Steven M. Finkelstein

Early Friday morning, the Detroit Tigers’ outfielder Delmon Young was arrested outside a Manhattan hotel for being heavily intoxicated and brawling with a stranger. According to witnesses, Young shoved the guy and then tackled him, while at the same time yelling “you bunch of Jews,” or something to that effect. Apparently three or four guys had been stopped by a panhandler, who was wearing a yarmulke, and they were giving him some money when this happened. All indications are that they weren’t talking to Young or involved with him in any way prior to his going off on them. When the cops were called, they had to take Young to the hospital before they took him to jail, because of how drunk he was. It’s not clear whether the guys Young attacked were actually Jewish or not, but Young is now likely to be charged with a hate crime. The Tigers were in town for a weekend set against the Yankees, and Young wasn’t able to play for them. The Yanks won two out of the three games.

Delmon Young is a big guy, six foot three, 220 pounds. Sources say he was far bigger than the men he was attacking. Assuming that there aren’t some details that the press have missed in this case, and that Young was indeed the aggressor, then that makes him a bully, and a dangerous one, at that. The men he attacked said they didn’t know who he was, that he was a ballplayer and a minor celebrity, but that hardly matters. He seemingly went after them because he believed that they were Jewish, and that obviously makes him antisemitic. He’s hardly alone, though. Persecution against Jews has taken place for pretty much as long as the Jewish faith has been in existence. The Holocaust is one of the most glaring examples of the atrocities committed against Jews in recent memory, but it has gone on far longer. There are recent individual, ugly incidents: the clothing designer John Galliano expressing his love of Hitler, Mel Gibson’s career taking a nosedive after he went on an antisemitic rant against a cop that pulled him over. There are other examples, but the continued existence of antisemitism cannot be argued, and when things like this happen, it really bothers me, even though I don’t particularly self-identify as Jewish. Judaism, after all, is not an ethnicity, even though, strangely, people treat it like one. It’s a religion, and I’m not really religious, yet when people see my features and hear my last name, they think “Jewish,” even though my personal connection doesn’t go much beyond a perfunctory lighting of the Hanukkah candles. I’m lumped into that category, though, and while it’s not something that I take pride in, exactly, it’s certainly not something I’ve ever been ashamed of. It’s one of those things that I didn’t have any control over, as none of us have a choice about our culture, or the family into which we were born, or our sexual preferences. So in that sense I always want to stand up for my fellow Jews, because even if I don’t believe as the religious among us believe, I still want us to be able to live freely and without fear, and travel throughout the world without having to worry about being bullied, or worse, because of who we are. The bottom line is, people like John Galliano, people like Mel Gibson, and people like Delmon Young, if these allegations prove to be true, are scumbags. All three of them blamed alcohol for their actions; guess what, guys, it wasn’t the booze. I’ve been drunk plenty of times, and not once have I ever yelled ethnic slurs at somebody. It’s not the alcohol that’s the problem; the problem, antisemitism, clearly exists within you, and it’s deplorable. Alcohol lowers inhibitions, and sometimes it brings out in people feelings that exist below the surface. But the fact that these feelings are there is very upsetting, and there isn’t any excuse for them. Apologies don’t really cut it for me; when you reveal your inner selves in this way, you tell me all about yourself that I need to know, and I won’t ever again be a supporter of yours in any way. It’s not like I was ever going to buy any of John Galliano’s tacky, hideous clothing anyway, and I’m not a Detroit Tigers fan. After Mel Gibson’s anti-Jewish rant at the cop that pulled him over, I never paid money to see one of his movies again, not that there were too many of them. He was ostracized by most of Hollywood, and rightly so…guess what Mel, turns out there were a few Jews in Hollywood! Who would have thought it? But whenever someone shows me, though their words, through their actions, that they’re a member of that most sickening of clubs, the one that hates Jews for being Jews, you’re going straight to my shit list, regardless of who you are, actor, athlete, or just some ignorant jerk on the street. When you let me know your feelings about Jews, you tell me all I need to know about you, and believe me when I say, the feeling is mutual. If you hate me, I’ll hate you right back, regardless of what ethnicity or religion you are.

