Let’s see if I can do this quickly. Before I have to leave for a memorial service for a friend who passed away last year. Actually, last night I put together a post about certain of the books we have in the house, but I am going to let that go for another day.

This morning, I am concerned about a few things. Okay, about a lot of things. Prime Minister Netanyahu, according to CNN, gave a speech saying “Israel faces war on 7 fronts”, and it seemed to me that he said it with a degree of pride. War against “Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, West Bank terrrorists, and Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria”.

As I have recently said, it is getting harder for me to judge Israel’s actions, because I just don’t know what is right anymore. Yes, this may be the “time” to try to change the paradigm once and for all. Tomorrow may be too late. And, yes, maybe a war on seven fronts is just one war, not seven and if you don’t do it all at once, it is bound to fail. And perhaps doing it now and doing it all at once is so essential that the extraordinary collateral damages that results from the military action (death, injury, property disruption, economic dislocation, etc.) is a cost that must be paid and, if that cost is not paid today, it will be paid with even greater numbers tomorrow.

But can Israel do this alone? Can it do it with help from the United States, but not elsewhere? At what point does Israel run out of bombs, or drones, or ammunition, or even personnel? At one point does the war(s) come back so strongly to Israel that Tel Aviv’s high rise luxury office and residences wind up like the Twin Towers?

And what is the plan after the war is over? Are there back room conversations that we just don’t know anything about? Are the moderate Arab states, the members of the EU, the United States, involved in coming up with plans for modifications of foreign policies for Israel’s neighbors, and the rebuilding of their countries? Or are there not?

The threat to Israel is enormous, of course, and Netanyahu’s policies real show what happens when you have a gambler in charge. This is an enormous gamble.

And – yes, it may be secondary, but it is real nonetheless – what is its effect here in the United States? How does it affect antisemitism? How does it affect American Arabs? How does it affect the teachings at American universities? And how does it affect politics.

The Trump side, so far, has it pretty simple. They support Israel. Period. Full stop.

The Harris side, not so simple. Harris has so much to worry about. First, can she take a position that is different from Biden? Second, how can she keep the overwhelming majority of the Jewish vote? Third, how can she keep the majority of the Arab vote, so important in Michigan and, I think, in Pennsylvania as well. What should she say? What should she not say?

Let me segue a bit here. The problem Harris has is not limited to the Middle East. She has to become Mike Pence, and not remain Hubert Humphrey? Know what I mean? The Democrats celebrate Vice President Mike Pence, who broke with Donald Trump to certify the 2020 presidential election. They mourn the fact that Vice President Hubert Humphrey did not win the 1968 election, but lost to Richard Nixon, in large part because Humphrey did not separate his position on the Vietnam War from that of President Lyndon Johnson’s.

Harris has to separate herself from Joe Biden, and state her own positions, whatever they may be, clearly, even when they differ from her current boss. That reminds me of another question. Are Marcus Johnson and I the only Americans who understand that a Vice President has limited power?

In his comments after the Walz/Vance debate, university student Johnson made it clear that the vice president’s job is to do what the president asks them to do, not to set their own policies or priorities. This should be obvious. But the Trump/Vance campaign wants us to overlook this distinction. They want us to assume that the current administration is as much Harris’ as it is Biden’s. In fact, because they want us to think that Biden is non compos mentis, they portray the Biden administration as the Harris administration or at best the Harris/Biden administration.

Okay, that may be good politics on their side. But why didn’t Walz, for example, counter this in the debate by saying: “Hey, this isn’t the Harris administration you are talking about. This is the Biden administration. Was the 2016-2020 administration the Pence administration?” But he didn’t, and the campaign doesn’t. They let the current administration be named the Harris administration without complaint, falling into the hands of Trump, just to be loyal to the president. Big mistake.

I gotta go. I wanted to say something about Elon (“I am dark MAGA”) Musk. What happens when a billionaire who is more than a billionaire, but someone whose business are are REALLY IMPORTANT, goes completely nuts. But no time now. No time to proofread. Happy Sunday.