Sandberg Inadvertently Echoes Musk on Blaming Jews for Anti-Semitism

On Sunday, former Meta COO Sheryl Sandberg spoke at the Birthright Israel Excelerate26 Summit at the Museum of Jewish Heritage in New York City and I am perturbed by what she said:

We have to be really strategic. And I’m not sure we’re all always doing that because it’s hard

The thing about antisemitism is, it is really bad, massively on the rise, on the right, on the left. It is a massive problem. But it is still a fringe problem. The average person in this country is not antisemitic. And the problem is that if we run around telling everyone that everyone’s antisemitic, we will cause everyone to be antisemitic. That’s what all the data shows us.

And I do think as a Jewish community, as we’ve gotten alarmed about the rise of antisemitism, I am worried that some of us are inadvertently kind of spreading it. And I think we need to be really, really careful.

For starters, Sandberg is plainly contradicting herself. In a matter of seconds, Sandberg says anti-Semitism is a massive problem and then says it is a fringe problem. At best, she is sending mixed messages. It's well and good to be strategic about anti-Semitism but it is difficult to formulate a strategy if she cannot determine whether anti-Semitism is a fringe problem or if it is a massive problem.

Second, who is running around tell everyone that everyone's anti-Semitic? If "that's what all the data shows us" then it might have been helpful had she cited a specific example in support of her argument. 

Third, I think the notion that Jews are inadvertently spreading anti-Semitism is a dubious notion because it has the effect of absolving the people who are quite advertently spreading anti-Semitism whether it is Tucker Carlson or people in the streets of New York praising the October 7th attacks.

In so doing, Sandberg also inadvertently echoes Elon Musk who argued on his X platform in September 2023 - more than a month before the October 7th attacks:

The ADL, because they are so aggressive in their demands to ban social media accounts for even minor infractions, are ironically the biggest generators of anti-Semitism on this platform!

As I argued at the time:

In other words, the Jews are to blame for anti-Semitism by speaking out against it, and we ought to keep our mouths shut. 

By making this claim, Musk effectively absolves responsibility from those who actually harbor hatred towards Jews while giving them a blank check to defame us at every opportunity. 

In such an environment, anti-Semitism would be bound to become mainstream in the United States. And if this comes to pass then pogroms will be sure to follow.

Now I could see Sandberg objecting to my third paragraph and going so far as to cite it as an example of Jews inadvertently spreading anti-Semitism. If she were to tell me that directly, I would ask her the following question:

So how would anti-Semitism not become mainstream in an environment where those who openly spread it flourish with impunity and those who call out such behavior are considered responsible for anti-Semitism?

To claim without evidence that Jews are responsible for spreading anti-Semitism, even inadvertently, is an act of cowardice which takes our eye off the ball. By taking our eye off the ball, we do not put pressure where it belongs - on the anti-Semites who spread their hatred.

Why Was There a Girls' School Near One of Iran's Military Bases?

At the outset of the U.S.-Israeli military action against the Iranian regime, the latter's state media claimed that the U.S. and Israel had bombed an Iranian girls' school.

Some such as Marjorie Taylor Greene accepted the story at face value despite its provenance with Iranian state media.

The fact was that at the time of the incident in question, it could not be determined who was responsible.

However, it does now appear the United States was responsible for the act in question which killed 168 people mostly children despite the claims of President Trump that Iran was responsible. Here is how The Bulwark put it this morning:

Iran’s government has flatly denied that it targeted its own civilians in the strike. And while the Iranian regime has a wretched human-rights record and has been perfectly happy to butcher their own citizens in even the extremely recent past, the idea that this particular tragedy was some sort of friendly-fire strike is contradicted by available evidence. This morning, the New York Times published video analysis confirming that the IRGC base adjacent to the school was hit by a Tomahawk missile—which no belligerent in the war uses except for the United States—and that the school was damaged at around the same time. Ergo: We bombed the school. It seems in all likelihood that this wasn’t a case of Iran intentionally targeting civilians, but of the United States accidentally killing civilians.

Yes, but The Bulwark is missing one very key point here.

Why is there a girls' school situated near one of Iran's military bases? 

Based on the preliminary investigation, U.S. intelligence wrongly identified the area as still being part of the military installation. If this is the case, then the Iranian regime then carved out that portion of the military installation and built a girls' school. How recent this development is far from clear. But if the Iranian military knew there would come a day when there would be an American or Israeli attack at their base then why not build a girl's school and maximize civilian casualties? Should such an attack happen, the world would focus on characterizing American and Israeli forces as child killers instead of questioning why the Iranian regime would build a girls' school in an area that was one part of a military base.

The long and the short of it is that Iran were using that girls' school as a human shield. Given Iran's history long history of funding Hamas which has long used the populace in Gaza as human shields it is fitting that the Iranian military would deploy the same tactic.

Of course, it doesn't change the fact it was a U.S. strike which caused the deaths of these Iranian children. President Trump's insistence on lying also doesn't help matters. Yet it was the Iranian regime which saw fit to build a girls' school on land which was once part of one of their military bases. Surely, this cannot be the only piece of civilian infrastructure which replaced portion of an Iranian military base. Where there is one school then there are others? Not to mention hospitals and homes for the elderly.

The Iranian regime does not care a whit about these dead girls. For them, they serve only as propaganda tools which far too many in the U.S. and the West accept a face value.

I Hope The Iranian People Will Be Given The Space to Reject Mojtaba Khamenei

(ZUMA Press Wire via Reuters Connect)

The Islamic Republic of Iran's so-called Assembly Experts has chosen Mojtaba Khamenei to be the country's Supreme Leader following his father's assassination just over a week ago.

I hope the United States and Israel will pause their military offensive just long enough to give the Iranian people the space necessary to publicly reject the younger Khamenei as well as the Islamic Republic at large.

After all, the Iranian people had no say in Khamenei's ascension.

While President Trump has previously publicly stated that he found Mojtaba Khamenei to be "unacceptable" he also wants to choose Iran's next leader. I think Trump making that choice would be every bit as wrong as the Assembly of Experts making that choice.

Now that the world's attention is centered upon Iran, the world needs to see that the Iranian people do not want Khamenei nor for Iran to continue as an Islamic Republic. This is especially true when one considers the spectacle of public demonstrations in New York City's Washington Square Park proclaiming the elder Khamenei as a "man of social justice."

