Thursday, September 13, 2012

One Nation, One Vote

“In a related story” (reference my recent post entitled “Israel Cracks the Whip”), President Obama has allegedly “snubbed” Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu by declining to meet with him later this month when Benny the Nat makes one of his regular tours on horseback around the ol' plantation, whip in hand. Now, if it were any other national leader it would be no big deal, but when Israel is involved it's a “snub” -- but we're used to that, right? And of course the media are all in an uproar: It “threaten(s) to plunge U.S.-Israeli relations into crisis” and so on. In my opinion, the only “crisis” is the Constitutional crisis that occurs every time an American president or Congressman prefers Israel's interests to ours... but let that go for now. It is remarkable, however, that Obama is pulling this stunt right in the middle of election season – almost as if he suspects that Americans, and even some of his “base”, are starting to get fed up with our servitude to Israel. It's all about votes, in other words, and a move this drastic has to reflect a certain level of panic, or at least paranoia, on the part of the prez. He seems to agree with those who think it's going to be a close race, and therefore is casting about for every possible vote. 

On the other hand, doesn't Obama risk losing votes if Israel's fans and facilitators in the U.S. think he's wandering off the reservation – especially with Mitt Romney breathing fire and foaming at the mouth every time the subject of our “eternal ally” comes up? Ah, yes – it's great to watch those who sow the wind reaping a whirlwind, especially while still in office.

But there's another nuance to all this – one that our mainstream media will never breathe a word of, of course. Rumor has it that Israeli companies control U.S. voting machines – not that they manufacture them but that they have, mysteriously, obtained the contracts to produce and run the software (we're talking about electronic machines now, not the old mechanical kind) which records and tallies the votes. I haven't looked into this in a big way, but it's easy enough to find Google links on the subject. Now... what if -- just what if -- there's some truth to this, and what if Israel decided that Obama had become just too unreliable an asset? Granted, as I've said, any candidate will have been thoroughly vetted by the boys in Tel Aviv, but Obama was vetted four years ago, and a lot can happen in four years. He might be starting to answer to a different dog whistle... or none at all. Or, they might simply fear that he is, which is the same thing. And if they're really in charge of counting the votes in our elections (no more incredible than anything else in the political arena these days)... well, you see where this is going. Especially if it's already a close election, which it shows every indication of being. A thumb on the scale could very well throw the election Romney's way, the way Mayor Daley used a very fat thumb to grant JFK Illinois' electoral votes in 1960. Imagine the “BFF” of Israel that Romney would become if they did him this one tiny favor.  Why, you could expect him to slap an ICBM on Tehran before the first inaugural ball kicked off.   

Of course Jewish voters in the U.S. are facing the same dilemma they have faced in previous elections – do they vote for liberal social programs or for whoever seems more joined at the hip with Israel? Sometimes this turns out to be the same person, but sometimes not – and this time around “not” seems to be the case. The Israeli thumb on the scale would, among other things, keep their ambivalences from making a critical difference.

But really, folks – would anyone in charge of an election in the U.S. be crazy enough to give a foreign power all the tools it needed to change the outcome of an election without being detected? Wouldn't that be, at the very least, a severe conflict of interest? And after all, why would we deserve such treatment, since we've never interfered to the least degree in the elections of any other country (sound of choking on coffee).

Personally, I don't think Romney has a snowball's chance in Baghdad of winning the election – but if he should, and if it's extremely close (a la Bush-Gore), and if that result surprises and shocks everyone, especially the MSM and the pollsters... well, just remember this intriguing rumor.

No comments: