…the Bleacherman has just entered the debate…

I guess the older I become the more I become the victim of my own growing cynicism. I have always been the doubter. I never have automatically accepted anything at face value. I aways searched for a different meaning, a deeper, more thorough, more rationale explanation of things. But now, I just do not doubt everything, I just don’t believe in anything in anymore. I tend to doubt even that which I see with my own eyes, hear with my own ears or reason with my own sense of values. I have become the quintessential misanthropist. I trust not God nor mortal man. I don’t even trust myself anymore. Once I was the quixotic idealist; now I follow the darker side of the force. Sometimes I actually sound like a right-wing conservative.

In the most benign, I see conspiracy. In the innocuous, I see an immediate and real threat. In the benevolent I see blasphemy. Ugh. It is not the person I want to be. But it is the image I see reflected in the mirror.

So it was no great surprise when I burst out in anger when I recently read that Susan Klebold, the mother of Dylan Klebold of Columbine High School fame, had signed a contract to pen her autobiography. Just when I thought that I had seen every possible disgusting manifestation of corporate greed, the men and women of America’s Board Rooms take yet another step into the madness of squeezing yet another dollar of profit off of an American tragedy.

Although Ms. Klebold has assured us that all of her profits from her manuscript will be donated to various mental health organizations, one has to wonder what corporate America will do with their profits. Doesn’t this whole thing just smell of rotten fish or is my plunge into the dark side much deeper than I once thought. Is this (what I see as an)exploitation both pathetic and insulting?

To set the stage: Diane Klebold’s son Dylan, along with a friend, Eric Harris, went on a rampage on April 20, 1999. They stormed into their high school in Colorado firing guns and setting off explosive devices. When the smoke had cleared and after the two boys had taken their own lives, twelve students and one teacher at Columbine High School were dead. Twenty one other people were injured.

Now, almost fifteen years later, Ms. Klebold says she wants to confront the indescribable grief and shame that she has had to endure following the shooting.

So is this tell all book nothing but a catharsis for her? Is this book a way of dealing with her own demons? If so, what about the real victims of this senseless act of insanity? What about the families of those who died or were injured in the violent outburst of childhood aggression? What about their pain? Do they have to relive the memory one more time just to placate Ms. Klebold’s need to cleanse her soul?

I am surely not one who can judge anyone’s parenting skills nor can I nor do I want to pass judgement on Ms. Klebold; but simple logic would think that she, to some degree, is partly responsible for the events on that tragic day. I can sympathize with her for the pain, suffering and shame she has experienced. But does that give her the freedom to put herself out in front of the real victims of her son’s outburst.

I just don’t know; is this the dark side of me or is it just the fast fading common sense side of me?

Would love to hear your comments?

…the Bleacherman has left the debate…

…the Bleacherman has entered the dialogue…

The Ray Rice domestic abuse story has almost dominated the news for the past few days following the release of a video recording of Mr.Rice knocking his then fiancé, (now wife, Janay Rice) unconscious in a hotel elevator.

Much has already been reported about this tragic incident. Experts, activists and commentators have been popping up everywhere to feed the insatiable hunger of a twenty-four hour news cycle always short on relevant content and long on time to fill in-between long lasting spasms of advertising nonsense.

I don’t know, but at 2am, it seems odd that a story about male aggression and violence against women is immediately followed by two minutes of advertising encouraging viewers to rush out and buy a year’s supply of male enhancement and libido increasing medications.

At the center of the controversy is the question of why did it take the release of a video to force the NFL to act in what most people think is a more appropriate and relevant manner?

Before the video was released, he NFL suspended Mr. Rice for two games. Drug violators are usually suspended for four games which means physically beating up on a young lady is only half as bad as tweaking out on a joint a few nights a week.

What was the wide world of football thinking when it tried so hard to mitigate the reality of a a two hundred pound athlete knocking out a young, almost defenseless women? Do they think the knock out punch was a superficial love tap? Did they really need to SEE a video of the violent and brutal encounter to understand the absolute barbaric and savage actions of a young man who lost control of his emotions and physically lashed out at his fiancee?

As much as I try to restrain myself, I feel compelled to add two things to this on-going dialogue: the first is that it should come as no surprise to anyone that the NFL acted in such a self-serving manner. The NFL is business first, sports second and morality policeman a distant third. The second is that most of society does not care about what is unfortunately and disgustingly perceived as a mundane issue. (So the man hit his wife? She probably had it coming. Just ask sports commentator Stephen A. Smith about his first reactions to the incident.)