It is essential that the Iranian people disabuse Americans and the West of our collective ignorance whatever legitimate reservations might be had concerning the present military conflict.

If nothing else, we owe the Iranian people the courtesy of our attention.

U.S. Intelligence Report Says Military Action in Iran Unlikely to Oust Regime

A classified U.S. intelligence report prepared one week before the joint U.S.-Israeli strikes in Iran concluded that such a military operation was unlikely to topple its regime, according to the Washington Post:

The report, completed about a week before the United States and Israel initiated the war on Feb. 28, outlined succession scenarios stemming from either a narrowly tailored campaign against Iran’s leaders or a broader assault against its leadership and government institutions, the people familiar with its findings said. In both cases, the intelligence concluded that Iran’s clerical and military establishment would respond to the killing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by following protocols designed to preserve continuity of power, these people said.

The prospect of Iran’s fragmented opposition taking control of the country was described as “unlikely,” said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss a classified report.

It is not clear if President Trump saw this report. If he did then it clearly did not influence his thinking on the subject, such as it is.

Of course, it is possible this assessment could be wrong. After all, the Post notes the report did not make any assessment to the Iranian regime's future if either U.S. ground troops or if Kurdish rebels were armed. The former is unlikely, but the latter scenario is not beyond the realm of possibility. However, such action carries the risk of fomenting civil war within Iran thus giving the regime yet another lifeline.

As I have previously written, my main fear regarding military action in Iran is that the regime would be kept intact and Trump would permit the installation of a new Ayatollah. Even if Trump isn't inclined in this manner, this report would indicate that the regime will be far more difficult to topple than he anticipated.

Despite Trump's rhetoric of "unconditional surrender", I suspect that he will want an easy way out even if it means keeping the existing regime in Tehran and undermining Israel in the process. He'll declare victory, find someone within the regime who he thinks is palatable, permit their ascension into power, and invite the new Iranian leader to sit on his Board of Peace. If Trump was prepared to prop up the Taliban and Hamas, then why wouldn't be prepared to do so the same for the Iranian mullahs?

Meanwhile, Israel will have gained nothing from this military action. There will still be the threat of a nuclear Iran even if the new regime softens its rhetoric. Their actions behind the scenes will invariably tell a different story. If the Iranian regime cannot be dislodged and remains an existential threat to Israel, then I think Israeli voters will oust Benjamin Netanyahu from power come October. 

Needless to say, the Iranian people will also have gained nothing from this military action.

Trump Wants to Choose Iran's Next Leader

President Trump proclaimed that his desire to choose Iran's next leader.

He told Reuters:

We're going to have to choose that person along with Iran. We're going to have to choose that person.

We want to be involved in the process of ​choosing the person who is going to lead Iran into the future, so we don't have to go back every five years and do this again and again. We want somebody that's going to be great for the people, great for the country.

So much for Trump telling the Iranian people to take over your government. 

To drive the point home, Trump also told Axios, "I have to be involved in the appointment, like with Delcy [Rodriguez] in Venezuela."

This is exactly what I was afraid of a week ago today only 48 hours before military action in Iran commenced:

Yet let us suppose there is military action in Iran. Who can say it would be any different than what occurred in Venezuela earlier this year where they extracted Nicolas Maduro only to install his vice-president as his replacement? Meet the new Ayatollah. Same as the old Ayatollah. 

If Trump was capable of bestowing legitimacy upon the Taliban during his first term, then it certainly isn't conceivable the Iranian regime will remain in place during his second term.

Whoever becomes Iran's new leader, even if they are up to the task and move the country from theocracy to democracy, will be perceived as Trump's puppet in view of his overt desire to choose a leader of his pleasing rather than giving the space necessary for the Iranian people to choose.

Trump Makes Noem Roam Somewhere in the Western Hemisphere

I wouldn't say President Trump fired Kristi Noem as Department of Homeland Security Chief so much as he demoted her. 

I mean Special Envoy for the Shield of the Americas - Western Hemisphere sounds like a groovy gig, but she will soon answer to Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense, er, War Pete Hegseth. Imagine being a member of Trump's Cabinet one day and becoming a lackey for Hegseth the next. 

To be sure, Noem will still live high off the hog and have horizontal jogging sessions with Corey Lewandowski at taxpayer expense as Lewandowski is leaving DHS with her. But Trump wants Noem out of the spotlight and is banishing her to Central America as punishment. Noem and Lewandowski became an albatross around Trump's neck. 

It didn't help matters that Noem had a disastrous set of hearings on Capitol Hill. At the Senate hearing on Tuesday, Republicans were every bit as vigorous in their questions as Democrats with Louisiana's John Kennedy and Thom Tillis of North Carolina both taking her to the woodshed. Trump was unhappy with Noem claiming under oath that he had authorized an ad campaign worth nearly a quarter of a billion dollars which prominently featured her, but she further infuriated him when she would deny her affair with Lewandowski at a House hearing yesterday. 

Of course, Trump knew full well about the affair and was surely aware of the ad campaign which was ubiquitous on radio and TV. So, he softened the blow with a cushy new job.

Naturally, Trump has appointed someone who might be every bit as bad if not worse than Noem as her successor - Oklahoma GOP Senator Markwayne Mullin. While Noem accused Alex Pretti of "domestic terrorism" claiming he was there to "perpetuate violence", Mullin was little better and characterized Pretti as "a deranged individual who came in to cause massive damage with a loaded pistol was shot and killed.” 

Mullin has as much contempt for immigrants and those who disagree with Trump's immigration policies as Noem. The question is if he will be smart enough not to spend so lavishly on himself and furnish a government jet with a luxury bedroom for briefing sessions with female subordinates.

While Noem deserves her comeuppance, we must remember that it is Trump who set everything into motion concerning ICE's actions on kidnapping people off the streets, deportations and the murder of American citizens.

Marjorie Taylor Greene Doesn't Want to Have a Serious Conversation About Iran or Anything Else

While I certainly have plenty of misgivings about the Trump Administration's aims and objectives about taking military action in Iran, there is a danger of those who have similar reservations in elevating conspiracy theorists and their conspiracies because their views appear to align with their own. 

To be specific, I refer to an editorial in The Bulwark co-written by Andrew Egger and Benjamin Parker titled "Who's in Charge Around Here?" focusing on Secretary of State Marco Rubio's gaffe that the U.S entered the war because Israel decided to attack Iran first. Egger and Parker straddle into Pat Buchanan territory:

One of the only true consistencies of Trump’s foreign policy—besides tariffs—has been his Putin-like insistence on being treated with what he considers the appropriate deference and respect internationally. He’s made it very clear to our allies, like Canada and Denmark, as well as smaller countries like Venezuela, that America is a major country that can do whatever it wants to minor countries. (He treats China and Russia as members of the same great-powers club.) The one exception appears to be Israel, which, despite not being a treaty ally of the United States and being one of the smallest countries on the planet, can nonetheless—at least in the telling of the administration—drag our globe-striding superpower into war.

Their Buchananite tone continued:

Of course, the administration’s telling is wrong. The United States isn’t bound by Israel’s foreign policy any more than it is by France’s or Australia’s. And while suggesting it was all Israel’s idea may make it a bit easier to argue that America was facing an imminent threat under any circumstances, the White House may be opening themselves up by saying so to a barrage of attacks from the anti-Israel parts of its own base.

“We need to have a serious conversation about what the fuck is happening to this country,” former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said yesterday, “and who in the hell are these decisions being made for, and who is making these decisions.”

Since when has Marjorie Taylor Greene ever wanted to have a serious conversation?

Greene simply wishes to vilify Israel and Jews at large. After all, Greene claimed the U.S. and Israel had bombed a school killing over 100 girls. The problem with Greene's claims is that it was made by Iranian state media which she evidently accepts as the gospel truth. 

It isn't to say that school children weren't killed but it cannot be independently verified by whom and there remains a question of how far the school may have been situated from an Iranian military base. But if Greene is telling us to accept Tehran talking points at face value, then she has zero interest in a serious conversation.

Let us remember that Greene has palled around with white supremacists like Nick Fuentes, employed his colleagues, suggested Israel was responsible for JFK's assassination and Charlie Kirk's as well, voted present on resolutions condemning anti-Semitic violence against Jews in D.C. and in Boulder, Colorado later complaining that condemning anti-Semitism is something "forced on Congress."

If Egger, Parker and other Bulwark staff honestly believe Marjorie Taylor Greene wants to have a serious conversation then that tells me that they too are embracing conspiracy theorists and their theories. Alas, anti-Semitism is the world's oldest conspiracy theory. 

In their sincere effort to discredit President Trump and Trumpism, The Bulwark is prepared to amplify anyone who now sees fit to criticize him even if the aims and objectives they espouse are every bit as irrational and nonsensical as those offered by Trump and MAGA.

Simply put, it is impossible to have a serious conversation if you simply exchange one set of stupid and foolish ideas for another set of stupid and foolish ideas.

Why I Now See Bruce Froemming in a Different Light

Last Wednesday, former MLB umpire Bruce Froemming passed away following injuries sustained in a fall. He was 86.

Froemming was a big-league umpire from 1971 through 2007 predominantly in the National League. He would first gain notoriety for a confrontation he would have with Chicago Cubs Milt Pappas when he called ball four on San Diego Padres pinch hitter Larry Stahl denying him a perfect game. While Pappas would get his no-hitter it would begin a public feud between the two men which lasted decades.

Perfect game or not, Froemming would be involved in a MLB record 11 no-hitters including four behind home plate. He would finish his career with 5,163 games umpired - the third most in MLB history behind only Bill Klem (5,373) and Joe West (5,460).

While brushing up on Froemming's achievements following his passing, I came across something of which I was not previously aware.

At the beginning of the 2003 season, Froemming was suspended for 10 games without pay for calling an MLB employee "a stupid Jew bitch." Froemming had argued with the official over travel expenses to Japan where he was to umpire the inaugural series of the 2003 season between the Seattle Mariners and the Oakland A's.

As someone who was following baseball observantly at the time, I am astonished that I was not previously aware of the event.

It would appear that most people who were aware of the incident quickly forgot about it. Consider the words of Phil Mushnick of the New York Post in July 2007 following that year's MLB All-Star Game in San Francisco:

The day before the All-Star Game, Froemming was saluted as both a noble fellow and for a job well done by Fay Vincent, the former commissioner of baseball, in a guest column that appeared in the New York Times. During the game, FOX’s Joe Buck and Tim McCarver lauded Froemming as, “good for baseball.”

But neither the former commissioner, in his Times piece, nor FOX’s broadcasters, while addressing a national audience, saw fit to note – perhaps they were too polite or they just plain forgot – a certain episode. In 2003, Froemming didn’t disengage his cell phone until after he could be heard, at the end of a voice mail, calling MLB administrator Cathy Davis a “stupid Jew bitch.”

The episode made short and quick news. Froemming apologized. Sort of. He explained that his comment about Davis wasn’t meant to be heard by anyone other than his wife. “There was no anti-Semitism on my part, whatsoever,” he further explained. Gee, how could anyone regard “stupid Jew bitch” as anti-Semitic?

Froemming nonetheless served a 10-day suspension. Then, before Froemming could even be forgiven, it was forgotten. Poof! It disappeared. Then his career carried on as if nothing had happened, right up until – and now beyond – this year’s All-Star Game, when he was saluted as a great guy and a credit to the game.

Maybe that’s a good thing. Maybe it isn’t.

But it’s certainly a lucky thing for Froemming that he only slurred a Jewish woman. In a world that has lost its balance, imagine had he slurred a black person. Imagine.

Ya think the FOX broadcasters, Tuesday, would have told a national audience that Froemming has been good for the game? Ya think a former commissioner of baseball would have lauded him in a guest column in the New York Times? Ya think the Times would have run such a column? Ya think Froemming would have worked Tuesday’s All-Star Game?

Froemming would have, in 2003, been fired, condemned to the Land of Al Campanis and to reside in the Jimmy The Greek Go Away Forever Village. Though neither of those men actually spoke a racial slur, their indelicate words were all it took.

I’m not sure what kind of price public figures should pay for their hateful, bigoted words. But whatever it is, and if equality is the prize, it should be the same price.

Double standards aside, there is another consideration. When someone utters a phrase like "stupid Jew bitch", it comes from a deep-seated hatred. One does not utter such words unless one means them in the moment regardless of whatever they might say down the road. 

