Stupidity personified..

According to Webster: stu·pid·i·ty, The quality or condition of being stupid.

According to Webster: per·son·i·fied, (in context) To be the embodiment or perfect example of…

According to numerous independent “Watch Dog” websites “Barack Obama” is accredited with issuing; “The Most Ignorant Statement ever made by a U.S. President.”

According to, ( among many others, on March 15, 2012, Obama said;

“Nobody made these guys go to war. They had to have known and accepted the risks. Now they whine about bearing the costs of their choice?”

Can you believe it, ..and “secularists” still look us straight in the eyes and claim that there is no God…

..when everyone with a lick of common sense knows that if it wasn’t for God, ..a benevolent God, ..fools and little children wouldn’t exist.

I served in the United States Army from March 19th, 1964 to March 19th. 1966. During my time in the military, I served a tour of duty in Vietnam. I am a Purple Heart recipient and I take great exception to anyone that would make a statement to specify that nobody makes soldiers go to war, ..especially the president of the United States, ..the “Commander in Chief of all America’s Armed Forces.


 “A” Company – Weapons squad,

2nd. Bat. 2nd. Bde, 1st. Infantry Division,

South Vietnam, 1965

In my opinion, not only does Barack Obama not deserve to be the President of the United States and the Commander in Chief of America’s Armed Forces, Barack Obama does not deserve to live in America among Americans.

Accordingly, although I have said it before and even shouted it from the rooftops more times than I can count, I reiterate…

If you are a man or a woman who has served in any branch of the United States Armed Forces, or if you are a man or a woman who is acquainted with a man or a woman that has served in the United States Armed Forces and you cast your vote on November 6, 2012 for Barack Obama, don’t deserve to live in America either. 


Editorial: I did not vote for (Barack Obama) because “in my opinion” he was not properly “vetted,” i.e., (scrutinized) by the News Media, ..his campaign, ..or any other source!

I am an “Old School” common sense “conservative” who appreciates and values my constitutionally guaranteed right to vote.

According to Webster: scru·ti·nized, To examine or observe with great care; inspect critically.

There are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of people living in America today who do not belong here. Americans used to label these people, “illegal aliens,” by virtue of the fact that they entered the United States without respecting our laws and proper protocol.

Barack Obama, to my knowledge has not once in the 3 plus years he has been the President of the United States even hinted at suggesting restricting entitlements, to include health services to any individual in this country illegally. Yet the man has the gall to suggest that the men and women in America’s armed forces, by virtue of the fact, “at least in his mind,” that because the men and women serving in the Armed Forces, serve “voluntarily,” ..therefore, ..these men and women who “voluntarily” put themselves in harms way in active combat theaters in the Middle East or anywhere else on the planet, ..should “via” their patriotism, responsible for their own injury and care.

Hypothetical Question: If you were the “captain” of a team participating in a competition, ..any competition? Knowing what you now know about Barack Obama, many of you would choose him to be on your team?

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…


According to Webster: spend·thrift, One who spends money recklessly or wastefully.

In my offering yesterday, I wrote a piece entitled “Stupid Questions” to reveal the connection between the Obama administration and the “Occupy Wall Street protesters.”

Today, I like to do a follow-up to further expose why Barack Obama and his Chicago thugs, have done and are doing with our tax dollars.

New York Times, business day,

“Energy and Environment”

published November 11, 2011;

WASHINGTON— Halfway between Los Angeles and San Francisco, on a former cattle ranch and gypsum mine, NRG Energy is building an engineering marvel: a compound of nearly a million solar panels that will produce enough electricity to power about 100,000 homes.

The project is also a marvel in another, less obvious way: Taxpayers and ratepayers are providing subsidies worth almost as much as the entire $1.6 billion cost of the project. Similar subsidy packages have been given to 15 other solar- and wind-power electric plants since 2009.

The government support — which includes loan guarantees, cash grants and contracts that require electric customers to pay higher rates — largely eliminated the risk to the private investors and almost guaranteed them large profits for years to come. The beneficiaries include financial firms like Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, conglomerates like General Electric, utilities like Exelon and NRG — even Google.

(Sidebar) Due to the enormity and celebrity of “General Electric” and “Google,” I don’t believe that I need to define their “cog” in the wheel of American commerce. However, when it comes to “Exelon” and “NRG,” I believe that a description of who they are would, ..or at least “should” be of interest to the “rank-and-file,” we, “We the People,” who are providing the wherewithal, ..”our tax dollars,” to “guarantee” the success of these enterprises, (privately owned, profit-making, commercial enterprises.)

Exelon Company Description..

Exelon Corporation (NYSE: EXC) is an American electric utilities company headquartered in the Chase Tower in the Chicago Loop area of Chicago.

Question: Isn’t Barack Obama from Chicago?

It was created in October 2000 by the merger of PECO Energy Company and Unicom, of Philadelphia and Chicago respectively. Unicom owned Commonwealth Edison. Exelon has 5.4 million electricity customers and serves 485,000 natural gas customers in the Philadelphia suburbs. In October 2009, Exelon had full or majority ownership of 17 nuclear reactors in 10 nuclear power plants.


On June 30, 2005 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved the merger of Exelon and Public Service Enterprise Group Inc., a New Jersey utility. Under this merger, Exelon would have become the largest utility in the United States. The two companies later broke off the agreement due to pressure put on the N.J. Board of Public Utilities by public interest groups, including New Jersey Citizen Action. The merger sat pending in front of the NJBPU for nineteen months before Exelon concluded that they were fighting a losing battle. On April 28, 2011 Exelon announced merger with Constellation Energy for $7.9 billion and the combined company will own more than 34 gigawatts of power generation (55 percent nuclear, 24 percent natural gas, 8 percent renewable including hydro, 7 percent oil and 6 percent coal). (source Wikipedia)

NRG Company Description..

NRG Energy, Inc. (NYSE: NRG) is an American energy company headquartered in West Windsor Township, New Jersey, near Princeton.

Electrical Power Generation Operations..

NRG’s power plants provide more than 25,000 megawatts of generation capacity, enough to supply more than 20 million homes.

In late 2005, NRG Energy bought Texas-based Texas Genco from a group of private equity firms for roughly $5.9 billion.

Today, NRG has 29 traditional gas, coal, and oil power plants located across 11 states, including 9 in Texas. Additionally, NRG has 6 operational “clean energy” facilities, including wind farms, a solar farm, and the South Texas Nuclear Plant (STNP)

NRG also owns or has an interest in generating facilities in Europe, Australia, and Latin America. NRG’s operations include baseload, intermediate, peaking, and cogeneration facilities, as well as thermal energy production and energy resource recovery facilities.

Solar & Wind Power..

Beginning in 2009, NRG began a major initiative to become the leading green energy producer in the United States and started investing very large amounts of money in clean energy projects. They include onshore and offshore wind power, solar thermal energy, photovoltaic, and distributed solar power facilities, and repowering of some of their traditional coal plants with biomass.

Question: Wasn’t Barack Obama inaugurated in 2009?

Retail Power Operations..

NRG’s Retail Power services provide electricity services to more than 2 million homes and businesses, mostly in Arizona and the Northeast.

In May 2009, NRG entered this market by acquiring the retail operations of Reliant Energy. NRG’s retail service serves 1.6 million customers inTexas. The retail operations continue to operate under the Reliant Energy name while the remainder of the former Reliant Energy became RRI Energy.

Following the acquisition of Reliant, NRG extended its retail footprint with the acquisition of Green Mountain Energy in November 2010. In doing so, NRG also became the largest retailer of green power in the nation, providing all of its Green Mountain and many of its Reliant customers with energy derived from 100% renewable resources.

