This Is Small Business in America: Burdened, Crushed, Doomed

This Is Small Business in America: Burdened, Crushed, Doomed

If you make it increasingly costly and risky to open a small enterprise, then no wonder unemployment remains high.

You hear a lot about Kafkaesque stifling bureaucracy in Greece and other struggling European nations, but America's Status Quo is trying its best to destroy small enterprise with taxes and crushing bureaucracy. I am self-employed, and have been for most of my life. When I did take a paid position, it was in other small enterprises or local non-profit organizations.

I mention this because there is an unbridgeable divide in any discussion of small business between those who have no experience in entrepreneural enterprise (i.e. they've worked for the government, NGOs/non-profits or Corporate America their entire careers) and those who have.

There are all sorts of similar chasms that cannot be crossed and which quickly reveal a surreal disconnect from actual lived reality: for example, the difference between actually playing football--yes, with pads, a muddy field and guys trying to slam you to the ground--and being an armchair quarterback who's never been hit even once, never caught a pass or ever struggled to bring down a faster, bigger player. (And yes, I did play football in high school as a poor dumb skinny kid who mostly warmed the bench for good reason, but I lettered.)

At the extreme of this disconnect, we have armchair generals screaming for war who have no experience of combat or war as it is actually experienced.

You get the point: it's very easy for well-paid pundits who have never started a single real enterprise or met a single payroll to pontificate about "opportunity" and small business as the engine of growth, blah blah blah. It's also easy for those with no actual experience to reach all sorts of absurd conclusions about how easy it is to turn a small business into great wealth. (No, Bain Capital or other Wall Street outposts of financialization are not "small business.")

In real life, it's only easy to run a small business into the ground, especially when there's a thousand tons of junk fees, taxes and useless bureaucratic requirements on your back. Lest you think this an exaggeration, consider that it took two years and $200,000 to open an ice cream parlor in a vacant retail space:

"Ms. Pries said it took two years to open the ice cream parlor, due largely to the city’s morass of permits, procedures and approvals required to start a small business. While waiting for permission to operate, she still had to pay rent and other costs, going deeper into debt each passing month without knowing for sure if she would ever be allowed to open.

“It’s just a huge risk,” she said, noting that the financing came from family and friends, not a bank. “At several points you wonder if you should just walk away and take the loss.”

Ms. Pries said she had to endure months of runaround and pay a lawyer to determine whether her location (a former grocery, vacant for years) was eligible to become a restaurant. There were permit fees of $20,000; a demand that she create a detailed map of all existing area businesses (the city didn’t have one); and an $11,000 charge just to turn on the water."

There is nothing mysterious about the cause of this Kafkaesque Status Quo: each city, county, state and Federal fiefdom must justify its existence and payroll, and everyone in each fiefdom will fight with every fiber of their being to protect their turf. Politically, it's a fight to the death to trim even the thinnest slice of bureaucracy, and so little if any ever gets trimmed.

Nobody will care until the city, county and state's revenues collapse as people opt out of supporting the bloated dead-weight of the Status Quo with their own sweat and blood.

The only way to survive is to not have a "real" business, i.e. you write code in your living room or parents' basement, or you do enough business in the informal sector (cash) to support your high-cost formal business.

Taxes and bureaucracy are not just urban phenomena, as this insightful report from Eric in Texas shows. Eric draws a critically important causal line between the stifling of small enterprise and high structural unemployment: if you make it so costly, risky and burdensome to start a business and hire people, then no wonder unemployment is high and will stay high.

One of your recent posts made me think of how difficult reinventing communities and coming up with creative solutions for the problems of unemployment and displaced people in our society is. I think it has to do mainly with the way in which lower middle class / middle class people are overburdened with taxation. As you stated in your post, the amount of taxation is staggering. Especially for the self employed, like myself.