I strongly suspect that Bruce Froemming harbored anti-Semitic attitudes (as well as negative attitudes towards women) long before he uttered them. His apology isn't so much conveying regret for his attitudes but rather that he was caught in the act of revealing them. How many other times had Froemming uttered anti-Semitic statements in private whether he was alone or with his umpire colleagues? If he did do so, then how many of his fellow umpires agreed with him?

This isn't to say that Bruce Froemming wasn't capable of goodness or kindness. There is, of course, goodness and badness in all of us. 

Yet I now view Froemming in a different light just like I do with Johnny Bench. I acknowledge their achievements and contributions to baseball. But these are the sort of people that I would have no desire to meet much less get to know. R.I.P.

The Last Picture Show Has Long Left a Lasting Impression

This afternoon I went to the Brattle Theatre for a screening of The Last Picture Show. 

Released in 1971 and nominated for 8 Academy Awards, The Last Picture Show features an all-star ensemble cast consisting of Timothy Bottoms, Jeff Bridges, Cloris Leachman, Ellen Burstyn, Eileen Brennan, Ben Johnson. Clu Gulager, Randy Quaid, John Hillerman along with the film debut of Cybill Shepherd. At the time, Shepherd was the muse of the film's director Peter Bogdanovich who adapted the screenplay for the silver screen along with Larry McMurtry who would later become famous for the Lonesome Dove books.

I first remember watching The Last Picture Show on late night TV in the early 1980s. As I recall, it would have been on WDIO/WIRT, the Duluth-Hibbing ABC affiliate which would show late night movies on Saturday night. The Last Picture Show was among several early 1970s films I was first introduced to during this period along with M*A*S*H and Serpico. 

The Last Picture Show left a lasting impression on me. First and foremost, there is the bleakness of smalltown life. Shot in black and white on location in McMurtry's hometown of Archer City, Texas near the Oklahoma border (named Anarene in the film), the landscape was mostly desolate with small pockets of beauty. While Northwestern Ontario is about as far removed from Northern Texas as you could imagine, the desperation of people in isolation is the same everywhere. One wishes to be anywhere other than where one is right now.

Then there are the performances. When I first watched The Last Picture Show more than 40 years ago, I was most struck by Bottoms' performance and have often wondered why he didn't have a bigger Hollywood career along the lines of Bridges. Bottoms would star in The Paper Chase two years later but would later settle for smaller roles in a variety of movies and TV shows and would later develop a niche for playing former President George W. Bush.

Four of the eight Oscar nominations received by The Last Picture Show were in the Best Supporting Actor and Best Supporting Actress categories. Bridges and Johnson each earned Best Supporting Actor nominations with Johnson prevailing while Burstyn and Leachman each earned Best Supporting Actress nominations with Leachman prevailing. 

As I get older, Johnson's performance as Sam the Lion resonates more. Sam the Lion owned the diner, the pool hall and the picture show house. While stern, Sam the Lion was also sentimental. In a scene by the water, Sam the Lion tells Sonny Crawford (played by Bottoms) how he would take a younger married woman to that same place and swim naked:

If she were here now, I'd be just about crazy as I was then in about five minutes. Isn't that ridiculous? 

No, it ain't really. Being crazy about a woman like her is always the right thing to do. Bein' a decrepit bag of bones, that's what's ridiculous. Gettin' old. 

I have no doubt this is what earned Johnson, a bonafide rodeo star and stuntman, the golden statue. At the time Johnson won the statue he was 53 years old - the same age I am now. Yet he appeared to have lived several lifetimes longer. I can scarcely imagine what he endured and yet possessed a masculinity which was dignified and generous.

The muse of Sam the Lion's monologue was Lois Farrow (portrayed by Burstyn). She was the unhappily married mother of Jayce Farrow (portrayed by Shepherd). While there was no denying Shepherd's captivating beauty, it is Burstyn to whom I am drawn. She looked really good with longer hair. Towards the end of the movie, after stopping Sonny Crawford from marrying her daughter, she tells Sonny that she loved Sam the Lion like no one else before or since. I found Burstyn's performance far more compelling than the one for which she earned a Best Actress Oscar several years later for Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore.

I must confess that I never saw the film's 1990 sequel Texasville. Perhaps one day I will. Yet I see The Last Picture Show as a film which stands on its own. There is a certain ambience about early 1970s films which could not be recaptured in the 1990s let alone in the 2020s. 

Nevertheless, here in the 2020s, some 55 years after the film's release many of its stars are still with us. Bottoms is now 74, Quaid is 75 (even if he has gone off the deep end), Bridges and Shepherd are both 76 while Burstyn is 93. Aside from taking a stroll down Amnesia Lane, I wanted to appreciate the work of these actors while they are still walking among us before the final credits roll on their last picture show.

Wayne Granger Only Wore a Cincinnati Reds Uniform for 3 Seasons, But Was Inducted into the Team's Hall of Fame

Former MLB relief pitcher Wayne Granger passed away on Wednesday at the age of 81. No cause of death was announced.

Granger grew up in Western Massachusetts in the small town of Huntington which is about 25 miles northwest of Springfield. In his youth, Granger played baseball, basketball and soccer in high school and would play baseball at Springfield College.

Prior to the 1965 season, Granger signed with the St. Louis Cardinals and would make his big-league debut with the club in 1968 when they won the NL pennant. Granger appeared in Game 6 of the World Series against the Detroit Tigers which the Cardinals lost 13-1. While Granger pitched two scoreless innings he did plunk both Al Kaline and Willie Horton.

Only 48 hours after Granger pitched in the World Series, the Cardinals would trade him and speedster Bobby Tolan to the Cincinnati Reds for veteran outfielder Vada Pinson. 

In his inaugural season for the Reds in 1969, Granger set a then big-league record with 90 appearances out of the bullpen resulting in 27 saves. The following year, the Reds would win the NL pennant and Granger contributed with a league leading 35 saves. During the 1970 season, the Reds would move from Crosley Field to Riverfront Stadium. Granger has the distinction of both throwing the last pitch and earning the last win for the Reds at Crosley Field in a game against the San Francisco Giants.

For the second time in three seasons, Granger would find himself in World Series competition this time against the Baltimore Orioles. In Game 3 of the 1970 World Series, Granger gave up a grand slam HR to Orioles pitcher Dave McNally marking the only time a pitcher ever hit a grand slam in World Series competition. Granger would also give up two runs in the deciding Game 5.

In 1971, Granger would lead the NL in appearances by a pitcher with 70. But the Reds struggled that season and the team would trade him to the Minnesota Twins for reliever Tom Hall. After a single season with Minnesota, the Twins would send him back to the Cardinals in the trade which brought Larry Hisle to the Twin Cities. 

Granger's second tenure with the Redbirds was short-lived and by August he was in a New York Yankees uniform. In the next three seasons, Granger would pitch with the Chicago White Sox, Houston Astros and the Montreal Expos ending his big-league career in 1976. Granger tried to hook on with the Atlanta Braves in 1977 but would be released during spring training and would end up pitching in the Mexican League for two seasons.

In 451 appearances (all out of the bullpen) over 9 big-league seasons, Granger went 35-35 with a 3.14 ERA collecting 108 career saves. 

Although Granger only pitched with the Reds for three seasons, he would be elected to the team's Hall of Fame in 1982. No other Reds player in the team's Hall of Fame played fewer seasons in Cincinnati than Granger.

Wayne Granger certainly made a lasting impression with Cincinnati Reds' fans. R.I.P.

Khamenei Reportedly Killed After U.S. & Israel Strike Iran

Following a joint U.S.-Israeli military operation in Iran, both Israel and President Trump have reported that the Ayatollah Khamenei has been killed in an airstrike. 

For their part, Iran claims Khamenei is alive, well and "commanding the field." Yet one must consider this to be a "Baghdad Bob" moment.

Trump told the Iranian people, “When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take.”

Presuming that Khamenei and other members of Iran's leadership are dead or incapacitated, who will succeed them?

Consider what I wrote scarcely 48 hours ago:

Yet let us suppose there is military action in Iran. Who can say it would be any different than what occurred in Venezuela earlier this year where they extracted Nicolas Maduro only to install his vice-president as his replacement? Meet the new Ayatollah. Same as the old Ayatollah. 

I also think the words of Adrienne Mahsa Varkiani, an Iranian American, who is the Deputy Editor of The New Republic, should be given weight in a piece she wrote today titled "I Want Iran To Be Free More Than Anything; I Also Don't Trust Trump":

Trump can talk about how he cares about the freedom of Iranians all he wants, but everything he has done until now makes that hard to believe.

Just examine how the Trump administration is viewing its operation inside Iran. This round of strikes on Iran is not called “Operation Aiding Freedom”—or some feel-good cliche. It is called “Operation Epic Fury,” which is being led by the newly-renamed “Department of War.”

But if that is too small a point, perhaps we can look at what Trump has really done to support the Iranian people thus far. In 2017, just one week after becoming president, he banned all Iranians from the United States. It is almost silly to mention that now, given how much worse things have gotten since then, but at the time, it was a nightmare. For a few days, that ban applied to valid visa holders and permanent residents as well. I remember calling my cousins with green cards who were outside the country, trying to explain to them in my broken Farsi the latest on immigration law.

That ban has only gotten worse in his second term—with no new visa applicants allowed to enter the United States. (In his first term, Trump eventually relented and allowed Iranian students the opportunity to continue to come study here.)

Varkiani then goes on to decry Trump's decision to withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018. I would part company from her on that for the simple reason the JCPOA had the effect of giving a lifeline to the Khamenei and company and only prolonged the suffering of the Iranian people. It is also worth noting that President Biden did not see fit to rejoin the JCPOA after rejoining the Paris Climate Agreement, UNESCO and WHO.

Nevertheless, I share Varkiani's mistrust of Trump regarding the aspirations of the Iranian people when he has gone out of his way never to welcome Iranians who opposed the regime in this country. In which case, who can say that Trump won't reach an agreement with a member of the existing regime as he has done in Venezuela? Or perhaps we will see the restoration of the House of Pahlavi. The days of the Shah of Iran don't look so bad after nearly half a century of rule by Shiite Islamic fundamentalists, but there were plenty of human rights abuses under the last Shah of Iran. Is there any reason to believe that Reza Pahlavi would be better than his father? After all, Bashar al-Assad proved to be more ruthless than his father in Syria.

Naturally, I shed no tears for Khamenei and hope the Iranian regime will come to a long overdue end. But I worry that Iranians will simply trade one murderous regime for another. And if Trump and his so-called Board of Peace are to be involved in a post-Khamenei Iran, the opportunities for corruption will be staggering. 

However, even if Iran's new regime is less than stellar, if it no longer has designs on the destruction of Israel then it will be one less thing for the Jewish state to worry about. Not that Israel isn't still surrounded by countries and an international community hostile to it. But not having a nuclear design with designs to use that nuclear power against Israel would be quite significant.

Of course, if it turns out that Khamenei is in fact not dead then both Trump and Israel will have egg on their face. Such an error would put the wind back into the sails of the Iranian regime. That would be most unfortunate. If you are trying to kill the Ayatollah, you better not miss.

UPDATE: Khamenei has been confirmed dead with Iranians taking to the streets to celebrate. I hope their celebration isn't short-lived. I also recall rejoicing in Baghdad after the fall of Saddam in 2003. Only time will tell.

Why I Will Forever Associate Neil Sedaka with Wheeling, West Virginia

Shortly before leaving work, I learned of the passing of singer-songwriter Neil Sedaka at the age of 86. Sedaka's death was sudden as he was rushed to the hospital early this morning.

The Brooklyn-born Sedaka had two distinct periods of success - the early 1960's when he scored hits like "Breaking Up is Hard to Do" and "Calendar Girl" and the mid 1970's when, with a boost from Elton John, had a career resurgence with "Bad Blood" (featuring John), "Laughter in the Rain" along with Captain and Tennille's cover of "Love Will Keep Us Together" which featured Toni Tenille singing "Sedaka is back" at the conclusion of the song.

Sadly, Sedaka is now gone.

Yet my favorite Neil Sedaka song comes not from his peaks but during the valley in between. When chart success proved elusive for Sedaka in North America and the U.K., he found a receptive audience in Australia and New Zealand and scored a couple of big hits in the late 1960's and early 1970's - "Star-Crossed Lovers" and "Wheeling, West Virginia".