No one knows exactly what dreams are. Some psychologists feel that they’re just a kind of meaningless jumble, the mind sorting through the thoughts and emotions of the day, both the conscious ones and the ones that are happening slightly below the surface, the ones we might not necessarily want to be aware of. Others feel that dreams can be analyzed and that useful information can be garnered from them, that we can learn lessons from them regarding our true motivations. Still others, the more fanciful among us, feel that dreams are real in some way, and that when we’re dreaming, we’re actually touching or visiting real places, or even accessing holes in what we perceive as reality. These are often the ones that also think that maybe what we experience in our day-to-day lives isn’t real, and that it’s some construct of our own making. In my experience, it’s usually the more self-centered people that feel this way. They’re prone to flights of fancy; they’re the ones that are heavily into sci-fi, aliens and superheroes, comic books and dressing up and the occult. There’s nothing wrong with that. I’m into most of those things myself. But do I believe that dreams are “real,” and that what I perceive as “reality,” i.e. what I see and experience on a daily basis is a figment of my imagination? I don’t think so, because frankly, I’m not that self-centered. Would I like to think that the world revolves around me, and that when I die, the world will disappear? A part of me would, because that would be the ultimate validation of my importance, but it just doesn’t seem likely. The world doesn’t work that way. I’m willing to face the probability that I’m really just one relatively unimportant sack of flesh, up and walking around, one human insect among six billion or so, and if I was to get hit by a truck this afternoon then everything would still keep on going without me. But that’s not to say that I don’t have dreams sometimes that do seem real, or even ones that I wish were. The stuff of dreams has been written about by poets, explored at length in the fantastic “Sandman” comic book series by the uber-talented Neil Gaiman. It’s kind of hard not to be fascinated by them too, when they come to me in the night unbidden, and I can wake in the morning and ponder their meaning, especially the ones that seemed so vivid that they occur to me again throughout the day. I see people that I haven’t seen in years, in scenarios that make no sense. I see people that have passed on. And sometimes the dreams are so enticing that I’m truly disappointed when they end, and I wish that whatever a dream really is, that I could control it a little better, that I could dictate how long I remained inside, or even whether someday I might remain in a dream state permanently. It’s not that I don’t enjoy reality. It’s just that the laws that seem so immutable here don’t really exist in dreams, and it’s good to get away from them. Although, by that same token, if I had more access to the seemingly fantastic, then by definition it would become more commonplace, and at some point I would probably want to leave it too. That, I think, is what the escapists don’t realize, the ones who would like to become lost in their dreams because they’re unhappy in life, and never return. What we perceive as paradise can just as easily become stale, if we indulge in it for too long. That is the nature of indulgence; if we wallow in it ceaselessly, then it is no longer special. And that is why, ultimately, I’m never completely disappointed even when the most pleasant of dreams ends. I might have been enjoying my sojourn, but somewhere in my mind, I always knew that what I was experiencing wasn’t tangible. For better or for worse, I recognized reality when I came back to it. Someday, I may be proven wrong. It might turn out that this world was indeed all an illusion, and that the dreams were the true reality. But until that day comes, I have to go with what my conscious, waking brain tells me. No matter how many pretty pictures it conjures when I bed down for the night.