NRG continued the trend of leading in the green power market in 2011 by becoming the largest green power retailer in New York City. The company also signed a two-year agreement beginning in January 2011 to provide 100% renewable energy for the Empire State Building.

Green Energy Initiatives..

In late 2010, NRG made news by launching the first completely private public car charging station network for electric power vehicles. The eVgo network, as it has been branded, was launched.

Nuclear Power Plant..

On June 19, 2006, the STPNOC, a partially owned subsidiary of NRG, filed a letter of intent with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build two 1358-MWe ABWRs at the South Texas Project site. This was the first nuclear plant license application filed in the United States in 29 years.

Reliant Energy naming rights..

Reliant Energy holds the naming rights to the Reliant Park campus in Houston, Texas, home to the Reliant Astrodome, Reliant Stadium, Reliant Arena and Reliant Center. (Source Wikipedia)

(Food for thought)

Dictators are not elected into power, dictators achieve power through conquest…

According to Webster: con·quest, The act or process of conquering.

According to Webster: dic·ta·tor, An absolute ruler.

(Personal experience) in 2011 my electric bill “tripled” in a period of 60 days and although I now physically use less electricity in my home, my electric bill has not gone down and now I understand why.


A great deal of attention has been focused on Solyndra, a start-up that received $528 million in federal loans to develop cutting-edge solar technology before it went bankrupt, but nearly 90 percent of the $16 billion in clean-energy loans guaranteed by the federal government since 2009 went to subsidize these lower-risk power plants, which in many cases were backed by big companies with vast resources.

When the Obama administration and Congress expanded the clean-energy incentives in 2009, a gold-rush mentality took over.


Boys Night Out – circa 1850)

According to Webster: gold rush, (in context) Headlong pursuit of wealth and success: a gold rush on Wall Street.

Continuing… David W. Crane

As NRG’s chief executive, David W. Crane, put it to Wall Street analysts early this year, the government’s “largess”

According to Webster: lar·gess, Liberality in bestowing gifts.


..was a “once-in-a-generation opportunity,” and (we intend to do as much of this business as we can get our hands on.) NRG, along with partners, ultimately secured ($5.2 billion in federal loan guarantees) plus (hundreds of millions in other subsidies) for four large solar projects.

According to Webster: sub·si·dy, Monetary assistance granted by a government to a person or group in support of an enterprise regarded as “being in the public interest.”

Question: Could it be that as the United States Government “does not provide subsidies” for the “General Public,” ..that the “United States Government” holds “no interest” or “no regard for the general public?


“I have never seen anything that I have had to do in my 20 years in the power industry that involved less risk than these projects,” he said in a recent interview. “It is just filling the desert with panels.”

From 2007 to 2010, federal subsidies jumped to $14.7 billion from $5.1 billion, according to a recent study.

Most of the surge came from the economic stimulus bill, which was passed in 2009 and financed an Energy Department loan guarantee program and a separate Treasury Department grant program that were promoted as important in creating green jobs.

States like California sweetened the pot by offering their own tax breaks and by approving long-term power-purchase contracts that, while promoting clean energy, will also require ratepayers to pay billions of dollars more for electricity for as long as two decades. The federal loan guarantee program expired on Sept. 30. The Treasury grant program is scheduled to expire at the end of December, although the energy industry is lobbying Congress to extend it. But other subsidies will remain.

The windfall for the industry over the last three years raises questions of whether the Obama administration and state governments went too far in their support of solar and wind power projects, some of which would have been built anyway, according to the companies involved.

Obama administration officials argue that the incentives, which began on a large scale late in the Bush administration but were expanded by the stimulus legislation, make economic and environmental sense.

(Sidebar) What the hell, isn’t his money.

Beyond the short-term increase in construction hiring, they say, the cleaner air and lower carbon emissions will benefit the country for decades.

“Subsidies and government support have been part of many key industries in U.S. history — railroads, oil, gas and coal, aviation,” said Damien LaVera, an Energy Department spokesman.

Damien La Vera

A Case Study..

NRG’s California Valley Solar Ranch project is a case study in the banquet of government subsidies available to the owners of a renewable-energy plant.

California Valley solar Ranch

The first subsidy is for construction. The plant is expected to cost $1.6 billion to build, with key components made by SunPower at factories in California and Asia. In late September, the Energy Department agreed to guarantee a $1.2 billion construction loan, with the Treasury Department lending the money at an exceptionally low interest rate of about 3.5 percent, compared with the 7 percent that executives said they would otherwise have had to pay.

That support alone is worth about $205 million to NRG over the life of the loan, according to an analysis performed for The New York Times by Booz & Company, a strategic consulting firm that regularly performs such studies for private investors.

When construction is complete, NRG is eligible to receive a $430 million check from the Treasury Department — part of a change made in 2009 that allows clean-energy projects to receive “30 percent of their cost as a cash grant” upfront instead of taking other tax breaks gradually over several years.

Californians are also making a big contribution. Under a state law passed to encourage the construction of more solar projects, NRG will not have to pay property taxes to San Luis Obispo County on its solar panels, saving it an estimated $14 million a year.

Assisted by another state law, which mandates that California utilities buy 33 percent of their power from clean-energy sources by 2020, the project’s developers struck lucrative contracts with the local utility, Pacific Gas & Electric, to buy the plant’s power for 25 years.

P.G.& E., and ultimately its electric customers, will pay NRG $150 to $180 a megawatt-hour, according to a person familiar with the project, who asked not to be identified because the price information was confidential. At the time the contract was awarded, that was about 50 percent more than the expected market cost of electricity in California from a newly built gas-powered plant, state officials said.

While neither state regulators nor the companies will divulge all the details, the extra cost to ratepayers amounts to a $462 million subsidy, according to Booz, which calculated the present value of the higher rates over the life of the contracts.

Additional depreciation tax breaks for renewable energy plants could save the company an additional $110 million, according to Christopher Dann, the Booz analyst who examined the project.

The total value of all those subsidies in today’s dollars is about $1.4 billion, leading to an expected rate of return of 25 percent for the project’s equity investors, according to Booz.

Mr. Crane of NRG disputed the Booz estimate, saying that the company’s return on equity was “in the midteens.”

NRG, which initially is investing about $400 million of its own money in the project, (expects to get “all of its equity” back in two to five years,) according to a statement it made in August to Wall Street analysts.

By 2015, NRG expects earnings of at least “$300 million” a year before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization from all of its solar projects combined, making these investments some of the “more lucrative” pieces in its sprawling portfolio, which includes dozens of power plants fueled by coal, natural gas and oil.

NRG is not the only company gobbling up subsidies. At least 10 of the 16 solar or wind electricity generation projects that secured Energy Department loan guarantees intend to also take the Treasury Department grant, and all but two of the projects have long-term agreements to sell almost all of their power, according to a survey of the companies by The Times.

These projects, in almost all cases, benefit from legislation that has been passed in about 30 states that pushes local utility companies to buy a significant share of their power from renewable sources, like solar or wind power. (These mandates often have resulted in contracts with “above-market rates” for the project developers,) and a guarantee of a steady revenue stream.


“It is like building a hotel, where you know in advance you are going to have 100 percent room occupancy for 25 years,” said Kevin Smith, chief executive of SolarReserve.

His Nevada solar project has secured a 25-year power-purchase agreement with the state’s largest utility and a $737 million Energy Department loan guarantee and is on track to receive a $200 million Treasury grant.


Because the purchase mandates can drive up electricity rate significantly, some states, including New Jersey and Colorado, are considering softening the requirements on utilities.