For those of you familiar with these pages can hazard a guess that it is the latter song which has become my favorite of Sedaka's on account of my business trip to Wheeling in June 2025. In anticipation of my trip, I thought of songs about West Virginia. Of course, there is John Denver's "(Take Me Home) Country Roads" which is now the official state song. There is also "West Virginia Fantasies" which is part of Chicago's "Ballet for a Girl in Buchannon" suite composed by James Pankow.

But I certainly didn't expect to come across a song named for Wheeling much less one sung by Neil Sedaka. Co-written with his longtime lyricist Howard Greenfield, the song has a breezy, elaborate orchestration accompanied by introspective, morose lyrics on the price of success:

Where is the guy from Wheelin' West Virginia
Why did he have to roam
So far away from Wheelin' West Virginia
Thousands of miles from home

Gone is the guy from Wheelin' West Virginia
Gone is the world he used to know
There's no such place as Wheelin' West Virginia

It faded long ago 

Given that this was a hit south of the Equator more than half a century ago, I'm not sure how well known this song is Wheeling, West Virginia although I'm sure he must have performed at the Capitol Theatre at some point in his six-decade career. 

I cannot speak for the people of Wheeling, West Virginia, but I can tell you that I listened to this song scarcely 24 hours ago. I can also tell you that when I think of Neil Sedaka I will always think of Wheeling, West Virigina and when I think of Wheeling, West Virginia I will always think of Neil Sedaka. R.I.P.

Will There Be a New Iran?

The time has come to give long overdue attention to the situation in Iran.

Since late last year, there have been systemic protests against the Iranian regime with the regime responding by killing between 7,000 and 30,000 civilians.

Mass protests are hardly new in Iran. Indeed, they have occurred regularly since the ill-fated Green Movement of 2009 following the "election" of then Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Of course, then President Obama refused to back the Green Movement because he wanted to achieve a nuclear deal with Iran. For Obama, it was more important to preserve a repressive regime in the name of justifying his Nobel Peace Prize than it was to stand with people fighting for their freedom. 

Yes, it is true that in 2022 Obama admitted that he erred in not backing the Green Movement. Better late than never perhaps. But Obama knew what his choices were and chose his own ego over the greater good. If Obama were ever to be sent back to the White House, I do not have confidence that he would be any wiser. 

Yet Obama's failure to back the Green Movement has not stopped Iranians for standing up for themselves. There were protests influenced by the Arab Spring in 2011, the Dey Protests of 2017-2018, Bloody November in 2019 as well as the 2022 women led protest sparked by the murder of Mahsa Amini by Iran's morality police for not wearing her hijab properly.

What is different about this set of protests is how Iran's regime appears to be crumbling. Iran's Supreme Leader the Ayatollah Khamenei turns 87 in April, and the country has been plagued by water, food and fuel shortages. The Iranian regime is only capable of responding with violence against their own people.

Then there is the threat of military action by President Trump. Yet those threats are accompanied by diplomatic talks over its nuclear program. Should diplomacy succeed then the Trump Administration will have given the Iranian regime a lifeline and a guarantee of more water, food and fuel shortages with a large dose of political repression. 

Yet let us suppose there is military action in Iran. Who can say it would be any different than what occurred in Venezuela earlier this year where they extracted Nicolas Maduro only to install his vice-president as his replacement? Meet the new Ayatollah. Same as the old Ayatollah. 

From where I sit nearly 6,000 miles away from Tehran, I believe the best possible outcome would be if the regime were to collapse by the sheer force of popular revolt from within and for Iranians to determine their own destiny. I write this knowing full well such a thing is unlikely to happen without the aid of external actors. While it is true that Iranians have long been the most pro-American nation in the Middle East outside of Israel, leave it to Trump to squander that good will.

During his SOTU address earlier this week, Trump stated:

And just over the last couple of months with the protests, they’ve killed at least, it looks like, 32,000 protesters — 32,000 protesters in their own country. They shot them and hung them. We stopped them from hanging a lot of them with the threat of serious violence.

I'm not sure how much Trump has deterred the Iranian regime from killing their own people. Of course, Trump is right to decry these killings. Yet his credibility on the subject is severely undermined by the enthusiasm with which he and his administration defended the executions of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis last month. It is hard to take Trump seriously concerning his defense of political protest in Iran when he does not support political protest on American soil unless it is a crowd trying to overturn an election on his behalf. 

Unfortunately, when it comes to Iran, Democrats are little better. Democrats are falling all over themselves to accuse Israel of genocide while looking upon Iran with complete indifference except to oppose military intervention either by Trump or by Israel. Well, why would those who accuse Israel of genocide condemn Iran when Iran has long been a significant benefactor for Hamas? Why would pro-Hamas apologists bite the hand which helps feed Hamas?

Iran's Islamic regime has made the lives of Iranians miserable on all counts. Nothing good comes from their remaining in power. Yet they cannot be replaced by an entity which will either maintain the status quo or make things worse. But what Iran lacks in water, food, fuel and basic freedoms is made up by a thriving civil society which, in the face of death, has the capability of being the foundation of a new Iran which could contribute positively to the Middle East and the world. 

The question which remains is whether a new Iran will have a chance to emerge or if the Trump Administration gives it yet another lifeline.

Why Did I Watch Trump's 107 Minute SOTU Address?

 

I know there were a great many people who skipped watching President Trump's SOTU address including nearly half of all Democratic members of both Houses.

Of course, much of it was going to be bullshit just like his 100-minute address to Congress last March.

True to form, Trump told some whoppers.

He claimed that America was raking in trillions in tariffs from foreign government when in reality it is paid by American importers and passed onto consumers.

He claimed to have ended 8 wars when the U.S. is not party to most of these ceasefires or peace agreements.

He claimed America had record inflation under President Biden. In fact, America had much higher inflation both after the end of WWII and during the Watergate scandal.

He claimed America saw the sharpest drop in its murder rate in history. Except that the study didn't include either Jackson, Mississippi or Birmingham, Alabama which had the highest murder per capita rates in the U.S. in 2024. Even so, the murder rate has been declining for years save for a spike during COVID in 2020.

He claimed the price of eggs have declined by 60%. Perhaps the wholesale price, but not the retail price.

He claimed to have obliterated Iran's nuclear program but wants to go to war with them because their nuclear program is still in operation.

But then it got ugly. 

Trump claimed corruption was plundering America and laid all of it at the feet of "Somali pirates" in Minnesota. Says the President who is using his office to profit to the tune of nearly $4 billion off crypto schemes.