My wife and I pay much the same percentage taxes as you listed in your post. I live in a rural area of Texas and from time to time small acreage properties go up for sale around our home. If we wanted to buy some adjacent acreage for the purpose of inviting a few of our friends, who are teetering on the edge of unemployment and facing the prospect of real poverty, to live next to us and help each other grow food, take care of livestock and find creative self employment opportunities in our area together, the resultant burden of taxation would prevent it.

For example, as I see it, my wife and I would now be paying property taxes on two properties, one would not have the homestead exemption. Any "improvement" on the new property, e.g. a small house built for our friends, would only increase the property taxes. We would also have to consider, if we planned to live together in this way long term with the major contribution of our "unemployed" friends being their labor and time invested in our communal living experiment, what kinds of taxes we might be subject to in the future based on the way we are using each others time and energy to achieve solutions for food production, child rearing, shelter, etc. I don't know if we would be subjected to any taxation in doing these things only assuming we might be.

To attempt to sum up my reaction to your post, I will make a list of what I think would impede a lower middle class person who has some discretionary income and could provide a small house and small acreage for the benefit of a few friends on the brink of poverty, with the view to the arrangement being ultimately beneficial to all involved.

1. Increased property taxes
2. The possibility of providing mandatory health insurance through "Obama care"
3. Taxes and or restrictions on what produce we can sell through farmer's markets or through the Internet, e.g. the recent crackdown on raw milk sells, and "cottage foods" like goat cheese, homemade pies, homemade canned goods, etc. In other words, if our whole way of life is to produce locally grown food for ourselves and our extended "family" and this is threatened through excessive regulation and or taxation, I wonder if it's really realistic to pursue.
4. In Texas taxes are rising, even in this recession school taxes, property taxes, fees, etc. are all going up.
5. Federal taxes look like they are poised to increase.

If I didn't have to worry about taking on the burden of all these forms of taxation, property taxes being the most onerous to me, I might could use what capital I have to invest in a communal living arrangement that I would hope to be of benefit to my family and some of our friends.

It's the idea, ultimately, that I want to reinvent my community (for me that means bringing friends in close relationship in mutual work for mutual benefit) and provide opportunities to contribute. But if that means having to tangle with bureaucrats over how much more I now owe because of my desire to do these things, I think I will be doing better to try to take care of myself, my wife, and our children, and leave the rest of my loved ones to prayer and occasional modest charity.

In short, if we were not taxed every time we tried to do something, we just might damn well do something!

Let's focus on getting rid of property taxes, and other forms of ridiculous taxation so that we can free up our energy and time to do the very things you advocated so well in your post.

I realize the benefit to myself and so many of some forms of government assistance, for example food stamps, child tax credit, energy efficiency rebates.... I think good government programs could be sustained if we did things like close our military bases around the world, brought the troops back to the states, and made education and real estate much less expensive, and allowed people to grow and market local foods without encumberance.

You wrote:

Here is the ugly truth about the Savior State, welfare state, social welfare state, or whatever you choose to call the Central State: The Savior State displaces and destroys community and social capital. By making individuals dependent on the Central State for free money, free food, free housing, etc., then the State has taken over the natural function of community.

In my opinion, it is also that the Savior State displaces and destroys even the potential for ( my main point) community and social capital. By placing oppressive, punitive, discouraging, and unreasonable forms of taxation on individuals who may otherwise extend resources of capital towards helping their neighbors, friends, and even family. In this way, then, the State has decided to oppress and retard the development of communities.

Well said, Eric, thank you. Before you jump in to "correct" this view of small enterprise in America, first list how many enterprises you have started, owned or run, and how many people were/are on your payroll.

If you think it's so easy to get rich in small business, then here's the keys, and payday's on Friday.

Ex-Cop Admits To Robbing Bank To Get Health Benefits In Federal Prison

COLUMBUS, Ga. (CBS Atlanta) — A former Columbus police officer admitted in court that he robbed a bank last year so he can get health benefits being in a federal prison.

Edward Pascucci told U.S. District Court Judge Clay D. Land Thursday that he was facing “severe health problems” and homelessness when he decided to rob the Citizens Trust Bank last August, according to the Columbus Ledger-Enquirer.

