moses who took him on a humbling swimming lesson in the Red sea. This War on Marriage may just be the stretch run gambit the president regrets later in life.

We must ask ourselves, does President Obama, like his historical, and egotistical Egyptian predecessor, have the interests of the people at heart ? Does this president agree with the interests of those involved in the Gay and Lesbian persuasion as he “evolves” on the issue, or are they being used as political pawns to be discarded after the election is over ? Here is a preview of what I think the presidents War on Marriage playbook might look like based on what I have seen so far.

First off, our president is not without help. His Hollywood and Big Media troubadours continue to create a narrative that points to a Boogieman—that would be you an me. Mothers, fathers, parents who believe deeply in their conviction that marriage is a sacred vow since time immemorial between a man and a women–it’s never been any different.

However, the President’s chief henchmen, Eric Holder is smart enough to know that time does not make an argument, after-all slavery had gone on for a long time, and so the equivocation of slavery and same sex marriage is a fairly easy sell—but a flawed one. False comparisons with ethnicity and behavior will be their narrative.

Secondly, the administration could play the racist segregation theme as well; that mothers and fathers, parents that want to uphold traditional marriage are one and the same with those bigots who were against blacks and whites marrying one another long ago. We hear these straw man arguments already, and I find those kind of comments truly offensive.

Considering that both President Obama, and Attorney General Holder are both black men who have experienced racism in their lives, yet overcame such discrimination with grit and determination, I suspect their words may resonate particularly well with those who are still struggling in life be it financially or otherwise.

Thirdly, are the issues of benefits. It would seem unfair to deny health care and certain tax benefits to a couple in love. After-all, does it seem fair to deny a sick person health care ? Considering the Obama-Care is now in the hands of the Supreme Court, I expect the president to maneuver and associate the same sex marriage debate as part and parcel of the controversial health care legislation.

If he can successfully tie that narrative in, he will pressure the Supreme’s who are no different then you and me in their human desire to be loved and respected. The strategy is simple: obfuscate the issue of same-sex marriage with healthcare enough, ultimately so you can’t have one without the other.

Finally, so what are people who believe marriage is between a man and a women to do ? Considering the above strategies in some form or another will intensify, I think the following three steps should be on every conservatives mind in some form or another.

Number one, stay on subject—marriage. This is what the debate is about, nothing else. Not healthcare, not slavery, not racial intermarriage, not even people who claim their in love. Its about an institution that has the biological advantage of having a mom and a dad for children to learn from each parent with their unique gender advantages.

Gays and Lesbians have the right to do as they please, but they do not have the right to redefine marriage for all of us. Having no children is not an argument against traditional marriage any more then it is an argument for same sex marriage. It’s about upholding values that sustain civility for society.

Number two, marriage is a biological must for the human race to progress into a civil and technologically advanced society—it is more then just survival of the human race. Without it, I doubt seriously I would be here writing this piece, and frankly there would be few of you who would know how to even read it—let alone on a computer.

We need to be thankful to someone for this grand institution called marriage— I will leave that up to you who that is.

Number three, we need to concern ourselves with those who we disagree with on these major issues. I have had a similar conversation with some in the gay community. I care for their survival, their health, their prosperity—and as a Christian their ultimate welfare. I must admit I wasn’t always this way. Show you care, engage people you differ with in dialogue—have conversations that don’t burn bridges—the cause is worthwhile.

In the end, some may think I may be falsely mis-characterizing the president. I have thought about this, and I don’t think so. Reading both his books, (still not finished) watching him for almost four years now, seeing him instructing his Attorney General not to enforce DOMA ( Defense of Marriage Act), I believe he is making a pure political calculation no more no less.

Yet, as personable and likable as he comes off, I believe his vision for America is dangerous and most uniquely disguised as peaceful–a rare trait. For me and my family, I think the president is sailing in sacred waters which may well sink his hope and change chariot.

Special thanks to

The Swindlers: How Four Vain Philosophies Threaten American Liberty.

Jack-ass polices are getting tiresome

“The ‘Art of War’ is painted with a Philosophers   pen.”-Unknown

This is a brief study of the religious, and philosophical weapons that Post-modern Democrats, are using against the chief cornerstone of liberty—the Christian worldview. Their goal is simple—marginalize Christianity, and thus liberty, and replace our great heritage with a forgery—Secular Humanism. My purpose is to point out the philosophical  weapons that Progressive/Post-modern-Democrats are using in our culture, and encourage conservatives to engage our fellow Americans with a reasoned argument.

Please note: the terms Progressive, Post-modern, and Humanism are used somewhat interchangeably. Although there are differences in their meaning, their arguments against conservatives are similar. My goal is also to reach out to both Independents, and Democrats to disengage from the Democrat party rhetoric—which is nothing more then a swindler’s list of false slogans. I know this to be true because I use to be one of them. I have since become an Independent and staunch Christian conservative.

I want to make a brief distinction between the traditional Blue-dog Democrats, and the Progressives/Post-moderns. Blue-dog Democrats believed in the same values as our Founders did—that our liberties come from God, and not too much government intervention. This is not what the Progressive/Post-modern-Democrat believes today—they are hostile to this concept. I point this out because  both my Father and Grandfather were hard working Blue-dogs. Our enemy here is not the people—it’s their vain ideologies.

Sadly, many of the traditional working-class Blue-dogs, still to this day, are not aware of the skullduggery committed in the hijacking of their party. Therefore, because of their innocent oblivion   it concerns me that president Barack Obama may be re-elected. If the Democrat party wins back the House—the Founding Fathers doomsday prophecy of America falling under a tyrannical government could well be fulfilled. Remember, half the battle in any fight is knowing your opponent, the other half is knowing their strategy.  Our opponents are the Progressive Democrats, the enemy is their ideas–So lets get busy.


The four weapons of the Post-modern-Progressive Democrat–a brief history.

It was Alexis de Tocqueville who said, “The Americans who combine the notions of religion and liberty so intimately in their minds that it is impossible to make them conceive of one without the other.” Sadly this statement by the French philosopher is no longer true. The religion he was referring to was Christianity.

50 years ago in 1962-(63), Christianity—the chief cornerstone of American Exceptionalism, and vanguard of liberty was removed from public education. It’s replacement was a deceptive religion, a philosophy of supposed moral neutrality called Secular Humanism. Born from the words of the Dragon of Eden, and proffered during the Enlightenment period, this was the religion of man as the center of all things—a breeding ground for government largess—and that was the plan. This would be the primary weapon for Progressive Democrats in which all vanity would build upon.

To further popularize Humanism—the new vanguard of our republic, three vain philosophies: Naturalism, Moral Relativism, and Religious Pluralism would form a rather unholy, but complementary alliance with Secularism in the pilfering of American values. This would not only challenge the Biblical worldview, but Natural law, and The Correspondence theory of truth, and indeed it was successful. In spite of all the circular reasoning, and contradictions these vain ideologies brought forth—America seemed bewitched by these charming tales.

Traditionally it was always understood that true propositions corresponded to reality—to which the Biblical worldview exclusively fit. The Post-modern rejection of Natural law, and Aristotelian logic sent a shock-wave through the fabric of our culture; setting us back academically, and socially from prior years with some ugly metrics such as: lower SAT scores, an increase in crime, personal debt, teen-pregnancies, divorce, and a host of other moral calamities. Here are some disturbing graphs.

Not dissuaded by the moral and academic decline, the Progressive-Democrat swindle continued. The strategy was simple: marginalize the Biblical worldview in all facets of American culture, so that in time our nation would cycle through a new generation of like-minded professional Progressive-Humanists. Influential positions such as: teachers, professors, media moguls, judges, even theologians, and of course politicians, would capitulate to this atheistic way of thinking. Big government would be the “God” of their lives.

This cultural confusion that we are currently witnessing is somewhat reminiscent of the Marxist-Leninist Communist takeover in Russian 1917. Aside from whipping up the working class, and union infiltration, another similarity was being played out at our universities since the early 20th century,  the theory of Naturalism.  The belief that man came from natural organic evolution, as opposed to super-natural means. This would be the second weapon in the Progressive-Democrat playbook, borrowing from the Humanist playbook.

The intellectual offspring of Naturalism was Evolution. The theory goes as follows; that life evolved from the simple to the complex via Natural Selection, Mutation, and Genetic-Drift. Personally, I think Darwin should take a back seat in the classroom. Achieving life from non-life has never been witnessed. The theory seems contradictory on it’s face— something from nothing—simple to complex…considering a greater agency would be needed, and where are the fossils of these transitional forms ?

Weapon number three is a simple deduction–if man was not created, then definitions of right and wrong are not absolute. In fact they were relative to the person, or culture. This is called Moral Relativism: a belief that universal truth, in a absolute objective way does not exist. Think about that for a moment…if truth is just a preference, like ice-cream flavors, then for certain, Moral Relativists would find the Christian witness of Jesus only, an a aggressive and false belief. Moral Relativism in summation, is self-refuting.

However, considering America has become a great melting pot of varied worldviews and religions, thanks to the graciousness of our Christian heritage, Secular Humanist’s could not afford to simply force people to drop their worldviews. They did something much more ingenious. The fourth weapon deployed would be philosophy of Religious Pluralism.

This charming sophistry would create the false impression that all religions are equally valid, hence true in the classic meaning,  irrespective of their contradictory truth claims. This is also a classic Post-modern-Democrat slogan as well. An easy example to understand this if I may. Imagine you are trying to find the capital of our nation, Washington, D.C., and you ask for directions, and you hear the following… “it doesn’t matter what highway you take, they are all equally valid!” Folks it doesn’t get much sillier then this.

Finally, these four philosophical weapons have effectively obfuscated our cultural values of thrift, hard work, and the belief in universal truth;  and more then anything—hope. Perhaps a word of wisdom from Aristotle would be apropos. In book 12 of Meta-Physics he says, “ That there must be an immortal, unchanging being, ultimately responsible for all the wholeness and orderliness in the sensible world, and we are able to discover a good deal about this being.”  For a man who lived a few centuries before Christ, he was able to see the footprint of God through creation and logic.

Folks our worldviews matter. Our moral positions either add to civility or subtract from it. Some worldviews do not make sense in the world we live in. Think it through and vote sensibly.

A special thanks and credits to the folks at Stand to Reason and Answers in Genesis of which I have learned a great deal. I encourage any person that is truly interested in engaging our confused culture with a rational and winning argument to review their web-sites.


Calling on Optimus Prime: An Independent’s plea

If there was ever a time for a Super hero in American Politics, it is now.

Rick PerryIt’s prime time for Governor Rick Perry of Texas to announce his candidacy. Gov. Perry, a real transformer of sorts, is the only potential candidate who has the heavy metal needed to take on the socialist agenda of President Obama and his progressive Democrats who as a party, are becoming increasingly hostile to the notion of free markets, religious freedom, and free speech. Governor Perry has several distinguishing factors working for him that will make him the GOP front runner, should he choose to enter the race.

Perry’s Texas is truly a lone star in a nation of dimly lit economies. For the last 4 years, Texas has led America in new job growth. Most recently, the state of Texas was cited as having created approximately 43% of the net new jobs in the United States. Couple this with being the nation’s number one exporter for the last 7 years, and you have to say Governor Perry’s leadership is extraordinary. If voting with your feet were a barometer of approval, then Perry has a double digit lead over President Obama already, as thousands of new residents are swarming into Texas everyday, adding to an already robust tax base.

Compared to the massive job losses all around the country produced by the Keynesian nonsense that President Obama and his party have been pushing, Governor Perry has a proven record of success that tops all the GOP hopefuls, and certainly better then the current occupant on 1600 Pennsylvania, Avenue.

Rick Perry is no skinny on personality. A tall, attractive man, with a get ‘er done attitude, he has a creative governing style and rock steady temperament when in battle. One of his real advantages is that he knows how the other side of the isle thinks. Yes, Rick Perry was a one time Democrat, which I understand personally, as I left the Democrat party as well. I believe the experience is an advantage. Familiarity in understanding the ideological differences can help to avoid grid-lock and encourage bi-partisan support, at least in areas that need immediate attention like the economy.

A believer in States rights, Perry sees major encroachment from the federal government as a national problem. In the same light being on the border with Mexico, The Governor understands the issues with immigration more then anyone else, and believes in a, “boots on the ground” policy, combined with hi-tech surveillance. Couple this with being a strong ally for Israel, and a supporter of traditional marriage Governor Perry is in the main stream, despite what the deceptive troubadours of the modern snarky media might tell you.

Governor Perry is an unapologetic conservative, he see’s The Constitution as it is was intended; a glorious document that was never intended to be separated from the Christian principals that inspired it. It’s through this clear vision that our great institutions; American jurisprudence, our educational system and our economy have shined with the brightest stars. Unfortunately the democrat leadership has never recovered after the Clinton years, and instead has tried to unmoor America from her anchor of Judeo/Christian principals. Whether you agree with that progressive gambit or not, one thing is clear, our nation has been negatively affected in every one of these uniquely American institutions. Its time to revisit what made us great and Governor Perry seems to understand this.

Finally, capturing The White House will be a formidable challenge which takes me back to the movie Transformers 3. Where the hero Optimus Prime, and his Autobots take on the evil Megatron and his gang of aptly named Deceptacons. In a similar vein, even with a capitulating economy, getting a fair shake with a deceptive media will be a challenge to get Governor Perry’s fiscal common sense message out. This writer knows all too well how the poverty of pessimism which the Left will use against Perry and the American people, can often interfere with clear thinking. In the end, this election is going to be a titanic struggle of what I truly believe is America’s last chance. Governor Rick Perry is a proven success, and should be considered our best hope for The Presidency of the United States.