Some people say that the new century didn’t really start till 9/11, and a case could be made for that. Certainly it was a seminal event that changed things in America forever, the way we conduct ourselves both at home and abroad, and the repercussions and backlash were felt, in turn, all over the civilized (and not so civilized) world. But life in America was changing in other ways even before the hyper-paranoia that set in following the infamous terrorist attack. Technology, it seems to me, was making advancements almost too rapidly for an old-school guy like me to keep up with. True, I’m only thirty years old, but already in my life I’ve seen the advent and ascension of the internet and the home computer, which then gave rise also to the I-Pod and the I-Pad and the I-phone, and will undoubtedly give rise in the immediate future to more advancements while I still haven’t gotten around to buying the current round of electronic junk. It’s kind of crazy to me to think that ten years ago a lot of people didn’t have cell phones, and now if you haven’t at least made that leap people look at you like you’re walking around in 19th century garb. Inventions have been making our lives easier (or, some would say, more complicated) in the past couple of hundred years especially, but it’s truly shocking to me how different an American kid coming up now has it versus what it was like just a couple of decades ago. In years past, horny teens had to steal a Penthouse from the drugstore or from under their older brother’s bed. Now they can just go online and see virtually everything under the sun. It’s as far away as the click of a mouse; it’s amazing that any of them find the time to do their homework once they reach puberty! And if the grownups put the parental control system in place, the kids can easily bypass it, because the average kid coming up these days is at least a proficient hacker. You’ve got little tykes hacking the Pentagon for fun, with one hand, the other clutching the third Red Bull of the day! In my time, Mortal Kombat was considered a violent video game. Now the graphics are so realistic in horror and first-person combat games that it’s no wonder kids are getting more and more desensitized, younger and younger. It brings to mind the movie Toys, where kids are being trained, unknowingly, to become a willing army through use of combat video games. Not unrealistic at all, now. The Army these days actually does use video games to recruit kids. I mean, why not? It makes perfect sense! And the nation’s attention span keeps getting shorter and shorter. This is true of kids, but adults too, as news cycles speed up increasingly due to social media making it possible for any important breaking story to fly around the world nearly instantaneously. The Trayvon Martin case was the latest one, but before that was Casey Anthony, Occupy Wall Street, Anthony Weiner…they all get their fifteen minutes, except now it’s more like fifteen seconds, because no matter how riveting the current one is, the next big scandal is right around the corner, and now who needs to actually watch the news on TV to get it? Let’s face it, who else besides an ever older demographic actually watches an hourly news show anymore on Fox, or CBS, or NBC, or any of the others? Kids just get their news from the internet like ordinary people, because, increasingly, that’s what’s become ordinary. Or if they haven’t heard about something just by surfing the net, someone is bound to send out a Tweet about it, and then they’ll join in the conversation. The information age has made it possible for anyone to say anything at any time. We’ve all become unpaid pundits, except if our opinions are loud and bombastic enough, someone might actually pay us to spout off at the mouth, like Bill O’Reilly or Shawn Hannity or Steve Ducey. We can all tell each other exactly what we’re thinking at any moment, and believe me, that’s not a good thing.

Of course, I’m no exception. I signed up for Twitter, I got my own website, and I’ve got a personal and “professional” Facebook page. I try to think of other ways to get my name out there, to get noticed. But there’s something I want to be clear about, and it’s the entire point I’m trying to make. In my case, I’m trying to get people to notice what I have to say because I’m an author, and I’m always trying to get published, so I can get paid, so I can support myself and my family. I’m not doing it just to hear myself talk. When I send tweets and when I think up inane things to post on Facebook, I freely acknowledge that what I have to say usually isn’t very interesting. But I feel like I have to do it to promote my work, and, unfortunately, myself, because one can’t be separated from the other. But that doesn’t mean I have to like it, and I don’t. I miss the way things were before. I’m pretty jaded, but I think it happens to kids faster and faster these days. This is the era of immediacy, and I, for one, wish things would slow down sometimes. I know they’re not going to. Technology will continue leaping and bounding forward, and I’ll try to keep up, like everyone else. But if the world really does end this year, all I have to say is, we were asking for it. I’m not going to be at all upset if the end of the Mayan calender looks like everybody thought Y2K was going to, with computers coming alive and trying to eat us, and airplanes falling out the sky. The lives of the survivors would be about immediacy then, but not the kind we’re experiencing now. I know I’d get a kick out of an ashy-faced kid sitting in a pile of dust-strewn rubble, trying to send out a last desperate tweet for help, while all the while being surrounded by hungry cannibals salivating for a taste of his tender flesh. OMG to that, indeed. And LOL, also.

