Mr. Frank does an excellent job providing a radical analysis of Liberals and how they dilute radicalism and any chance for progressive change his analysis here and his response to Mr. Spezio is downright reactionary and cynical.

Mr. Frank claims that … Hillary is in essence a power driven elitist. But that not analysis. Such a description can be labeled against any an all “leaders”. The question is their advocacy.

One of the “excuses” the left could use upon GW Bush (Texas), Chaney and Rice is that since they all had background with oil firms that could be use by the left to justify their “War For Oil” explanation. However Clinton was not known with having a long association with oil firms. However with Clinton being a Senator from New York State the likelihood of her having an affinity toward Zionism is much more likely.

What Mr. Frank is doing is diluting the role Zionism has in influencing and shaping Ms. Clinton advocacy. This is a rather dishonest analysis as we have seen numerous article here on DV by James Petras that has clearly detailed oil firms being against the Iraq invasion. As well as the military being tepid in their desire to invade Iraq and being more vocal against the invasion in Iran.

It is also dishonest not to examine Zionism and how it contributes to maintaining LARGE U.S. military budget as a large military budget is required in order for the U.S. to engage in these Middle East incursion that would now appear to benefit Israeli hegemony. Even some members of the right have questioned the bloated military budgets and maintenance of bases world wide. Apparently the “left” suffers from myopia.

Even the venerable Bill Moyers ignores Zionism (the Jewish variety) and is only concerned with the “Christian” variety. However apparently the Dutch TV is willing to tackle the issue that the U.S. left is too cowardly to discuss.

Here a link …

The Israel Lobby

Hillary’s addicted to oil insomuch as she is addicted to power. Oil is power. Who controls it ultimately controls the global economy — that is of course, if prices or supplies don’t peak. Some say they already have. Hillary is really addicted to war. But war nowadays is only feasible with ample supplies of oil. When the oil runs out the wars we fight will change dramatically. It could simply become a perpetual circle: wars are fought over natural resources while natural resources fuel those very wars. As supplies dwindle, you can expect more war.

The US relationship with Israel, I believe, is convoluted. You have many different interests driving US foreign policy in the region. Sure you have the Zionists, but you also have the oil execs and others who know that without Israel’s military prowess (an air force, nukes, etc) the US exploitation of the resources there is ultimately threatened. I won’t venture to guess exactly what’s influencing Hillary’s approach, er, non-approach to Israel-US relations. It may be a bit of everything.

Hillary is in essence a power driven elitist — or to steal Mills’ term, a member of the Power Elite. Totally disconnected from the people she hurts. Be they American soldiers or Iraqi kids. Sometimes I think a lot of the current mess regarding Israel and Palestine has less to do with Zionism and more to do with outright hatred, racism and power. All components of traditional Zionism, I know, but I think philosophically a lot of the direct violence waged against Palestinians today isn’t derived from the classical definition of Zionism but from what many Israelis see as tit-for-tat retaliation.

Of course it is not tit-for-tat. Israel has the bigger guns and no moral authority to do what they are doing or have done to millions of people. It’s an asymmetrical situation supported by the US government. Hillary won’t alter that. Certainly not if it threatens her power base. And that platform is dependent on a host of Washington insiders; be they Big Oil, the pro-Israel Lobby or defense contractors.

Unfortunately there are many on the left who fail to integrate Zionism (racism) into their analysis and thus ignore the racist aspects of U.S. foreign policies. This is not about “white” people defeating “brown” people in the Middle East. This is about expanding and securing Zionism.

The result of failing to analyze Zionism by the “left” results in a failure to analyze Zionism effects on U.S. culture, politics and economic policies. It also fails to deal with all forms of racism within the U.S. Resulting in the continuing and advancement of divide and rule mechanizations of the ruling class.

Racism exist across the entire political spectrum and until the “left” is willing to deal with its internal racism and contradiction there will NEVER be any chance for progressive change within the U.S.

Do you think that Hillarious has taken more money from Big Defense than she has from the murdering Zionist Lobby?

Is Israel’s expansionist state agenda with its commitment to the decimation of the Palestinian people more or less of a variable in Hillarious’s political and career program than her commitment to big defense or her “addiction to oil?”