“I didn’t want to be homeless,” Pascucci said, according to the paper. “I should not have manipulated the justice system, but I couldn’t think of any other way to get help.”

The FBI said Pascucci walked out of the bank with more than $1,000, according to WTVM-TV. He was jobless for more than a year when the crime occurred.

Pascucci – who served as a police officer for 15 years – was sentenced to five years and three months in prison.

Businesses Pin Hopes on Digital Scrapbook Pinterest

Small businesses, and their larger counterparts, are getting extremely attached to one of the hottest new social-networking sites: Pinterest.

Clothing retailers, wedding planners and graphic designers are among the swelling business crowd joining the popular social-media site, which lets users "pin" images of items that interest them to their profiles.

Pinterest's millions of users create digital scrapbooks that display images under themes such as favorite foods, wanted wedding gifts and coveted handbags. Some users simply catalog items they like, others use it to organize ideas for projects, such as redecorating a bedroom or creating a wedding reception menu.

Members can use images they like from the Web or from other Pinterest profiles, categorize them in genres and share them with other Pinterest users. Those who click on the images are often able to locate the website they originated on. Members can also comment on those pictures.

As the site has grown in popularity, so has interest from firms that see it as a chance to boost brand awareness.

"Businesses are definitely taking notice," says Andrew Lipsman, analyst at research firm ComScore.

Pinterest's large user base — and ease of use — is appealing to mom-and-pop retailers and corporate giants alike, he says. It had 11.7 million unique visitors in January, vs. 1 million in July.

The start-up's users, who are mostly female, are also highly engaged, Lipsman says. In January the average visitor spent 98 minutes on the site, up from 38 minutes in July.

Big companies, such as high-end retailer Bergdorf Goodman, use the site to display images such as swanky spring shoes.

Smaller firms also use it to promote their goods and services. California restaurant chain Tender Greens showcases images of its chefs at work, as well as food served through its catering services.

Tampa-based wedding planner and blogger Lauren Grove uses Pinterest to showcase items that would appeal to brides, as well as to draw traffic back to her ad-supported website. Pinterest also lets members collaborate on bulletin boards, and Grove has used that service to share ideas with her bridal clients, especially those she can't regularly meet with face-to-face.

MORE FROM USA TODAY

• Pinboard for the Web
• Pay What You Want Cafes
• Immigration in Silicon Valley

And while firms often display images of products that relate to their core business, many also post pictures that aren't directly related. West Elm home goods company, for instance, has images of an unusual striped wedding tent and overflowing bowls of white baking flour on its Pinterest page.

That diversity is smart, Lipsman says.

"You don't want to be seen as inauthentic and seen as just pushing your product," he says.

While it's simple for firms to create their own pin boards on pinterest.com,Lipsman says businesses can make their products even more Pinterest-friendly by adding "Pin It" buttons to their websites. So if a user sees a photo she likes online, it takes a simple click to add it to her personal site.

Furniture retailer Raymour & Flanigan has even added a Pinterest icon to e-mails that it sends to potential customers.

Those who click on the the red-and-white "P" icon are taken to its Pinterest page, which features images of "new products" from the retailer, as well as aspirational photos of "lovely living rooms" and "beautiful bedrooms."

Tender Greens co-owner Erik Oberholtzer says that Pinterest isn't just for reaching out to potential patrons. He also uses it to gather inspiration on what meals to serve, how to display food and what art would look good in restaurants.

"It's not only about what we are sharing," he says. "It gives us access to find people and organizations that can turn us on to ideas that otherwise we might not have considered."

Gold Bullion or Cash

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ja0EeLCraXI

US, France, UK, Turkey, Italy prepare for military intervention in Syria

Despite public denials, military preparations for intervention in the horrendous Syrian crisis are quietly afoot in Washington, Paris, Rome, London and Ankara. President Barack Obama is poised for a final decision after the Pentagon submits operational plans for protecting Syrian rebels and beleaguered populations from the brutal assaults of Bashar Assad’s army, DEBKAfile’s Washington sources disclose.