So everybody in the world these days has an opinion on the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case. Zimmerman is the guy who shot and killed the unarmed Martin in Florida when the teen was coming home with an iced tea and Skittles from a convenience store. Zimmerman claimed to be a neighborhood watch volunteer; he also claimed Martin was acting suspiciously, and because of Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law, he so far hasn’t been charged with a crime. Here’s where I stand on the whole thing: first and foremost, I’m not suggesting we string up Zimmerman until all the facts come out. Nobody seems to know everything that happened that night, and there’s a lot of contradictory info. Zimmerman says Martin attacked him first, though at first glance there doesn’t seem to be any evidence of that. What I will say is that while it would be a mistake to jump to any conclusions, Zimmerman’s background doesn’t make this appear very kosher. The fact that he made many 911 calls in the past few months, and that many of them appear to be racially motivated, reporting “suspicious” black guys and so forth, seems to be a big strike against him. Clearly, there’s a pattern at work here. Then there’s the fact that the 911 dispatcher told Zimmerman not to pursue Martin, and he ignored that order. It seems, therefore, that Zimmerman was the aggressor. But obviously, a long, hard look at what took place that night is necessary. It doesn’t seem like justice has been served here, and I don’t blame his parents for being up in arms, not to mention OWS and every other group with a sociopolitical agenda. That being said…

While what took place was a tragedy, some of the loudest protestors have jumped all over this thing because of the racial overtones. It was all about “a white guy shot an unarmed black kid!” That’s not actually what happened. Zimmerman is biracial, white and Hispanic. But that’s being downplayed because unjustified white-on-black violence makes a better story. It’s the same way that everybody tries to fixate on Obama being the first “black” President. He’s not. He’s biracial too. It’s just a minor detail that people like to overlook. I’m not saying there was no racial motivation for what Zimmerman did; there very well might have been, I’m just saying this is a slippery slope, and the protestors would do well to tread carefully. Which is why it was so stupid what President Obama said about “if I had a son, he would look like Trayvon.” I don’t know what good a comment like that does. I know Obama is trying to highlight how much of a tragedy this is and was, but he’s only drawing attention to the racial overtones of this in a way that I feel is more divisive than conciliatory. I think what’s being ignored in this is something that an op-ed in the New York Post pointed out a few days ago. There’s a lot of black-on-black violence. In Trayvon Martin’s age group, there is no greater killer of young black men than other young black men, all around the country. That’s simple statistics. So while, once again, this is a tragedy and justice hopefully will be served, it’s kind of crazy to give this so much attention just because it was a perceived “white man” that killed Trayvon Martin. Let’s not become fixated on that. It doesn’t do anybody any good. It would instead behoove us all to focus on this particular incident and not make it larger or more meaningful than it actually is, and also to have a healthy discourse on the merits of laws like “Stand Your Ground,” which seem to encourage vigilantism, regardless of the race of who is involved in the incidents in question. In no way, shape, or form should what happened to Trayvon Martin be brushed under the rug. But I really wish that some of these politicians, newscasters, and so forth would turn down the rhetoric a little bit. Blowing things out of proportion doesn’t do any honor to Trayvon Martin’s memory.