To the NFL and the Baltimore Ravens, Ray Rice is nothing more than a revenue-producing commodity. He helps his team win football games. Fans love him and buy jerseys with his name and number embroidered on the back. They pay big dollars to file into the M&T Bank Stadium to watch Ray Rice bowl over his opponents. They watch and cheer for him on television. And the NFL sells those television broadcast rights for huge dollars. Everyone wins. Ray Rice is paid a huge salary; some $7 million dollars a year. He was given a $15 million dollar signing bonus.

The Ravens are worth an estimated $1.5 billion dollars. It’s overall financial valuation increases about 7% per year. It’s gross operating profit each year is estimated to be around $50 million dollars.

The Ravens produce over $200 million dollars of gross state product every year. They pay over $10 million dollars in admission and state taxes. The pay out over $120 million dollars a year in personnel and employee compensation.

The NFL itself generates over $9 billion dollars a year in revenue with the goal of tripling that number in the next twelve years. The NFL is a business. It is not a sport.

So who, in the NFL’s very wide, very profitable world of business really and sincerely cares if several players have off the field behavioral issues and verbally or physically abuse their wives. The NFL turns to the long standing tradition that money makes such problems go away. Realities and consequences fade into the oblivion of yesterday’s news. Life goes on; the dollars keep rolling into everyone’s pocketbook. Hell, it is a scene out of the movie, Evita. (Hell, I am already humming the words to the song, “And the money keeps rolling in (and out)”

Even the fans don’t care about such nonsense as domestic violence. When Ray Rice appeared at Ravens training camp several months following the incident, the cabal of concerned citizens gave him a massive ovation. “Gain those yards, Ray,” they shouted. “Score those touchdowns. Win those games. So you hit your wife; she apologized so what the hell?”

We now live in a perverted society where celebrity is the American form of nobility. The more atrocious the movie star acts, the more callous and offensive the sports star behaves, the more society falls to its knees to worship these self-anointed Gods and Goddesses. They are allowed to commit crimes and never see any real and relevant jail time. They need to get back to the sound stage to make money for movie producers. They need to get back on the playing field to make money for team owners and league bureaucrats. Things like culture and civility are deemed meaningless; especially in a world where one’s status is determined by the size of one’s bank account and not one’s compassion and benevolence.

When we live in a world where our elected officials laugh and scorn the debate over domestic violence, where misogyny is seen as something as far-fetched as climate change and the victim is compelled to become an apologist and de-facto enabler of such abhorrent behavior we invite the consequences of such behavior. How often do we read of some disgruntled husband shooting and killing his wife? Unchecked domestic violence is the precursor to a senseless murder.

But the game must go on and touchdowns need to be scored and revenue sources need to be protected. Battered women become nothing more than collateral damage. One day the headlines will go away, a new crisis will sweep across cable news America and revenues, profits and salaries will continue to grow. And once in a while, right before the next male enhancement ad, a twenty second story will document another woman being killed in a domestic dispute.

How sad.

…the Bleacherman has left the debate….for now…

…the Bleacherman has entered the stadium…

I read the other day that Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel was on hand at Penn Elementary School in the city’s Lawndale neighborhood to greet students to the start of a new school year. I could only lean back in my chair, close my eyes and offer a wide smile. Sixty-two years ago, I walked three or four blocks from my home to attend the very same school for the very first time.

But as I read through the article, I realized that much has changed in the ensuing six decades since I was a kindergarden student at Penn Elementary.

In those days of my youth, life was bathed and blessed in a benign simplicity. Most of the fears expressed by my family at the dinner table were focused on the questions of whether or not our next door neighbors were communists (what ever that meant) or having my always outspoken zede (grandfather) wondering in whispers – as if someone was listening at the door – if having children ducking under flimsy, wooded school desks would truly protect them from the effects of an exploding Russian nuclear bomb.

In those days of my youth, life was nothing more than a single cell existence. It was a time and place where Ward and June Cleaver personified the illusion of what American family values should look and sound like. It was a time when the smoke from burning cigarettes was as thick as London fog and as ubiquitous as the Cubs losing another baseball game.

In those days of cultural, religious and racial isolation and segregation, a Christian God demanded that Sundays be a day of prayer and not meant for commerce yet the same God said nothing in rebuttal to burning crosses demanding racial and religious purity.