Brookfield Asset Management, a giant Canadian investment firm, will receive so many subsidies for a New Hampshire wind farm that they are worth 46 percent to 80 percent of the $229 million price of the project, when measured in today’s dollars, according to analyses for The Times performed by Booz and two other two industry financial experts. (The wide range reflects a disagreement between the experts on the future price of electricity inNew Hampshire.)

Richard Legault, the chief executive of Brookfield Renewable Power, the division that oversees the Granite Reliable project in New Hampshire, declined to discuss his profit expectations in detail, but said the project might not have happened without government assistance.

“When everything has come together, it is a good investment for Brookfield, it is no doubt,” Mr. Legault said. “We are quite happy with it.”


(Brookfield is also the owner of the small park in Manhattan that is home to the Occupy Wall Street protesters.)

Even companies whose business has little to do with energy or finance, like the Internet giant Google, benefit from the public subsidies. Google has invested in several renewable energy projects, including a giant solar plant in the California desert and a wind farm in Oregon, in part to get federal tax breaks that it can use to offset its profits from Web advertising.

Industry executives and other supporters of the subsidies say that the public money was vital to the projects, in part because financing for renewable energy projects dried up during the recession. They also note that more traditional energy sectors, like oil and natural gas, get heavy subsidies of their own. For example, in the 2010 fiscal year, the oil and gas producers got federal tax breaks of $2.7 billion dollars according to an analysis by the Energy Information Administration.

Statement of fact: That $2.7 billion dollar tax break is out of our pocket, ..the “rank-and-file,” ..the taxpayer.

Question: How much of a break did you get (from anyone) the last time you pulled up to a gas pump?


“These programs just level the playing field for what oil and gas and nuclear industries have enjoyed for the last 50 years,” said Rhone Resch, president of Solar Energy Industries Association. “Do you have to provide more policy support and funding initially? Absolutely. But the result is more energy security, clean energy and domestic jobs.”

Michael E. Webber, associate director of the Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy at the University of Texas, Austin, said (renewable energy subsidies were a worthy investment.)


“It is a form of corporate welfare that is consistent with other social goals like job creation, clean air and boosting a domestic source of energy,” he said.

Overflowing Breaks..

Obama administration officials said the subsidies were intended to help renewable-energy plants that were jumbo-sized or used innovative technology, both potential obstacles to getting private financing. But even proponents of the subsidies say the administration may have gone overboard.

Concerns that the government was being too generous reached all the way to President Obama. In an October 2010 memo prepared for the president, Lawrence H. Summers, then his top economic adviser; Carol M. Browner, then his adviser on energy matters; and Ronald A. Klain, then the vice president’s chief of staff, expressed discomfort with the “double dipping” that was starting to take place. They said investors had little “skin in the game.”



Officials involved in reviewing the loan applications said that Treasury Department officials pressed the Energy Department to respond to these concerns.

Officials at both agencies declined to discuss the anticipated financial returns of the clean-energy projects the federal government has agreed to guarantee, saying the information was confidential.

But Energy Department officials said they had carefully evaluated every project to try to calculate how much money the developers and investors stood to make. “They were rejected, if they looked too rich or too risky,” Mr. LaVera, the Energy Department spokesman said.

In at least one instance — NRG’s Agua Caliente solar project in Yuma County, Ariz. — the Energy Department demanded that the company agree not to apply for a Treasury grant it was legally entitled to receive. The government was concerned the extra subsidy would result in excessive profit, NRG executives confirmed.

In other cases, the agency required that companies use most of the Treasury grants that they would get when construction was complete to pay down part of the government-guaranteed construction loans instead of cashing out the equity investors.

“The private sector really has more skin in the game than the public realizes,” said Andy Katell, a spokesman for GE Energy Financial Services, which like Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and other financial firms has large investments in several of these projects.

But there is no doubt that the deals are lucrative for the companies involved.

Barack Obama with Jeffrey Immelt, GE-CEO

G.E., for example, lobbied Congress in 2009 to help expand the subsidy programs, and it now profits from every aspect of the boom in renewable-power plant construction.

It is also an investor in one solar and one wind project that have secured about $2 billion in federal loan guarantees and expects to collect nearly $1 billion in Treasury grants.

The company has also won hundreds of millions of dollars in contracts to sell its turbines to wind plants built with public subsidies.


Mr. Katell said G.E. and other companies were simply “playing ball” under the rules set by Congress and the Obama administration to promote the industry. “It is good for the country, and good for our company,” he said.

Satya Kumar

Question: Who is Satya Kumar?

The page “Satya Kumar” does not exist. You can ask for it to be created, but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered. (Source Wikipedia)

Satya Kumar ( according to is a senior analyst covering Solar Energy and Semiconductor Capital Equipment stocks at Credit Suisse. Mr. Kumar joined the equity research department of Credit Suisse in 2003. Prior to joining Credit Suisse, Mr. Kumar held different roles in engineering and global product management at Applied Materials between 1997 and 2003. Mr. Kumar has the distinction of being an Institutional Investor Magazine ranked analyst. He ranked third in 2009 and fourth in 2010 for Alternative Energy. He was also awarded runner up in 2010 for Semiconductor Capital Equipment. Mr. Kumar holds a Bachelor of Technology from the Indian Institute of Technology, Chennai, India, a MS degree from Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indianaand an MBA degree from the Haas school of business at University of California, Berkeley, California. (Source,

An observation:  One would think, ..or at least “hope” that an individual giving advice  on ways to spend billions of U.S. Tax dollars would be recognized by Wikipedia.


“But the industry could have done a lot more solar for a lot less price, in terms of subsidy,” he (Kumar) said.

Another observation: A statement which may, ..or may “not” be any more valid than anything, (at least in my opinion) than has come out of Barack Obama’s mouth since his announcement that he was declaring his candidacy to seek the office which he now enjoys.

According to Webster: en·joy, To have a pleasurable time.

What’s more fun than spending Money

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…

Stupid Questions..

According to Webster: “stu·pid,” Slow to learn or understand; obtuse.


..and of course, there’s Mrs. Gump: (Forrest Gump’s mother) a charming and clever character played by Sally Fields in the 1994 Paramount Pictures box office success who explicated; “Stupid is, stupid does.”



However, in pursuit of providing a definition that properly defines my purpose here for today, I would like to turn to my “Haydock Elementary school,” (second grade teacher,) Mrs. Deena Womack, who constantly reminded her class that the only “Stupid Question” was a Question that wasn’t asked.”

I liked Mrs. Womack a lot…

Accordingly, in remembrance of Mrs. Womack, I query: Who owns the property, legally and popularly known as; “Zuccotti Park” in New York City?

If your response is New York City, ..or any subsidiary of New York City,’d be wrong, ..or “incorrect,” ..for those of you who attended Harvard or Yale.

Correct answer: “Brookfield Asset Management Inc.

Question: Who is Brookfield Asset Management Inc?

If your response is; “Brookfield is a global alternative asset manager with approximately $150 billion in assets under management. We have over a 100-year history of owning and operating assets with a focus on property, renewable power, infrastructure and private equity.

Brookfield’s Corporate Headquarters are located at;

Brookfield Place, Suite300
181 Bay Street
Toronto,ONM5J 2T3

With corporate offices in;

London, United Kingdom

Sydney, Australia

Hong Kong

New York City, USA

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Dubai, UAE

..and why is this important to anyone in America?

Because it’s right at the top of the list of my “stupid questions” that no one is asking.

Like this Stupid Question: Did the Obama administration guarantee $150 million loan, (with American tax dollars) to Brookfield Asset Management Inc.?