Well, last year at about this time I was gearing up to head to Atlanta for Wrestlemania 27, and a fine adventure it turned out to be. This year I won’t be able to get to Florida for WM 28; instead I’ll head to Tobacco Road in Midtown, since they’ll be showing the event on a dozen big-screen TVs around the bar. That should suffice…and since WM 29 will be in New Jersey next year, count on me being at that one in person too. But even if I can’t be close enough the see the sweat fly this time around, I can still make my predictions who’s coming out on top. Here they are:

John Cena vs The Rock: this will be the main event, eclipsing the two world title matches. The hype for this has been building for a year, and being a “traditional” wrestling fan, and also not a dumpy middle-aged housewife or a seven year old, I hate John Cena. His persona in the ring has never rung true to me. He acts like he’s from the street, but he grew up in West Newbury, Mass, and attended private schools. On top of that, he can’t wrestle for shit, and that’s ultimately the deciding factor on whether I like a guy or not. As a fan, I’ve had to put up with Cena’s crap for nearly a decade, and brother, am I sick of it. But there’s no way the Rock wins here. I’d love to see it, but he’s a movie star at this point, not an every day in-ring performer. I expect a good match, because of the Rock, but ultimately, my pick is: John Cena.

HHH vs Undertaker Hell in a Cell: a rematch of last year’s show-stealing encounter. Shawn Michaels as the special guest referee adds some intrigue, as does the hell in a cell stipulation. I’ve enjoyed the buildup between these two veterans, and I have no doubt they’ll try to steal the show again, even though they’re both near the end of their storied careers. It makes no sense to have Taker’s streak end unless it’s to put over a younger guy, so my pick must be: The Undertaker, to run the streak to 20-0.

WWE Championship match: Chris Jericho vs (c) C.M. Punk: I was there to see Punk win the title in November at Survivor Series, and he’s had a good run since then. He’s over with the fans, while Jericho has been a good heel since his return in January. This should be a good match too, between two guys who can go. But Jericho is the past, and Punk is the present. So I expect the winner to be: C.M. Punk.

World Heavyweight Championship match: Sheamus vs (c) Daniel Brian: I was pleased when they gave Brian the World Heavyweight title, and it’s been fun seeing him turn heel over the past couple of months while still remaining champion; that’s a rarity in wrestling. It’s a shame they’re putting him in the ring with a bunch of bigger guys where he can’t really show off the full extent of his submission talents. Sheamus is over with the fans right now, and he’s that big, brawny type that Vince likes. Therefore I expect the winner, and new champion, to be: Sheamus.

Intercontinental Title match: Big Show vs (c) Cody Rhodes: Cody is on the rise, but it seems like they’re not quite ready to give him a world title yet. Maybe this is his year. Show is on the downside of his career, and he’s done everything, held every title. This is a throw-away feud, and while putting the title on the line is an interesting twist, I don’t expect this match to be given more than ten minutes, tops. They’ve emphasized in the buildup how Show has never won a singles match at ‘Mania, which is true. This is a tough call, as I could see it going either way. My bet, though, is that Cody will pull a chickenshit heel move and get himself disqualified. My pick is: Big Show by disqualification. Cody retains the title.

Randy Orton vs Kane: this is a singles match I really could have done without. Kane has been in few good matches over the years, and if it ever happens, it’s because of the other guy, not him. This won’t be an exception, and with no title or anything else on the line, this should be twelve or so pointless minutes followed by an RKO to finish it. No way Kane wins. My pick: Randy Orton, in a snooze fest.

Maria Menounos/Kelly Kelly vs Eve Torres/Beth Phoenix: ah yes, the unavoidable diva match/celebrity involvement. If you count Menounos as a celebrity…who the hell is she, exactly? Some sort of reporter? TV personality? At Wrestlemania, non-wrestlers always beat established wrestlers. Look at Butterbean over Bart Gunn, that sumo guy over Big Show, Floyd Mayweather over Big Show, Laurence Taylor over Bam Bam Bigelow, etc, etc, etc. The winners are: Menounos and Kelly Kelly, and I hope to God it’s over quickly.