In those days, the now reference Lawndale neighborhood of Chicago had no such name or reference. It simply was a neighborhood on the city’s West side. My family lived in an apartment building on the corner of 14th and Avers. Two or three stories below our tiny apartment(specifics of that era in my life have long faded away), on street level, my father owned and – seven days a week, twelve hours a day – ran a small neighborhood grocery store.

In those post World War II days, the neighborhood was desperately trying to hang on to its predominately Jewish character. Change was in the wind. Like most inter-city communities, the landscape was in the midst of significant population shifts with whites migrating to the suburbs and mostly blacks filling in the housing voids. My friends were leaving, the Jewish Community Center was closing and my father’s grocery store was robbed not just once, but twice in one week.

I was much to young to remember the social dynamics of this transition. For me, at age six, the world was very small. Television had not yet manifested to the medium that it is today. The reality that surrounded my relatively small dot of existence was both sanitized and sterilized by the elders of my community. Everything that I saw and heard, everything that I did was artificially created; I lived in a microcosm where environmental and social substance was no more real than a Hollywood backdrop.

Today, everything is different from the world that I knew and enjoyed. Everything has been turned inside and out. The corner of 14th and Avers is an empty lot; the old apartment building was burned down many decades ago. The journey from a child’s home to Penn Elementary School now is much more difficult, much more dangerous than it was in my day. It is no longer as simple as the taking the quickest path from one point to another. It is now almost as complex as designing a military maneuver.

Today, parents have to take great care in planning the route their child must travel in order to attend school. It is now about boundaries and borders. It is now about elementary students having to negotiate streets controlled by gangs who care little about the age of transgressors who transverse into their self-proclaimed kingdoms. Each street that the children have to walk through is today a potentially lethal encounter with a minion of different war lords. Safe passage for children whose only desire is to gain an education and escape from the horrors of their neighborhood has to be negotiated, monitored and controlled as if it were a humanitarian effort trying to navigate through a war zone in order to feed hungry non-combantants.

Is this really happening in America? For weeks, the media circus did nothing but concentrate on the the death of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. Yet, as far as I can tell, not five seconds of video or five seconds of commentary was focused on the American tragedy of having to provide safe passage for children to attend a neighborhood school.

Sometimes I wonder what is the biggest and most immediate threat to American security: ISIS or American gangs that control too many of our streets and neighborhoods.

We bomb ISIS positions in Iraq and do nothing to resolve a crisis that compels city officials to line the streets of Chicago with 1,800 adults (some paid, some volunteers) to protect the well being of school children. Where are the church leaders, where is the NAACP, where is Don Lemon and Chris Hayes and their video cameras? Where is the community outrage? Where are the demonstrations, marches, t-shirts and signs?

Racism is a problem in America Interactions between police and civilians of color is a problem in America. No less a problem in America is a socio-cultural environment that threatens the safety of children walking to school to gain an education.

Where is the outrage?

…the Bleacherman has left the stadium…

…the Bleacherman has entered the stadium…

Sometimes, as I night after night watch the newest American tragedy unfolding nightly in Ferguson, Missouri, I wonder what is the bigger malfeasance; the death of Michael Brown, the violent protests, police over-reaction or the blatant, careless and often unprofessional, self-serving demeanor of the press, politicians and political activists in rushing to pass judgment in order to get their point made and smiling faces on television.

The situation in Ferguson is a textbook case of too many people talking way too much. It is a textbook case of how the press can manipulate a story to fit its own agenda. It is an example of political activists and community leaders purposely massaging and manipulating facts to fit a highly polarized, very narrow minded agenda.

As this blogger has stated several times in prior posts, the death of Michael Brown is as much a travesty as it is a tragedy. In many instances, the actions of local politicians, news reporters, government officials and police command is a perfect story of stupidly, arrogance, racial prejudice ( white vs black and black vs white) and total and inexcusable incompetence.

There are now two opposing stories of what happened on the day Michael Brown was shot and killed. One, supported by the accounts of several witnesses, paints a picture of a cold-blooded killing where an officer draws his gun on a man standing in the street with his hands raised.

The rebuttal, offered by friends of the accused police officer and by unnamed witnesses, suggests that Michael Brown bull-rushed the officer and given the man’s size and girth the officer, fearing for his own safety and in an act of perceived self-defense, opened up and starting shooting.

So whose story do you believe? The news media, wanting to add fuel to the fire and profiting over extending the conflict as long as possible, tends to frame the issue in favor of the pro Michael Brown witnesses. Law enforcement is siding with one of its own.

So who is right and who is wrong?