According to the (lonely

“Company that Owns Zuccotti Park Received Green Loan Guarantee from Obama Admin…

October 9, 2011

By Lonely Conservative; 5 comments..

It’s been a bit of a puzzle as to why the owners of Zuccotti Park that the Occupy Wall Street gang has taken over have allowed them to stay. They’re angering residents and pretty much stinking up the place. The owners have mentioned that the park is normally cleaned every night, but they have not been able to clean it in three weeks. Sanitation was “becoming an issue” a few days ago. Lord knows what it’s like now, I hear it’s pretty bad.

Could the fact that the parent company of “Brookfield Properties” received a “green energy loan guarantee” from the Obama administration for a New Hampshire wind farm have anything to do with it?

In the name of “green energy,” the Obama administration is using taxpayer money to subsidize a New Hampshire wind farm that is a subsidiary of a hugely profitable company.

New Hampshire’s largest wind farm, the Granite Reliable Power project under construction in Coos County, is jointly owned by BAIF Granite Holdings, LLC and Freshnet Wind Energy, LLC. BAIF owns 75 percent of Granite Reliable. BAIF Granite Holdings was created earlier this year by “Brookfield Renewable Power,” which is a subsidiary of “Brookfield Asset Management” of New York. ( interesting, ..or no?)

That company, which runs clean energy operations around the world, has deep pockets. It reported net income of $454 million in 2009 and $3.2 billion in 2010.

Brookfield Renewable Power financed the creation of BAIF Granite Holdings from its Brookfield America’s Infrastructure fund, which was reported in February to have $2.7 billion in assets. With that kind of backing, “it is curious” that the U.S. Department of Energy announced it would guarantee up to 80 percent of a $168.9 million loan for the Granite Reliable wind farm project last week.

Isn’t it curious that such a prosperous company would need loan guarantees from a bankrupt government? I guess not, when you realize that “Joe Biden’s son”…

(Sidebar) ..for those less informed, (Joe Biden) is the vice President of the United States. a partner in the lobbying firm Brookfield employed.

There’s more to the story. Mayor Michael Bloomberg said it would be up to the property owners to evict the filth from the park. His girlfriend is on the company’s board of directors, so perhaps he could have a word with her?

And that’s not all…

Something stinks, and it isn’t just the unwashed protesters.

Question: So what does Joe Biden’s boss Barack Obama think about the links between the “Occupy Wall Street Protesters,” the Vice President “Joe Biden’s son and Mayor Bloomberg’s live-in girlfriend?

 The short answer..

 More to think about, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…

Questions of the day, March 28..

What is dependency?

According to Webster: de·pend·en·cy, Something dependent or “subordinate.”

According to Webster: sub·or·di·nate, Belonging to a lower or inferior class or rank; secondary.

What is dependency theory?

Dependency theory or dependencia theory is a body of social science theories predicated on the notion that resources flow from a “periphery” of poor and underdeveloped states to a “core” of wealthy states, enriching the latter at the expense of the former. It is a central contention of dependency theory that poor states are impoverished and rich ones enriched by the way poor states are integrated into the “world system.”

The theory arose around 1970 as a “reaction” (in opposition) to “modernization theory,” an earlier theory of development which held that all societies progress through similar stages of development, that today’s underdeveloped areas are thus in a similar situation to that of today’s developed areas at some time in the past, and that therefore the task in helping the underdeveloped areas out of poverty is to accelerate them along this supposed common path of development, by various means such as investment, technology transfers, and closer integration into the world market.

Dependency theory rejected this view, arguing that underdeveloped countries are not merely primitive versions of developed countries, but have unique features and structures of their own; and, importantly, are in the situation of being the weaker members in a world market economy, whereas the developed nations were never in an “analogous” position, …

According to Webster: a·nal·o·gous, Similar or alike in such a way as to permit the drawing of an analogy.


..they never had to exist in relation to a bloc of more powerful and economically advanced countries than themselves. Dependency theorists argued, in opposition to free market economists and modernization theorists, that underdeveloped countries needed to reduce their connectedness with the world market so that they can pursue a path more in keeping with their own needs, less dictated by external pressures.


Being that I actually enjoy raining on other people’s parades when they explicate with their heads up their rectums.

According to Webster: the·o·ry, Systematically organized “knowledge” applicable in a relatively wide variety of circumstances, especially a system of “assumptions,” accepted “principles,” and rules of procedure devised to analyze, “predict,” or otherwise “explain” the nature or behavior of a specified set of “phenomena.”

Talk about a mouth full of gibberish, ..let’s take a moment and take Webster’s definition apart…

According to Webster: knowl·edge, The state or fact of knowing.

According to Webster: as·sump·tion, Something taken for granted or accepted as true without proof.

According to Webster: prin·ci·ple, A basic truth, rule or standard.

According to Webster: pre·dict, To foretell something; prophesy.

According to Webster: ex·plain, To make plain or comprehensible.

According to Webster: phe·nom·e·na, An unusual, significant, or unaccountable fact or occurrence.

Question: Excuse me, ..but what the hell is an “unaccountable fact?”

According to Webster: un·ac·count·a·ble, Impossible to account for; inexplicable.

According to Webster: fact, The quality of being real or actual.

According to Webster: con·tra·dic·tion, Inconsistency; discrepancy.

Damn, ..if we can’t trust (depend on) “Merriam-Webster” with the meanings of the words in the English language, ..there is no way in hell that were getting a fair shake from our elected officials, i.e., “politicians.”



The premises of dependency theory are that:

1.) Poor nations provide natural resources, cheap labor, a destination for obsolete technology, and markets for developed nations, without which the latter could not have the standard of living they enjoy.

2.)  Wealthy nations actively perpetuate a state of dependence by various means. This influence may be multifaceted, involving economics, media control, politics, banking and finance, education, culture, sport, and  all aspects of human resource development (including recruitment and training of workers).

3.) Wealthy nations actively counter attempts by dependent nations to resist their influences by means of economic sanctions and/or the use of military force.

Dependency theory states that the poverty of the countries in the periphery is not because they are not integrated into the world system, or not ‘fully’ integrated as is often argued by free market economists, but because of how they are integrated into the system.


Dependency theory originates with two papers published in 1949 – one by Hans Singer, one by Raúl Prebisch – in which the authors observe that the terms of trade for underdeveloped countries relative to the developed countries had deteriorated over time: the underdeveloped countries were able to purchase fewer and fewer manufactured goods from the developed countries in exchange for a given quantity of their raw materials exports.

This idea is known as the Singer-Prebisch thesis. Prebisch, an Argentine economist at the United Nations Commission for Latin America (UNCLA), went on to conclude that the underdeveloped nations must employ some degree of protectionism in trade if they were to enter a self-sustaining development path. He argued that Import-substitution industrialisation (ISI), not a trade-and-export orientation, was the best strategy for underdeveloped countries.

The theory was developed from a Marxian perspective by Paul A. Baran in 1957 with the publication of his The Political Economy of Growth. Dependency theory shares many points with earlier, Marxist, theories of imperialism by Rosa Luxemburg and V.I. Lenin, and has attracted continued interest from Marxists. Matias Vernengo, a University of Utah economist, identifies two main streams in dependency theory: the Latin American Structuralist, typified by the work of Prebisch, Celso Furtado and Anibal Pinto at the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLAC, or, in Spanish, CEPAL); and the American Marxist, developed by Paul A. Baran, Paul Sweezy, and Andre Gunder Frank.

