1. Endorsing the boilerplate environmentalist blather about Americas addiction to oil, President Obama pursues the dream of renewables, such as wind and solar energy, harnessed from nature. But this ignores the reality that these cannot, for the foreseeable future, fill our energy needs. 2. What does one say of a policy-maker whose reality is not congruent with the facts? One option is to appeal to the DSM-IV manual for the proper allusion. a. America has vast reserves of oil, coal, and natural gas. Consider why the President would ignore, and actually block, the use of same. 3. Now, if one were to believe that President Obama has less than the best interests of the United States at heart, these facts fall into place with a resounding thug er, thud. Could it be that our President is about enriching previously colonized nations at the expense of those he sees as having benefited from colonization? After all, anti-colonialists say that the West looted resources and raw materials, well then .time for payback. D'Souza, "Obama's America," chapter nine. 4. One can see their point: before the West stole gold, or oil, or uranium Third World folks were feasting on those resources, sipping petroleum malteds, using them in their homes and factories, and offering them to their children as toys. Really??? 5. Of great debate is the question of poverty in the Third World, and the result is often the conflation of blame and causation. Did prosperous nations invade, conquer, and exploit and Third World nations, and leave they in the conditions we see today? a. How could the conquerors have conquered unless there were significant differences to start with? b. If causation is the same as blame, i.e., economic exploitation is the cause of said poverty, then why are those parts of the Third World least touched by contact with prosperous nations so often the most destitute of all? c. Blame is much easier to understand than causation, far more emotionally satisfying, and, today, more politically convenient. Sowell, Economic Facts and Fallacies, p. 189. 6. Little known by many who accept same as a given is the source of the concept. It was V. I. Lenin who wrote Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism (1917), It was a masterpiece in the art of persuasion, and it convinced many highly educated folks around the world, not only in the absence of compelling empirical evidence, but in defiance of a large body of hard evidence to the contrary. 7. In short, international investments went directly opposite the theories of Lenin, the theories taught to the naïve, tabula rasa of college students. The audience was so receptive to academics, intellectuals, activists, community organizers precisely because it validates envy and resentment of those with lower incomes toward those with higher incomes. a. As a bonus, it removes the stigma from implications of lesser ability and/or lesser performance on the part of those with lower incomes. Further, it shifts the need for change from those who wish to rise, to others, and replaces any such burdensome task with a morally uplifting sense of entitlement. Sowell, Op.Cit. 8. Could it be that Obama is attempting a global redistribution of energy, an ideological crusade against oil? Rich countries pay to reduce carbon emissions?? Coincidently, Obama has agreed to, based on a United Nations scheme, is $100 billion annually. Developed nations agreed in 2009 to raise climate aid, now about $10 billion a year, to an annual $100 billion from 2020 to help developing countries curb greenhouse gas emissions and cope with floods, droughts, heatwaves and rising sea levels. UN green climate fund, meant to aid poor, holds first talks | Top News | Reuters The sooner we end the reign of this President, and find one with the best interests of America.... ....the better.