When the preliminary autopsy report was revealed, the Michael Brown faction jumped on it saying that supported their contention that the facts clearly show that Mr. Brown was murdered in cold blood by the officer. They point to the fact that there was no trace of gunfire residue on the deceased’s body which, in their minds, absolutely confirms that the shooting was not at close quarters. There are entry/exit wounds on the arm that these same people say clearly shows that Michael Brown’s hands were raised above his shoulders in a surrender posture.

New anchors, so-called and self-labeled analysts and on the scene babbling brooks of senseless information known to us as reporters affirmed over and over again that the autopsy’s conclusions were affirmations of police misconduct.

Protesters held signs reflecting the same. Each were using (and in my opinion abusing) the findings of the autopsy to affirm the guilt of the police officer in question.

BUT THIS IS NOT THE TRUTH. All the autopsy did was to suggest possibilities. The only thing that was unequivocally affirmed was that Mr. Brown was shot six times – four to the arm, two to the head. Period! The county’s autopsy suggests that there was marijuana in Mr. Brown’s system which really does little to establish anything relevant and add to the process of determining what happened that fateful day.

All the while, Michael Baden and Shawn Parcells – the two people hired by Brown’s family to conduct the independent autopsy – stated over and over again that it was too early to make any firm conclusions. Yet, Daryl Parks, the Brown family’s attorney, ran to the microphone and said the results clearly supported the contention of Brown’s family that their son was killed as he was trying to surrender and that Darren Wilson, the Ferguson Police officer who shot their son should be immediately arrested for murder.

BUT THE INDEPENDENT FORENSIC AND PATHOLOGY EXPERTS DID NOT SAY THIS. Before any conclusions could be made, Baden and Parcells said that they needed to look at toxicology reports, Michael Browns clothing and x-rays before issuing a formal report.

Even Sunday night’s use of tear gas was a case of media and protesters jumping to conclusions. The likes of Chris Hayes lamented over the indiscriminate and unwarranted need to use tear gas yet, almost in a whisper, it was mentioned like an unread footnote that shots were fired and Molotov cocktails were thrown at the police. Another footnote, unmentioned by our unbiased press, was the fact that the police command post was on the verge of being overrun by a surge of protesters.

Everyone talks about justice but the justice they seek is the justice that fits in best with their own self-serving agendas. When it best serves the news media, facts and truth are sacrificed for a tendency to jump to conclusions in order to keep the fires of a tired story raging and advertising revenue pouring into network coffers.

The press cries because they believe their first amendment right to document and report on the Ferguson crisis is being impeded by the police. But the first amendment does not give them the right to become part of the story and that is what their zeal or recklessness is actually doing. Where is Walter Cronkite?

…the Bleacherman has left the building…

A NEED FOR POLICE MILITARIZATION

Posted: August 17, 2014 in Politics

A NEED FOR POLICE ‘MILITARIZATION.’

…the Bleacherman has left the stadium…

It is hard for anyone to ignore the bombardment of news and commentary coming out of Ferguson, Missouri. It is not a pretty sight. One can only think of words like disgraceful and revolting in trying to describe the turmoil confronting not just the citizens of a small Missouri town, but the nation as a whole.

After watching hours of media coverage, I sometimes wonder if the cable news networks and their plethora of opinionated correspondents and cue-card reading hosts are actually reporting on what is happening on the ground or are they, with their almost staging of events, fueling the intensity of an already tension filled atmosphere in Ferguson.

Unfortunately, where there is tension, there is emotion and where there is emotion, there is an opportunity form publicity hungry extremists and fringe players to step forward and seize upon the pandemonium and promote their own self-serving (usually) political agendas.

Volatility is fed by passion and passion usually breeds its own unique brand of over-reaction. Whatever side of an issue one finds themselves on, it is easy to fall victim to the emotions and leave common sense and linear analysis behind.

The site of armored personal carriers, mini tanks, helmeted and bullet-proof vested troops occupying one of our cities have left many Americans appalled, shocked and in a state of fear. What we have been witnessing on our television sets a libertarian’s “E” ticket ride at Disneyland. What is more orgasmic to the likes of Rand Paul than a tyrannical government’s military running amuck on the streets of American cities.

What I am most afraid of is what appears to be the fast growing sentiment of a large and growing number of American journalists, politicians and concerned citizens that is demanding the “demilitarizing” of many metropolitan police forces. I find this to be very short-sighted and disconcerting.