The theory was popular in the 1960s and 1970s as a criticism of modernization theory (the “stages” hypothesis mentioned above), which was falling increasingly out of favor because of continued widespread poverty in much of the world.

Many dependency theorists advocate social revolution as an effective means to the reduction of economic disparities in the world system.

Poor nations are at a disadvantage in their market interactions with wealthy nations. There are several aspects to this. One is that a high proportion of the developing nations’ economic activity consists of exports and imports from the developed nations—in many cases with only one or a few developed nations. By contrast, only a small proportion of the economic activity of the developed nations consists of trade with the developing nations; a developed nation’s trade consists mostly of internal trade and trade with other developed nations. This asymmetry puts a poor nation in a weak bargaining position vis a vis a developed nation. There are also historical aspects: the poor nations are almost all former colonies of the developed nations; their economies were built to serve the developed nations in a twofold capacity: as sources of cheap raw materials and as highly populous markets for the absorption of the developed nations’ manufactured output.

According to Vernengo, the Latin American Structuralist and the American Marxist schools had significant differences but agreed on some basic points:

Both groups would agree that at the core of the dependency relation between center and periphery lays the inability of the periphery to develop an autonomous and dynamic process of technological innovation. Technology – the Promethean force unleashed by the Industrial Revolution – is at the center of stage. The Center countries controlled the technology and the systems for generating technology. Foreign capital could not solve the problem, since it only led to limited transmission of technology, but not the process of innovation itself.

Baran and others frequently spoke of the international division of labour – skilled workers in the center, unskilled in the periphery – when discussing key features of dependency.

Baran placed surplus extraction and capital accumulation at the center of his analysis. Development depends on a population’s producing more than it needs for bare subsistence (a surplus). Further, some of that surplus must be used for capital accumulation – the purchase of new means of production – if development is to occur; spending the surplus on things like luxury consumption does not produce development. Baran noted two predominant kinds of economic activity in poor countries. In the older of the two, plantation agriculture, which originated in colonial times, most of the surplus goes to the landowners, who use it to emulate the consumption patterns of wealthy people in the developed world; much of it thus goes to purchase foreign produced luxury items—automobiles, clothes, etc. — and little is accumulated for investing in development. The more recent kind of economic activity in the periphery is industry—but of a particular kind. It is usually carried out by foreigners, although often in conjunction with local interests. It is often under special tariff protection or other government concessions. The surplus from this production mostly goes to two places: part of it is sent back to the foreign shareholders as profit; the other part is spent on conspicuous consumption in a similar fashion to that of the plantation aristocracy. Again, little is used for development. Baran thought that political revolution was necessary to break this pattern.

In the 1960s, members of the Latin American Structuralist school argued that there is more latitude in the system than the Marxists believed. They argued that it allows for partial development or “dependent development” – development, but still under the control of outside decision makers. They cited the partly successful attempts at industrialisation in Latin America around that time (Argentina,Brazil,Mexico) as evidence for this hypothesis. They were led to the position that dependency is not a relation between commodity exporters and industrialised countries, but between countries with different degrees of industrialisation. In their approach there is a distinction made between the economic and political spheres: economically, one may be developed or underdeveloped; but even if (somewhat) economically developed, one may be politically autonomous or dependent. More recently, Guillermo O’Donnell has argued that constraints placed on development by neoliberalism were lifted by “the military coups in Latin America that came to promote development in authoritarian guise” (Vernengo’s words, summarising O’Donnell, 1982).

The importance of technology, multinational corporations, and State promotion of technology were emphasised by the Latin American Structuralists.

Fajnzybler has made a distinction between systemic or authentic competitiveness, which is the ability to compete based on higher productivity, and spurious competitiveness, which is based on low wages.

(Sidebar) ..i.e., Walmart.

The third-world debt crisis of the 1980s and continued stagnation in Africa and Latin America in the 1990s caused some doubt as to the feasibility or desirability of “dependent development”.

Vernengo (2004) has suggested that the “sine qua non” of the dependency relationship is not the difference in technological sophistication, as traditional dependency theorists believe, but rather the difference in financial strength between core and peripheral countries – particularly the inability of peripheral countries to borrow in their own currency. He believes that the hegemonic position of the United States is very strong because of the importance of its financial markets and because it controls the international reserve currency – “the U.S. dollar.” He believes that the end of the Bretton Woods international financial agreements in the early 1970s considerably strengthened the United States’ position because it removed some constraints on their financial actions.

“Standard” dependency theory differs from Marxism, in arguing against internationalism and any hope of progress in less developed nations towards industrialization and a liberating revolution. Theotonio dos Santos described a ‘new dependency’, which focused on both the internal and external relations of less-developed countries of the periphery, derived from a Marxian analysis. Former Brazilian President Fernando Henrique Cardoso wrote extensively on dependency theory while in political exile, arguing that it was an approach to studying the economic disparities between the centre and periphery.

The American sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein refined the Marxist aspect of the theory, and called it the “World-system.” It has also been associated with Galtung’s Structural Theory of Imperialism.

“The inflow of capital from the developed countries is the prerequisite for the establishment of economic dependence. This inflow takes various forms: loans granted on onerous terms; investments that place a given country in the power of the investors; almost total technological subordination of the dependent country to the developed country; control of a country’s foreign trade by the big international monopolies; and in extreme cases, the use of force as an economic weapon in support of the other forms of exploitation.”

Che Guevara, Marxist revolutionary..

With the economic growth of India and some East Asian economies, dependency theory has lost some of its former influence. It is more widely accepted in disciplines such as history and anthropology. It also underpins some “NGO” campaigns, such as “Make Poverty History” and the “fair trade” movement.

Origins and predecessors..

Dependency theory can trace its intellectual heritage to the long-running “free trade debate,” specifically various forms of “economic nationalism” and the school of “mercantilism.”

An early statement of dependency theory is found in Henry Clay, architect of the “American System,” in an 1832 speech:

“Gentlemen deceive themselves.” It is not free trade that they are recommending to our acceptance. It is, in effect, the British colonial system that we are invited to adopt; and, if their policy prevails, it will lead, substantially, to the recolonization of these States, under the “commercial dominion” of Great Britain.

Henry Clay, “In Defense of the American System, Against the British Colonial System.” 1832, Feb 2, 3, and 6.

Similar sentiments were expressed by German American economist Friedrich List: Had the English left everything to itself, — “Laissez faire, laissez aller,” as the popular economical school recommends, — the German merchants of the “Steelyard” would be still carrying on their trade in London, the Belgians would be still manufacturing cloth for the English, England would have still continued to be the sheep-farm of the Hansards, just as Portugal became the vineyard of England, and has remained so till our days, owing to the stratagem of a cunning diplomatist. Friedrich List. (Source Wikipedia)

Editorial: At this point in time, March 28, 2012, I can with an “unbiased heart” and a “clear conscience” conclude that Barack Obama is without a doubt, unequivocally the most “disastrous action” that the “rank and file” citizenry of the United States has ever taken since the signing of the Declaration of Independence, and further, if the rank-and-file “common sense” citizens of this nation failed to rally and replace Barack Obama with a man, woman, or even a child that understands what it means to be an American, ..the privilege, ..and the honor, ..Americans will no longer need a passport or a plane ticket to visit a socialist Third World nation. Barack Obama, for what it’s worth, “in my opinion,” is less of an American and less of a man than a Middle Eastern terrorist, to include Osama bin Laden. With Osama bin Laden, or with his followers, you understood that “he and they” hate America and why? With Barack Obama, a large number of Americans fail to accept that Barack Obama hates America, so they don’t ask why, ..nor do I, as some mysteries simply are worth the effort to understand. My offering, “Blog” today is about dependency at many levels. Dependency, is a subject that I had to research as I have prided myself for 70 years as being self reliant and personally responsible. A claim, proven by my research that Barack Obama cannot make. Albeit he is miles ahead of me when it comes to knowledge pertaining to dependency. His father, Barack Obama Senior, was an activist in Kenya, the land of his birth. At the time of Barack Obama Senior’s birth,Kenya was under the rule of Great Britain as a colony. In the past few days I have provided a lot of information concerning colonialism and imperialism. Barack Obama’s father was well documented as an anti-colonialist and I personally don’t have a problem with that. Nor do I have a problem with the fact that Barack Obama Senior was part of the program that provided scholarships for deserving young men in Kenya. Nor do I have a problem with the fact that Barack Obama’s mother was a young woman who benefited from the benevolence of a charitable society. Nor do I have a problem with the fact that Barack Obama received scholarships, as I believe strongly in community and providing a helping hand. What I don’t believe in, is providing subsistence…

According to Webster: sub·sis·tence, n. Livelihood. an able-bodied man or woman. America, (at least in my opinion,) I have said many times, America is a Nation formed and founded on the promise of providing freedom, security and an opportunity to (earn) a better life…

(Sidebar) As silly as my next definition might seem, since approximately 30% of the nation identify themselves as progressive liberals, “in my opinion,” it is necessary.

According to Webster: earn, (in context) To gain a position through “hard work” and the “accumulation of experience,” often in the face of difficulties.


Barack Obama has a history, a long history of receiving his subsistence and more, ..much more, from a generous and benevolent nation, a generous, benevolent, “capitalist” nation. (In a Marxist were communist nation, Barack Obama would most likely be shining shoes outside the back entrance of a bus station.) Barack Obama, is a well educated person and he is also a well-traveled person, accordingly, one would find it difficult to believe that Barack Obama is not knowledgeable of the distinction between a communist nation, a socialist nation, and a free capitalistic nation? Accordingly, “at least in my humble opinion,” I find it difficult to believe that an individual, .. “so” well educated, .. and “so” ..well-traveled, ..with the proclivity for self-indulgence and self gratification that he displays, that he doesn’t believe in capitalism, or America. 


According to Webster: self-in·dul·gence, Excessive indulgence of one’s own appetites and desires.

The final word: Whether you agree with the premise or not, (in my considered opinion)  both “God” and “Mother Nature” provide smaller creatures for larger creatures to consume.

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…

Americanism, (ideology)..

Americanism is an ideology or belief in devotion, loyalty, or allegiance to the United States of America or to its flag, traditions, customs, culture, symbols, institutions, or form of government. A belief in Americanism is a preference for all things or most things having to do with the United States. In some cases it can be a view of superiority of the United States over other systems.

Americanism can also be a way of speaking, writing, or spelling of words in “American English” that may be different from “British English,” or other forms of the English language.

Editorial: I reiterate, i.e., (once again) America was founded by men and women in the pursuit of escaping tyranny, both political and religious. The preamble to our Constitution begins with;

            Continental Congress           

“We the People” (of the United States,) ”in Order to form a more perfect Union,” “establish Justice,” “insure domestic Tranquility,” “provide for the common defence,” “promote the general Welfare,” and “secure the Blessings of Liberty” to “ourselves” and “our Posterity,” “do ordain and establish this Constitution” “for the United States of America.”

Question: What is it, (that anyone with the “common sense” that God gave a gerbil,) ..doesn’t understand about the foregoing text?

We the people, ..simply refers to the “born or naturalized” citizens of the United States of America.

The United States, ..simply refers to the United States of America.


King George III

 A more perfect union, ..simply refers to the fact that the people in 1874 America under the rule of “King George III” were displeased with George’s policies and dedicated to forming, a more perfect government.


Lady Justice

Establish justice, ..simply means that the American people were tired of being treated unjustly.

Insure domestic tranquility…


According to Webster: do·mes·tic, (in context) Of or relating to a country’s internal affairs: domestic issues such as tax rates and highway construction.

 American highway



According to Webster: tran·quil·li·ty, The quality or state of being tranquil; serenity.

Provide for the common defense…

 Community, sharing for the common good.

According to Webster: com·mon, (in context) Of or relating to the community as a whole; public: for the common good.


U.S.troops defending against aggression.

According to Webster: de·fense, The act of defending against attack, danger, or injury.

Promote the “general” welfare.. 


According to Webster: gen·er·al, (in context) Involving the main features rather than precise details: in general.  

 Honest Welfare recipient.

 According to Webster: wel·fare, (in context) Health, happiness, and well-being.

 Lady liberty

“and secure the blessings of “liberty” to ourselves and our posterity.”

According to Webster: pos·ter·i·ty, Future generations.

 First line of defense .

According to Webster: se·cure, Free from the danger or attack.


 Unjust and unwanted Government Controller.

According to Webster: lib·er·ty, Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.

Editorial: With the most important Presidential election, in my lifetime, ..or in yours approaching quickly, and I, ..and every common sense voter in America is going to have to decide, “whether or not.” ..we, “We the People” ..that have devoted our lives to working, building and maintaining this Great Nation, ..a nation founded on the blood and sacrifice of our forefathers, ..want to continue living in the America that they fought for, ..or are we going to cower under the thumb of a socialistic ideologue and allow ourselves to be herded into a closet in “Obamaville?”

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…


According to Webster: im·pe·ri·al·ism, (in context) The policy of extending a nation’s authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations. 

Anti-imperialism, strictly speaking, is a term that may be applied to a movement opposed to any form of “colonialism” or “imperialism”. Anti-imperialism includes opposition to wars of conquest, particularly of non-contiguous territory or people with a different language or culture; it also includes people opposing the expansion of a country beyond earlier borders.


The term “Imperialism” was originally introduced into English in its present sense in the late 1870s by opponents of the allegedly aggressive and ostentatious imperial policies of British prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli. It was shortly appropriated by supporters of “imperialism” such as Joseph Chamberlain. For some, imperialism designated a policy of idealism and philanthropy; others alleged that it was characterized by political self-interest, and a growing number associated it with capitalist greed.

John A. Hobson and Lenin added a more theoretical macroeconomic connotation…

According to Webster: mi·cro·ec·o·nom·ic, The study of the operations of the components of a national economy, such as individual firms, households, and consumers. the term. Many theoreticians on the left have followed either or both in emphasizing the structural or systemic character of “imperialism.” Such writers have expanded the time period associated with the term so that it now designates neither a policy, nor a short space of decades in the late 19th century, but a global system extending over a period of centuries, often going back to Christopher Columbus and, in some facts, to the Crusades. As the application of the term has expanded, its meaning has shifted along five distinct but often parallel axes: the moral, the economic, the systemic, the cultural, and the temporal.

Those changes reflect – among other shifts in sensibility – a growing unease, even squeamishness, with the fact of power, specifically, Western power.

The relationship among capitalism, aristocracy, and imperialism has long been debated among historians and political theorists. Much of the debate was pioneered by such theorists as Hobson, Joseph Schumpeter, Thorstein Veblen, and Norman Angell. While these writers were at their most prolific before World War I, they remained active in the interwar years. Their combined work informed the study of imperialism’s impact on Europe, as well as contributed to reflections on the rise of the military-political complex in theUnited Statesfrom the 1950s.

Hobson argued that domestic social reforms could cure the international disease of imperialism by removing its economic foundation. Hobson theorized that state intervention through taxation could boost broader consumption, create wealth, and encourage a peaceful multilateral world order.