Team Teddy Long vs Team John Laurenitis for control of both shows: basically, all the mid-card talent not doing anything was thrown into this match. It’s tempting to just take the face, Teddy Long, except that I’ve pretty much got all the faces going over in this card, which leads me to think a couple of my picks must be wrong. That’s the only reason I’m picking team Johnny here, because of all the other faces going over. But this is another one I don’t really care much about…in fact, the more I keep studying this card, the more I feel I’m excited for the four “main events” and the other four scheduled matches don’t do a whole lot for me. This is a four hour PPV, and they only have eight scheduled matches?! You have to figure Hell in a Cell and Cena/Rock are going to run long, but still…just for the hell of it, I’ll stick with: Team Johnny. Though I don’t have much emotionally invested either way.

And that’s all she wrote. We’ll see on Sunday how my powers of prognostication are working. And for those of you who were tuning in this week for taut political discourse or updates on the writing, sorry bout that. It’s all about priorities, people. More soon.

I am near to having the rough draft finished of my new novel, Hell To Pay, which I have been working on since January of last year. Once the rough draft is complete, I will begin the long, often laborious revision process, and then, when I have a version of it that I’m happy with, I’ll start shopping it around. This will be the fifth book I’ve written (of the four previous ones, three were fiction, and one was nonfiction, a memoir). Of course, if you’re a frequent visitor to the site and you’ve followed what passes for my writing career, you’ll know that I haven’t managed to get any of the others published. As with the completion of each of the other projects, I hope that this is the one that finally gets me noticed, and gets my foot in the door. If I had an agent, I really feel like half the battle would be won, but, as I’ve written about on this blog frequently, if you don’t know anybody in the industry, getting somebody to look at your stuff can be next to impossible, and selling myself has never been my strong point. Just saying “I think my writing speaks for itself” is never enough, not so long as you’ve got assistants between yourself and the agents who are only willing to scan a query letter for a second before deciding whether or not to trash it. If they don’t like what they’re hearing, it’s usually the former. That’s why I made a conscious effort, this time around, to write a book that’s genre fiction, first off, since I know that sells, and then also to make it as marketable and mainstream as possible. Which kind of kills or at least limits the creative impulse, but I’m simply tired of not getting my stuff published. I take some consolation in the fact that I run across published works, not infrequently, that I judge as not being as good as what I’m producing. It’s kind of a double-edged sword, actually; it gives me hope because I know I’m able to write as well or better than certain published authors, but it’s also frustrating because it’s evidence that people who aren’t as good as me are getting published. I don’t think that’s false bravado on my part, either. I simply have confidence in my work, at this point. Let’s see if this time around I’ll be able to convince somebody in the publishing world whose opinion actually matters. I know I’ve made similar pleas in the past, but I feel compelled to make one again: if there is anybody who reads this blog who knows of an agent or editor or anyone else in the literary world who would be willing to take a look at my new manuscript, please, have them contact me! I’ve tried posting on Craigslist with a similar request, and my posting was deleted; presumably I violated some term of service stipulation I didn’t know about. When the manuscript is complete I will, of course, try going about the conventional route of query letters to agents again, but since that didn’t get me anywhere with the memoir last year, I don’t have super high hopes this time around either. I have to try, though, because I simply can’t think of any other ways to get noticed. So I say again, help me if you can, regular readers, assuming there are any of you out there! My latest is worthy of publication. Let’s see if we can’t find a way to get it on store shelves, together.

The recent meetings between President Obama and Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu have resulted in pretty much what happens every time these two meet up: Obama swears that the U.S. has got Israel’s back, and then asks them if they would please, pretty please not bomb the crap out of Iran until we’ve had a chance to see if economic sanctions can work? The problem is, we’ve already seen that sanctions won’t work with Iran. They’re hell bent on getting a nuclear weapon, and they’ll bluster and lie and say anything they can to delay and confuse the U.N. inspectors until that happens. Iran’s leadership is crazy, literally crazy, as in needing to be institutionalized. They’ve said repeatedly that they won’t rest until Israel is wiped off the face of the planet, much like the Palestinians. Therefore, regardless of what Obama says, it is in Israel’s best interest, in terms simply of self-preservation, to do anything they can to prevent a clear and immediate threat to their safety. A nuclear Iran, for them, cannot happen. Period. So no matter how much Obama says we stand beside Israel and our relationship with them is better than ever, the Israelis need to be ready to launch nukes at Iran at a moment’s notice, as I’m sure that they are.