Well, President Reagan had the War on Drugs.

Well, now Trump has started the War on Fraud and is appointing JD Vance to lead the charge. 

You know the guy who created stories about Haitian immigrants eating cats and dogs. 

What could go wrong?

Based on what's already gone wrong, I shudder to think about that.

After all, the demagoguery of the Trump Administration against the Somali community is what eventually resulted in the deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti.

Trump castigated Democrats for not funding DHS claiming they were impeding snow removal. Yeah, well here in Massachusetts, Governor Healey declared a state of emergency and called in the state National Guard. She didn't need Trump to take action.

This isn't to say that Trump didn't reward genuinely good deeds as he did with 100-year-old Navy Captain Royce Williams for his service in Korea bestowing him with the Congressional Medal of Honor. But like always, Trump made it about himself and said he wanted to give himself a Congressional Medal of Honor. Indeed, a few days ago, Trump said he should have received a Congressional Medal for visiting Iraq during his first term in 2018.

So why did I give 107 minutes of my time to a bullshit artist?

Because it is my duty to do so as an act of citizenry. If we are to effectively criticize Trump, then we have to remind ourselves of what he tells us and what he intends to do so no matter how nonsensical it is. Like it or not, Trump is President and that makes him a dangerous man. We need to shine a light to that danger and do everything in our power to make that danger stop.

In her SOTU response, Virginia Democratic Governor Abigail Spanberger noted:

In his speech tonight, the President did what he always does. He lied, he scapegoated and he distracted. And he offered no real solutions to our nation's pressing challenges, so many of which he is making actively worse. He tries to divide us. He tries to enrage us. To pit us against one another, neighbor against neighbor. And sometimes he succeeds. 

With that said, I would have preferred it if Democrats showed up and then walked out en masse as he was decrying Somalians. It would have made for compelling drama. 

At the same time, decades pass in days. Chances are very few people will remember what Trump said tonight. Some, of course, have tuned him out. But others among us because he will have said and done so many other egregious things. When you flood the zone with shit, some of it will remains and its stench will linger.

Thoughts on Another Snowstorm: Well At Least I'm Not in Fall River, MA or Providence, RI

As you may be aware, much of the Northeast United States was pummeled with snow. 

Here in Cambridge, we just got a little over a foot of snow. But we still have the snow from last month. And then there was the wind. 

Last night, I did some shoveling and my left arm is still sore.

Still, it could have been much worse.

Had I lived in either Fall River or New Bedford, I would have faced more than 3 feet of snow as the two southeastern Massachusetts communities received 41 and 37 inches of snow, respectively. 

Providence, Rhode Island also received exactly 3 feet of snow. The 28.6 inches it received during the Blizzard of '78 now seems paltry by comparison.

As for me, with Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey's state of emergency order, I worked from home yesterday. 

I will be working from home again today. While the snow has ceased to fall, the MBTA is operating on Sunday service. I am sure there will be residual delays for the rest of the week as was the case last month. 

I'll make my way to the office tomorrow. But for today I don't want to take any chances. I am at a stage in my life where I do not want to rush carrying my laptop and other stuff knowing full well that I would not be on time for work no matter how early I left.

Less is more. 

Well, maybe except when it comes to snow.

Bill Mazeroski Was So Much More Than His Game Winning HR in the 1960 World Series

 

Bill Mazeroski, best remembered for hitting a game winning HR in Game 7 of the 1960 World Series, passed away yesterday at the age of 89.

Mazeroski's death comes only a week after that of his longtime Pittsburgh Pirates teammate Elroy Face. With Mazeroski's passing, pitcher Vernon Law and outfielder Bob Skinner are the last living members of that 1960 World Series champion Pirates team which upended the powerhouse New York Yankees against all odds.

Yet Mazeroski was sometimes maligned for that HR with some mistakenly believing it was the only reason he was elected by the Veterans Committee into the Baseball Hall of Fame in 2001. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Mazeroski was the greatest second baseman in the NL from late 1950s into the late 1960s winning 8 Gold Gloves at the position between 1958 and 1967. While his offensive production was modest with a lifetime batting average of .260 with 138 HR and 853 RBI over 2163 career games. His 2016 career hits as a second baseman puts him at 22nd on the all-time list although at the time of his retirement he would have been 11th which just goes to show how second base has emerged as a more offense-oriented position. Those 2016 hits put him 8th on the Pirates all-time list.

I cannot emphasize enough that Mazeroski spent his entire 17-year MLB career with the Bucs. Not only did he win a ring with the Pirates in 1960, but he also did so again in 1971. Maz and Roberto Clemente were the only two players who won rings with both teams though Danny Murtaugh did manage both teams. Bill Virdon played on the 1960 Bucs and by 1971 was on Murtaugh's coaching staff. 

Bill Mazeroski earned his place in baseball history not only through his historic HR off Ralph Terry to make the Pirates champions, but with his stellar play with Pittsburgh throughout his career. He belongs in Cooperstown.

I would be remiss if I didn't mention my trip to Wheeling, West Virginia last June. Of course, Mazeroski was born and raised in Wheeling which is about 60 miles west of Pittsburgh. Right across the street from the hotel where I was staying was a sports tavern with a mural of sports legends who were either from the Wheeling area or had spent time there. Mazeroski had a very prominent spot on that mural. He will always have a spot on that mural, a spot in Cooperstown and a soft spot in the hearts of Pittsburgh Pirates fans everywhere. R.I.P.

Man on the Run: Paul McCartney Has Slowed Down But He Isn't Standing Still

This evening, I attended a special screening of Man on the Run, a documentary covering the life of Paul McCartney from the breakup of The Beatles, the origins of his solo career and the rise of Wings through the assassination of John Lennon.

Early on in the film we see footage of McCartney's farm in Scotland in its early days. Macca tells us that he didn't know if he'd ever write another song after The Beatles disbanded. This I did not find convincing considering that most of the footage of him is singing or playing the guitar even in casual moments. Music would always be a part of his life. The question was would it be accepted by the public let alone measure up to The Beatles.

McCartney's early solo efforts (McCartney, Ram) and early efforts with Wings (Wild Life, Red Rose Speedway) were maligned and misunderstood. Greater success would come in the form of Wing's seminal album Band on the Run followed by Venus and Mars, Wings at the Speed of Sound and Wings Over America, the live album documenting Wings' viability as a live act. Of course, even with these successes, McCartney's work with Wings would always be measured against The Beatles although Wings' 1977 "Mull of Kintyre" would be a bigger hit in the U.K. than any Beatles single. 