Conversely, should the state not intervene, rentiers (people who earn income from property or securities) would generate socially negative wealth that fostered imperialism and protectionism.

Political movement..

As a self-conscious political movement, anti-imperialism originated in Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, in opposition to the growing European colonial empires and theUScontrol of thePhilippinesafter 1898.

However, it reached its highest level of popular support in the colonies themselves, where it formed the basis for a wide variety of “national liberation movements” during the mid-20th century and later. These movements, and their anti-imperialist ideas, were instrumental in the decolonization process of the 1950s and 1960s, which saw most European colonies in Asia andAfricaachieving their independence.

Anti-Imperialist League..

An early use of the term “anti-imperialist” occurred after theUnited   Statesentered the “Spanish-American War” in 1898. Most activists supported the war itself but opposed the annexation of new territory, especially thePhilippines. The Anti-Imperialist League was founded on June 15, 1898 inBoston, in opposition of the acquisition of thePhilippines, which happened anyway.The anti-imperialists opposed the expansion because they believed imperialism violated the credo of republicanism, especially the need for “consent of the governed.” Fred Harrington states, “the anti-imperialist’s did not oppose expansion because of commercial, religious, constitutional, or humanitarian reasons but instead because they thought that an imperialist policy ran counter to the political doctrines of the Declaration of Independence, Washington’s Farewell Address, and Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address”.

Dervish State of Somalia..

The Dervish State (Somali: Daraawiish, Arabic: دولة الدراويش‎) was an early 20th century “Somali Sunni Muslim state” that was established by “Muhammad Abdullah Hassan”, a religious leader who gathered Somali soldiers from across the Horn of Africa and united them into a loyal army known as the Dervishes.

This Dervish army enabled Hassan to carve out a powerful state through conquest of lands claimed by the Somali Sultans, the Ethiopians and the European powers. The Dervish State acquired renown aclaim in the “Islamic” and “Western worlds” due to its resistance against the European empires of Britain and Italy.

The Dervish forces successfully repulsed the British Empire in four military expeditions, and forced it to retreat to the coastal region…

(Sidebar) A Dervish or Darvesh (from Persian درویش, Darvīsh via Turkish, Somali: Daraawiish, Arabic: درويش ‎) is someone treading a Sufi Muslim ascetic path or “Tariqah”, known for their extreme poverty and austerity, similar to mendicant friars in Christianity or Hindu/Buddhist/Jain sadhus.

(Sidebar) The Whirling Dervishes are a sect of Islam taught to love everything. Their dance is a “Sufi” ceremony is performed to try to reach religious ecstasy, (majdhb, fana).

According to Webster: Su·fi, A Moslem mystic. Of or relating to the Sufis. [Arabic ß¿fºy, (man) of wool, Sufi, from Ì¿f, wool.

Continuing… is at that time the only African state that fought against the colonizing Europeans. It became the symbol of the African struggle against Europe.

Marxism, Leninism and anti-imperialism..

“We must bear in mind that imperialism is a world system, the last stage of capitalism — and it must be defeated in a world confrontation. The strategic end of this struggle should be the destruction of imperialism. Our share, the responsibility of the exploited and underdeveloped of the world is to eliminate the foundations of imperialism: our oppressed nations, from where they extract capitals, raw materials, technicians and cheap labor, and to which they export new capitals — instruments of domination — arms and all kinds of articles; thus submerging us in an absolute dependance. Che Guevara, 1967.”

In Das Kapital, Karl Marx considered imperialism to be part of the prehistory of the capitalist mode of production. Conversely, Lenin defined imperialism as “the highest stage of capitalism”, the era in which monopoly finance capital becomes dominant, forcing nations and corporations to compete for control over resources and markets all over the world. Lenin’s theory of imperialism has since been adopted by a majority of Marxists.

The Marxist and Leninist views of imperialism, and related theories such as “dependency theory,” mostly look at the economic rather than military or political (though these are related) dominance of certain countries over others. Imperialism thus consists not necessarily in the direct control of one country by another, but in the economic exploitation of one region by another, or of a group by another. This usage differs from a popular conception of ‘imperialism’, as directly controlled colonial or neocolonial empires.

(Sidebar) Dependency theory or dependencia theory is a body of “social science” theories predicated on the notion that resources flow from a “periphery” of poor and underdeveloped states to a “core” of wealthy states, enriching the latter at the expense of the former. It is a central contention of dependency theory that poor states are impoverished and rich ones enriched by the way poor states are integrated into the “world system.” (Source Wikipedia)

Lenin held that imperialism was a stage of capitalist development, with five simultaneous features:

  1. Concentration of production and capital leading to the dominance of national and multinational monopolies and cartels.
  2. Industrial capital as the dominant form of capital has been replaced by finance capital, with the industrial capitalists increasingly reliant on capital provided by monopolistic financial institutions; “Again and again, the final word in the development of banking is monopoly”.
  3. The export of the aforementioned finance capital is emphasized over the export of goods;
  4. The economic division of the world by between multinational cartels;
  5. The political division of the world into colonies by the great powers, in which the great powers monopolise investment.

War is generally seen as a method of furthering imperialist interests, which is why Marxists generally see antimilitarism and opposition to ‘capitalist wars’ as an integral part of anti-imperialism.

The relationship of Marxists and other radical left-wing groups with anti-war movements often involves them trying to convince other activists to turn pacifism into anti-imperialism – that is, to move from a general opposition to war towards a condemnation of the economic system that is seen as driving wars (or from pacifism to specific anti-imperialist antimilitarism).

The Soviet Union also claimed to be the foremost enemy of imperialism and supported many independence movements throughout the Third World. However, at the same time, it can also be argued that it was imperialist, as it asserted its dominance over the countries of Eastern Europe and the Caucasus. This has led many to accuse the Soviet Union of hypocrisy, and it is often used as an argument for the idea that the Soviet Union did not, in fact, follow Marxist principles, or alternatively, for example by anarchists, as an argument for the failure of Marxism as a solution to imperialism.

Notably, Mao Zedong developed the theory that the Soviet Union was a “social-imperialist” nation, a socialist nation that had imperialist tendencies. However, Mao presided over the imperialist occupation of Tibet. This is an important aspect of Maoist analysis of the Soviet Union’s history.

The term “anti-imperialism” is today most commonly used by Marxists and those with closely similar ideas (anti-capitalism, a class analysis of society). Others who might be accurately described as anti-imperialists, and who would probably accept the description, nevertheless tend to use different terminology.

Anti-Imperialist Buddies.

Right-wing anti-imperialism..

There is a fairly strict division between “right-wing” anti-imperialism within powerful countries and that within their weaker clients or opponents, resulting from the fact that most right-leaning opponents of imperialism remain ideologically attached to their own nation or people.

Modern lines of thought within allegedly imperialist powers that are arguably both “right-wing” and “anti-imperialist” tend to divide into two general strains, “Libertarianism” and “Paleoconservatism”…

According to Wikipedia: Libertarianism generally refers to the group of political philosophies which emphasize “freedom, individual liberty, and voluntary association.” Libertarians generally advocate a society with little or no government power.

According to Wikipedia: Paleoconservatism, is a term for a conservative political philosophy found primarily in the United States stressing “tradition, limited government, civil society, anti-colonialism, anti-corporatism and anti-federalism, along with religious, regional, national and Western identity.”

..the latter, prominently represented by Andrew Bacevich and Patrick Buchanan, is differentiated from the former, prominently represented by Justin Raimondo and Ron Paul, by an association with social conservatism. Both are more influential within the United States than outside it, and both tend to see imperialism as in neither the best interests nor the real traditions of their country, giving them an ideological continuity with “isolationism”…

According to Wikipedia: Isolationism is the policy or doctrine of isolating one’s country from the affairs of other nations by declining to enter into alliances, foreign economic commitments, foreign trade, international agreements, etc., seeking to devote the entire efforts of one’s country to its own advancement and remain at peace by avoiding foreign entanglements and responsibilities. Two other terms often confused with Isolationism are:

  1. Non-interventionism – Says that political rulers should avoid entangling alliances with other nations and avoid all wars not related to direct territorial differences (self-defense). However, most non-interventionists are supporters of free trade, travel, and support certain international agreements, and therefore differ from isolationists.
  2. Protectionism – Relates more often to economics, there should be legal barriers to control trade and cultural exchange with people in other states.


Right-wing nationalists and religious fundamentalist movements that have emerged in reaction to alleged imperialism might also fall within this category; for example, Khomeinism historically derived much of its popularity from its appeal to widespread anger at American intervention or influence in Iran and the Middle East.

The Indian “Jamaat-e-Islami Hind” launched a 10-day Nation-wide campaign titled Anti-Imperialism Campaign in December 2009.


Antonio Negri and Michael Hardt assert that traditional anti-imperialism is no longer relevant. In the book Empire, Negri and Hardt argue that imperialism is no longer the practice or domain of any one nation or state. Rather, they claim, the “Empire” is a conglomeration of all states, nations, corporations, media, popular and intellectual culture and so forth, and thus, traditional anti-imperialist methods and strategies can no longer be applied against them.

French philosopher and author Bernard-Henri Lévy also argues in his book “Left in Dark Times” that modern anti-imperialism is nothing more than thinly disguised “anti-Americanism” and has been too commonly evoked by Third World dictators and extremist movements to distract their audiences from their own crimes and abuses of power. (Source Wikipedia) 

Editorial: First, (kudos to Bernard-Henri Lévy) America is “not” the devil, “nor the Devils Lair.” (with that hopefully established) I will now offer “my humble” opinion; (Simply put) “America is the pinnacle of aspiration for men and women with a desire for a better life and the fortitude to work for their supper.” 


 Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…

Question of the Day, March 25..

Question: What does the Forth Amendment provide?

Amendment IV, (text)…

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” (Source,

Tapping into cyberspace…

The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the “United States Constitution” is the part of the “Bill of Rights” which guards against (unreasonable) “searches and seizures”, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by “probable cause”…

According to Webster: probable cause, Reasonable grounds for belief that an accused person may be subject to arrest or the issuance of a warrant.


..It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the “writ” of assistance,…

According to Webster: writ, (in context) A written order issued by a court, commanding the party to whom it is addressed to perform or cease performing a specified act.


..which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and arrest should be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer, who has sworn by it.

In Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961), the Supreme Court ruled that the Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

The 14th amendment, “Due Process Clause”…

The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. (Source Wikipedia)

Due Process Clause…

Its Due Process Clause prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without certain steps being taken to ensure fairness. This clause has been used to make most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states, as well as to recognize substantive and procedural rights. (Source Wikipedia)

Equal Protection Clause…

Its Equal Protection Clause requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people within its jurisdiction. This clause was the basis for Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court decision which precipitated the dismantling of racial segregation in United States education. In Reed v. Reed (1971), the Supreme Court ruled that laws arbitrarily requiring sex discrimination violated the Equal Protection Clause.

The amendment also includes a number of clauses dealing with the Confederacy and its officials. (Source Wikipedia)


..In Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the Supreme Court ruled that a party is considered to have been searched, for Fourth Amendment purposes, if that party had a “reasonable expectation of privacy”. (Source Wikipedia)

In United States v. Jones, 565U.   S. (2012), the Supreme Court ruled that a search for Fourth Amendment purposes also occurs when law enforcement trespasses on a person’s property for information gathering purposes, even if that person had no reasonable expectation of privacy. (Source Wikipedia)

Editorial: “If an individual or an entity demands to know what is in my pocket, “they or it,” are invading my privacy. When I buy a lottery ticket, I do so with the full expectation that I have the same opportunity to win as anyone else who has purchased a ticket for the same drawing, while at the same time, I have no expectation that any individual or any agent of a municipality or government to have access to the numbers on my ticket.

When I buy a ticket to watch a movie in a theater that is licensed to do business as a movie theater, I do so with the expectation that my fourth amendment rights will not be abused between the time I buy the ticket and take my seat.

Accordingly, if I were to buy a ticket to ride on an airplane that is duly authorized and licensed by the proper authority to do business as an airline, I would expect to be treated as a patron, not a suspect. Which of course is why I have not and will never purchase a ticket to fly on a commercial air transport for whatever period of time our government deems it necessary to invade my privacy.

In the America that I grew up in and maintain for myself, there “was” and “is” (no invasion) of my privacy. As I forbid it by simply “not” patronizing enterprises that demand to know what I have in my pocket.”

Terrorism reduced to its “common denominator,” and/or “simplest form” is nothing more than a (criminal act.)

A criminal act that in most cases is and has been a (criminal act) for “decades” prior to the introduction of “our” current societies “term” to blanket numerous (criminal acts) into a lump sum that we have all been reprogrammed to accept as “terrorism.”

..again, a Rose by any other name.

Question: If hijacking an airplane is an act of “terrorism,” why is hijacking an automobile, “not” an act of terrorism?

Tapping into cyberspace…



“The United States is home to the largest passenger vehicle market of any country in the world. Overall, there were an estimated 254.4 million registered passenger vehicles in the United States according to a 2007 DOT study. ( source Wikipedia)

This number, along with the average age of vehicles, has increased steadily since 1960, indicating a growing number of vehicles per capita. The United States is also home to three large vehicle manufacturers: General Motors, Ford Motor Company and Chrysler, which have historically been referred to as the “Big Three.” Chrysler however is no longer among the top three; but is number five, behind Toyota and Honda. The motor car though has clearly become an integral part of American life, with vehicles outnumbering licensed drivers.” (Source Wikipedia)

Editorial: Although I fully realize that most Americans no longer take an ax in hand to acquire the material to build a home or raise their transportation from a colt, nevertheless, being an individual prone to “self reliance” and “personal responsibility,” I find present day (current) America rapidly approaching an “abomination.”

According to Webster: a·bom·i·na·tion, (in context) An Abhorrence; disgusting.

Question: Do I enjoy watching television? ..

Reply: Yes, ..albeit not nearly as much hunting,, ..or simply taking a walk in nature.

Question: Why don’t I go hunting, fishing, or simply take a walk in nature instead of watching television?

Reply: Because after 46 years as a productive individual in America’s workforce, ..I now “subsist” on the pittance that I receive from “Social Security” after the individuals that I, ..and. “we the people” trusted, (misappropriated and blew) “our” money.

According to Webster: sub·sist, maintain life.

Question: Do we, “We the People,” have a good choice in our upcoming November 6 election?

Reply: Absolutely not. Albeit, ..if the “rank and file” in America wish to choose “self-reliance and personal responsibility,” (work) over standing by while America becomes a “third world nation” via Barack Obama’s affinity for socialism, (welfare) ..and his affinity for anti-imperialism/colonialism, (his hatred of capitalism – inherited from his anti-colonialist father) ..then you will choose, (as has “sadly” been the case too many times in recent decades,) “NOT” vote for an individual that you like, ..but rather, vote “AGAINST” the candidate “YOU LIKE THE LEAST.”

Think about it, I’ll be back tomorrow

Crusader Rabbit…

Previous Older Entries