This process is also underway in allied capitals which joined the US in the Libyan operation that ended Muammar Qaddafi’s rule in August, 2011. They are waiting for a White House decision before going forward.

In Libya, foreign intervention began as an operation to protect the Libyan population against its ruler’s outrageous crackdown on dissent. It was mandated by UN Security Council. There is no chance of this in the Syrian case because it will be blocked by a Russian veto. Therefore, Western countries are planning military action of limited scope outside the purview of the world body, possibly on behalf of “Friends of Syria,” a group of 80 world nations which meets for the first time in Tunis Friday, Feb. 24, to hammer out practical steps for terminating the bloodbath pursued by the Assad regime.

The foreign ministers and senior officials – Russia has excluded itself – will certainly be further galvanized into action by the tragic deaths of two notable journalists Wednesday, Feb. 22, on the 19th day of the shelling of Homs.

Preparations for the event are taking place at the Foreign Office in London. Wednesday, Foreign Secretary William Hague said: Governments around the world have the responsibility to act…and to redouble our efforts to stop the Assad regime’s despicable campaign of terror.”

Hague pointedly said nothing about removing the Syrian ruler. Nor did he spell out the efforts need to stop the campaign of terror. DEBKAfile’s military sources note that he left these issues open because a decision by President Obama about if and how the US will act is pending until the Pentagon submits operational plans to Commander-in-Chief Obama.

The US president is also waiting for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s report on the mood at the Tunis conference. He wants to know in particular if Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar and the UAR will support US-led Western intervention in Syria, both politically and financially.

The Sunday Times correspondent Marie Colvin and the French Figaro video-photographer Remi Ochik died Wednesday in the heavy shelling of a fortified building which housed Western journalists making their way into Homs under the protection of Syrian rebels. Three other Western journalists were injured. Western military sources reported Thursday that this undercover Western press center was maintained by the rebels in tight secrecy. The building was practically gutted by a direct hit, suggesting that Syrian forces located it with the help of advanced electronic measures.

Another Western source noted that the journalists covering the atrocities in Homs from this hideout used coded channels of communications protected by anti-jamming and anti-tracking devices. The Syrians must therefore have called on Russian satellites or advanced Iranian electronic systems to locate it.

The authorities in Damascus decided to treat the press hideout as the first step in overt Western intervention in the Syrian conflict. It was accordingly razed totally with its occupants.

Israeli Action vs Obama’s Inaction

Not since Jimmy Carter was in office has an American administration so lacked the political will to engage either our enemies or the enemies of our allies.

With the clock ticking between Israel and Iran, Obama seems much more inclined to try and stop any Israeli action than to force Iran into compliance.

Yes, Obama is enacting sanctions – but sanctions don’t work against such an ideology as Iran’s. If sanctions, even strict sanctions, have any effect at all, it isn’t noticeable for years; and rarely, if ever, even after years of implementation, do sanctions have the desired effect.

Anyone who believe sanctions will keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons would also be apt to believe in rainbow farting unicorns.

In reality, the sanctions pave the way for Iran to “claim” a desire to talk at which point they will make ransom demands for halting their nuclear weapons program while continuing their nuclear weapons program.

National Security Adviser, Tom Donilon, just ended several days of talks IN Israel. Along with Netanyahu, Donilon also had talks with Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Chief of the General Staff Benny Gantz, and National Security Adviser Gen. Yaakov Amidror.

With Iran ramping up THEIR efforts to develop nuclear weapons and with their near non-stop calls for Israel to be eliminated, sanctions in play against Iran, Iran stating they will cease oil shipments to France, Iranian agents trying to kill Israel diplomats in various countries, Iran’s threats to bring THEIR form of terror attacks to OUR nation, a plot regarding the Iranian assassination of Saudi diplomats on OUR soil uncovered last year…

Obviously, these were not your run-of-the-mill, garden-variety discussions.

Nor, one would suspect, will Netanyahu’s visit to the White House on March 5^th contain your “normal” conversations.