Here’s the thing. Obama and other government officials keep saying that we don’t want Israel to bomb Iran, because we want peace in the Middle East. But as I’ve said on the site before, there will never be peace in the Middle East. It’s just never going to happen, and history will back me up on this. The same patches of “holy ground” have been disputed by too many religions for too long. If fundamentalist doctrines dictate that one group or another need to be exterminated, to please whichever deity we’re talking about, then the believers are never going to lay down their arms. Besides, let’s be honest here. I don’t truly believe that Obama doesn’t want Israel to bomb Iran to preserve peace in the region, or because he respects Israel’s right to exist. He’s protecting U.S. oil interests, plain and simple. That’s why maybe the Republicans should ease up a little bit with all their blather about gas prices being high because of Obama, and his administration throwing so much money into electric cars, and other green initiatives the Right views as unproductive sinkholes. Obama, by not giving his blessing for Israel to bomb Iran, is tacitly saying that we’re still going to continue being reliant on oil to power this nation, at least for the immediately foreseeable future. That’s why I believe that if Israel were to bomb Iran, it really wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world, for a couple of reasons. One, it would let the U.S. and the rest of the world know that the Israelis are deadly serious about protecting themselves, and that they don’t bluff, but rather do exactly what they say they’re going to do. And why shouldn’t they? They’re only protecting themselves from a culture who’s said that they want to exterminate them! And secondly, if oil shipments to this country from Iran were disrupted, maybe the U.S. would become more serious about breaking its oil dependency and would dedicate more time and money to other options. It’s true, some of the first electric cars and hybrids haven’t been successful, but that doesn’t mean that we should just stop trying! It’s not like we can just say, oh, well, it was a lark, trying to shake our oil dependency, but now let’s get back to reality. If we allow that to happen, then the damage to the planet will continue at the same rate that it has been, species will continue to be wiped out, the oceans will continue rising, and we’ll keep burning holes in the ozone layer. So I say, let Israel bomb Iran. It’ll keep us from having to be the one to start yet another Middle Eastern conflict, something that we couldn’t afford at this point regardless of how justified we thought it was. Israel doesn’t need our permission to protect itself, and it shouldn’t wait for it. And just one other caveat before I sign off. For anyone who doesn’t want to believe the worst about the U.S., in terms of our motivations toward Israel? Think about it this way. In Syria right now it has been established beyond any reasonable doubt that Bashar al-Assad’s regime is committing wholesale slaughter to try and prevent his being overthrown. If the U.S. is so noble, then isn’t that the sort of thing we would be trying to stop, regardless of our already existing debt? You’d think so, but Obama is sitting on his hands, and why? Well, it doesn’t take a genius to figure it out, does it? No oil interests. Don’t get me wrong, folks, I still the think the U.S. is the greatest country in the world. But I don’t have rose-colored goggles on while watching our chess moves on the world stage. We’re looking out for number one in whatever way we see fit. And that means behaving in some pretty callous ways sometimes, regardless of who’s in charge, Democrat or Republican. I’m sure Netanyahu is watching us this election season to see if Obama is voted out, because if it happens, it could mean our policy toward Israel is going to change. But no matter who’s in power come January of next year, they need to keep their own security in mind, and if that means bombing the Iranian lunatics who threaten them, so be it. There’s no need to crank up the rhetoric in regards to how evil and misguided Iran is. They do that themselves whenever Ahmadinejad opens his mouth.