Of course, there was always hope of a Beatles reunion whether it was $3,000 from Lorne Michaels in the early years of SNL to the hundreds of millions of dollars. Alas those hopes were forever shattered with John Lennon's assassination in December 1980.

Grounding McCartney during this period was his wife Linda who was an integral part of Wings. Although Linda McCartney has been dead for nearly 30 years, she remains very much a part of his life through his memories and through his children. 

Following the screening, there was a bonus clip of McCartney speaking with Man on the Run director Morgan Neville. What struck me most about their dialogue is how old Macca is getting. Yes, he is still touring but he was laboring to play both "1985" and "Maybe I'm Amazed" on the piano and did not attempt to sing either song in Neville's presence. 

Yet we must remember that McCartney will turn 84 in June. In other words, "When I'm 64" will be commemorating a 20th anniversary of sorts. The fact remains that McCartney could sell out any stadium in the world. Most people understand that one cannot do at 83 what was one was able to do at 23 and 33. 

It is worth noting there was a clip of a reporter questioning McCartney's ability to perform at 33 which the reporter viewed as old age for rock 'n roll. Macca invited the reporter to see the show and then come backstage after and tell him if he still had it or not. In our present age, I suspect most people are just happy to be in Paul McCartney's presence for a couple of hours even if he can't hit the notes he once hit with ease. Macca's music and The Beatles at large have a larger meaning for people. As such, people want to appreciate Paul McCartney while he is still here. For his part, Macca still hopes we will enjoy the show. 

Tony Clark Resigns as MLBPA Executive Director Following Internal Investigation Amid Federal Probe

(Associated Press)

Tony Clark abruptly resigned as Executive Director of the Major League Baseball Players Association (MLBPA) today following an internal investigation which uncovered an inappropriate relationship with his sister-in-law who had been in the employ of MLBPA since 2023.

Clark's resignation comes following a federal investigation of the MLBPA launched last year amid a whistleblower complaint that Clark had been profiting off licensing fees and other programs launched under his leadership. Before stepping down today, Clark had led the organization since December 2013 following the death of his predecessor Michael Weiner. Clark was the first former MLB player to lead the organization. He played in the big leagues for 15 seasons primarily with the Detroit Tigers and the Arizona Diamondbacks along with stints with the Boston Red Sox, New York Mets, New York Yankees and the San Diego Padres.

The shakeup comes amid the expiration of the CBA between MLBPA and MLB come December 1st. With MLB seeking to impose a salary cap, speculation has abounded that the 2027 MLB season could be awash as the owners are prepared to impose a lockout. 

The players could select an interim director as soon as tomorrow and Bruce Meyer, the union's lead negotiator, is the most likely choice to succeed Clark. Although Meyer has rankled some feathers among MLBPA's ranks and some would prefer Harry Marino, the labor lawyer who unionized minor league baseball, to succeed Clark. It is conceivable that down the line the players could choose Marino as their Executive Director and retain Meyer as their lead negotiator. 

I shudder to think what Marvin Miller would have thought of this spectacle. Miller was chosen as the first Executive Director of the MLBPA 60 years ago when it be ceased to be a company union making it one of the most powerful unions in American history. Of course, Clark has not been charged with a crime and is innocent until proven guilty if charges come to pass. As such, I could imagine Miller looking at the accusations against Clark with some skepticism especially only months before the expiration of the CBA. 

Yet I also cannot help but think that Miller would be disgusted by Clark or any union leader using their office for personal gain. I also cannot imagine Miller engaging in such nepotism even without the impropriety of an inappropriate relationship.

Like a lot of other things in this world, the MLBPA ain't what it used to be.

Thoughts on AOC Accusing Israel of Genocide on German Soil

While participating on a panel at the Munich Security Conference last Friday, New York Democratic Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez accused Israel of committing genocide. Her comment came in response to a question from Hegar Shazaf, a journalist from the Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz concerning the reevaluation of military aid to Israel:

I think that, personally, the idea of completely unconditional aid, no matter what one does, does not make sense. I think it enabled a genocide in Gaza, and I think that we have thousands of women and children dead … that was completely avoidable.

Not surprisingly, AOC spares Hamas from any criticism or culpability. After all, it is Hamas which has long used their civilian populace as human shields in an effort to turn them into involuntary martyrs. Egypt, Jordan and other Arab states could have opened their borders to the people of Gaza, but it is so much easier for them to vilify Israel. 

Of course, AOC engaging in defamation against Israel is nothing new under the sun. But what makes this particular accusation different is the fact that she uttered it on German soil. That she did so was no accident. Indeed, in accusing Israel of genocide on German soil was AOC's way of likening the Jewish State to the Nazis. 

Yet in accusing Israel of committing genocide while on German soil, AOC reveals her ignorance of what genocide actually is. The Nazis sought to eliminate Jews from the face of the Earth, a goal shared by Hamas. Israel merely wishes to protect itself from yet another entity which wishes to exterminate Jews from the face of the Earth. 

Alas, this will fall on deaf ears of most Democrats and AOC knows is all too well as speculation abounds for a White House bid in 2028. And if AOC sees fit to launch a White House bid, "the Israel is guilty of genocide" will become a focal point of her stump speech. Unfortunately, I suspect that nearly all Democratic aspirants for the White House in 2028 will fall over themselves trying to render Israel an international pariah with few dissidents. Pennsylvania Democratic Senator John Fetterman rebuked AOC during an appearance on Fox News stating, "Why is she so eager to criticize Israel, but I don't recall her saying anything as Iran executed thousands of protestors! There was never a genocide in Gaza."

And this is exactly the point. There is no genocide in Gaza. AOC's assertion that there is every bit as much of a lie as Donald Trump's claim that he won the 2020 election. No amount of screeching will change the fact.

The problem though is that far too many people believe lies to be true and sometimes those beliefs are expressed at the ballot box. In this respect, an AOC presidency would be every bit much of an assault on the truth as the continuation of the Trump presidency or a successor dedicated to implementing the MAGA agenda. AOC is every bit as much a demagogue as Trump or his minions and thus every bit as dangerous to the future of American democracy as Trump and MAGA are.