Before I am lynched by my fellow ideologues on the left, I must state that I am appalled by the over-the-top response displayed by the Ferguson, Missouri, police agencies in responding to the protests over the killing of Michael Brown.

What we have witnessed was a pathetic abuse of police power and authority. The actions taken by the local police was a profile in intimidation, provocation and almost racial discrimination in nature. What I saw was not policing. What I saw was an insane and idiotic display of a foolish tactical deployment of police presence. Whoever was designing, implementing and controlling the police game plan was just plain incompetent, if not just plain stupid.

I must admit that I am a product of the sixties and civil disobedience is very much in my blood. There is a valid purpose in protest and there is a valid purpose in police making sure that they protect the community they serve from over-zealous protestors and fringe elements who only seek violent disorder.

I have witnessed over-aggressive actions by protestors and over-aggressive reactions by police. To control a protest without impeding or infringing upon first amendment rights takes the walking of a very fine line that must separate citizen protest and police reaction. It is incumbent upon both sides to navigate to a path where protest and community protection are not mutually exclusive of each other.

Smarter and more knowledgeable people than I am will debate the police tactics and strategies employed by the Ferguson city police. As long as cable news can continue to milk advertising dollars out of this tragedy, the situation will be discussed over and over again.

Was the show of force we witnessed on Thursday night in Ferguson warranted? Hell no. Is the call for police disarmament warranted? Also, hell no.

I think it was MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell who said that the police are not being paid to die in order to protect and serve their communities. Just as the Michael Browns of the world deserve protection, the everyday cop on the street deserves similar protection.

The people of Ferguson don’t want to be judged by the actions of a few who seek to exploit an explosive situation. So, too, police officers should not be judged by the actions of a small group of bad cops.

The world is changing. Threats to the peace of our cities and municipalities are growing more terrifying than ever. Thanks to Second Amendment foolishness, citizens are now allowed to carry automatic long rifles as they walk down the aisles of their local Target store. High powered guns and large capacity magazines are available without background checks at gun shows. Criminals have more access to more lethal weapons than in the past. Terrorism is on the rise.

In December, 2012, two police officers were shot (one was killed) while trying to serve a warrant. In March, 2014, four officers of the Indianapolis police force were shot while trying to serve a warrant. Again, four months later, two police officers were shot while – once again – trying to serve a warrant. Can you blame the police for riding in an armored vehicle when trying to serve a warrant?

Someday, a local police SWAT team is going to have to respond to a situation of something much more dangerous and volatile than a lone man barricaded in someone’s house or business. Someday the police will have to confront well trained and well-armed terrorists who are more eager to die than surrender. Can you blame the police for wanting the most protection that is available?

We owe it to the men and women of law enforcement to protect them as best we can. We owe it to the officers AND THEIR families. If they need armored vehicles and high powered rifles and thick armor plated vests, we should provide those to our first responders.

The problem in Ferguson, Missouri, was not the armored carriers; rather, it was how and when they were deployed. Let us not put in jeopardy the men and women of law enforcement simply because some police chief had too much gung-ho cowboy for breakfast and felt that the only way he could express his bravado was by deploying an atom bomb during a knife fight.

…the Bleacherman has left the building

…the Bleacherman has entered the building…

It seems that the once again the United Kingdom is out to screw up the world.

The roots of many of today’s geo-political problems can be traced back to the pompous arrogance of the once great British Empire. History reflects a culture where British policy makers loved to draw up and define the geographic borders of its colonies as if they were playing on a meaningless game board. The Brits motto was, “consequences be damned, all hail and all benefit for Britannia.”

Over and over again, the United Kingdom’s foreign policy wizards engaged in a game of enslaving and barbaric delusional colonial boundary drawing. It was Darwinian to the core; a geo-political game of mixed martial arts fight to the death in the octagon. The Brits did not care if they put two warring ethnicities together to populate a piece of geography under a flag not so common to any one constituency. They only cared about raping the country of its natural and valuable resources. They divided and they subjugated. They bought, sold and traded territories like they were merely rectangles on a Monopoly board. And in the process they forever fucked up the world.

Once again the Brits are out to destroy the world. Once again, in an ethnocentric flashback to past glory, Great Britain is defining morality on its self-serving terms.

A few days ago, the British government announced that it will suspend 12 military licenses for export to Israel if the current ceasefire in Gaza does not hold. Somehow, everything is now Israel’s fault.

Brilliant!

So if Hamas unilaterally breaks the cease fire under the pretense of Israel not caving into all of their extreme demands and begins to fire rockets at Israel; Britain, in all its anti-Israel bias, will punish Israel. Once again, Britain is supporting terrorists. It is a repeat of how they dealt with their “Jewish problem” in Palestine in the years following the end of World War II. They were quick to disarm the Jews and looked the other way as Arab armies prepared to move against the newest UN mandated nation-state.

So I ask British Business secretary Vince Cable this one question: Why are you absolving Hamas of any responsibility in this current conflict?

Is the British Business secretary lamenting over the fact that only three Israeli citizens have died in Hamas rocket and mortar attack? Is the British secretary giving validation to Hamas’ rocket attacks aimed at Israeli cities? Is the British secretary totally discounting the suffering of Israeli citizens living in fear of the next rocket attack on their cities?

So yet again, British self-importance and conceit is going to make an already bad situation even worst. Once again, Britain is playing Monopoly with the well-being of some far off land. Once and for all, Britain must admit to itself that the sun HAS set on the late and not-so-great Empire.

I say this to you, Mr. Secretary: The first Hamas rocket that penetrates Israel’s Iron Dome defense and kills innocent Israeli citizens – their blood is on your hands.

…the Bleacherman has left the stadium…

…the Bleacherman has entered the building…

Dear Joe Scarborough:

Hey, Joe: I must say that I am very sorry that so many of us blessed with simple minds do not have the vast intellectual capacity that you often claim to have. So you must forgive us if we cannot grasp your complex and super-sophisticated logic and reasoning. We, down here in the valley of single cell intellect, must make do with the limited cerebral power God has entrusted us with to address the many and varied problems of our complex, confusing and contradicting world.

We’re just not as smart as you are, Joe. What can I say?

But, Joe, sometimes, on those very rare occasions where you could possibly be wrong about something, you need to lower the thick walls that surround your massive ego and listen to us down here where the simple minded dwell. Maybe we are not as smart and as articulate as you, but we do have a much clearer, much more focused view of the complexities that exist beyond what you claim is our comprehension.

We all share you valid concerns over the deaths of the innocent women and children of Gaza. It is both a tragedy and a human travesty. And we support your views being aired on your show. And most of us know that by doing so is not an act of anti-Semitism. Foolish but not evil nor anti-Jewish in anyway.

War is always a picture of mankind at its worse. Show me a war or conflict where civilians did not die and I’ll show you a war that never happened except in a Hollywood movie.

You suggest that the pictures of pulling dead and wounded children out of the bombed out rubble of Gaza is hurting Israel and helping Hamas. And yes, I agree with you. To a point.

A different, more simple perspective is needed. If Israel stops its military campaign because the pictures of dead civilians is too much for the world to bear and Hamas continues its relentless rocket fire into Israel, then Hamas has won the war and claims not only victory against its sworn enemy but also validates the tactic of using dead and wounded civilians as a highly effective military weapon.

In simple terms, by simply focusing on the horror that is unfolding on our TV screens and condemning one part of a bigger picture, you mitigate all that is at stake in this conflict. Israel may take a public relations hit and Hamas may see some temporary uplift in its domestic and international standing. But as the reality of the destruction of civilian homes and state infrastructure sets in, as the Palestinians realize that Israel cannot and will not totally lift the siege so long as Hamas seeks the total annihilation of the Jewish state, then and only then will the people of Gaza realize that Hamas is only interested in war and not in the well-being of the people it claims to govern.

Israelis have long ago learned the lesson that only Jews will step forward to save Jews in trouble. Yes, Joe, Israel must take the PR hit. It must do what is necessary to stop the rocket fire and destroy the tunnels dug deep into Israel. Failure to do so would be a tragic mistake that would only set the table for the next conflict. Think about the consequences if Israel unilaterally stops its military campaign and months later a rocket fired from Gaza slips by Israel’s Iron Dome defense and takes out part of a Tel Aviv neighborhood. Think about terrorist infiltrators sneaking into an Israel kibbutz and killing scores of innocent civilians. Does that even the score? Can Israel, with pictures of its dead and wounded civilians on world television, then claim the moral high ground and level Gaza?

So as you cry for the women and children of Gaza, cry for the women and children of Syria, of Iraq and of central Africa. Cry for the tens of thousands of civilians killed by Americans during the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. Cry for the innocent women and children killed by American drone strikes.

If your going to condemn something, which is your right and I will never question your motives for doing so; at least think in simple terms about the consequences of your condemnations.

…the Bleacherman has left the stadium…