The last time this happened, Netanyahu took Obama to school regarding the situation between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Obama stated publicly, that Israel should return to their pre-1967 borders from which talks with the PA could begin.

Netanyahu then, just as publicly, provided a history and defense lesson regarding Israel, their borders and the issues at hand. It was stunning and most likely, didn’t sit well with the Emperor.

So be it.

A statement from Donilon’s office stated the upcoming visit, “…is part of the continuous and intensive dialogue between the United States and Israel and reflects our unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security.”

Uh huh.

I suspect that Panetta’s declaration a couple of weeks ago regarding the timetable for an Israeli strike against Iran came up in Israel in the past few days and will again in the first week in March.

Those who know of such things are now saying that such a strike has gone from “possible” to “probable.”

What must be weighed are the potential effects of a strike against the proposition of doing nothing at all.

Iran’s past and indeed their present suggests strongly that should they develop nuclear weapons, they would use them and their stated belief that Israel should be eliminated is a clear indicator as to whom they would target. Obviously, a nuclear holocaust in Israel would achieve exactly what Iran has stated they want but, reprisals from either Israel or other nations against Iran would lead to Iran’s destruction as well.

Would that factor into an Iranian decision to strike Israel with nukes?

Probably not as much as some would like to think it would.

While many of the Iranian PEOPLE may not be hell bent on the destruction of Israel, in that country, the people don’t count. Speak out against the government’s ideology and see how long you last.

The ideology of Iran’s leadership calls for the destruction of Israel and remember, this is also an ideology which states if you die in the process of carrying it out, you are a martyr and you will be rewarded. That ideology believes whether or not THEY survive, the world would be better WITHOUT Israel.

Mutual destruction is not much of a deterrent in this case.

Would a strike by Israel END this situation once and for all?

A preemptive strike by Israel will have short range implications and could begin a war between Israel and Iran. If such a strike is effective, it will stall possibly for years if not a decade, Iran’s efforts in development of nuclear weapons. While such a delay is not permanent, it does allow for a great deal of possibilities including the overthrow of Iran’s government before Iran could retool and therefore, is definitely worthwhile.

Is standing with Israel and supporting a preemptive strike the same thing as advocating war?

No.

Call those who believe Israel SHOULD launch a preemptive strike, “War mongers” all you want but, that is an extremely stupid thing to do. Yes, a preemptive strike could lead to a war between Israel and Iran but, doing nothing and allowing Iran to develop nuclear weapons would lead to a NUCLEAR war between the two nations.

What those who would slap the “War monger” label on others SHOULD be asking THEMSELVES is; which is less desirable? A conventional war between Israel and Iran or a nuclear war between Israel and Iran?

Perhaps the best question overall to be asking is this; Why now? Why is this coming to a head NOW?

Simple.

Iran only respects strength.

Think back to the Iranian hostage situation in 1979. Iran took 52 American diplomats hostage and held them for 444 days.

Carter was President and he did not have the political will to engage in what was clearly an act of war. Carter had also, over his term, cut military spending leaving our military weakened. When were those 52 hostages freed? On the day of Reagan’s inauguration. Iran KNEW Reagan would STRENGTHEN the military and he DID have the political will to engage.

Today, throughout HIS term, Obama has shown NO political will to engage and is now, actively engaged in cutting military spending thus, weakening our military.

Iran is threatening to shut the Strait of Hormuz, embargoing oil shipments to Europe and England, pressing forward with their nuclear ambitions, threatening terrorist strikes on the U.S. and more…BECAUSE they have received the message that the Obama administration has no resolve to stop them.

They have ALSO been bolstered by the Obama administration’s furthering of Islamic power in Egypt and Libya.

The only Presidential candidate Iran would believe, and rightfully so, to have as great if not greater lack of resolve, would be Ron Paul.

If a preemptive strike is launched, who gets the blame for it?

Israel and the United States, of course, and it matters not whether we are involved in any way at all, we will be held accountable right along with Israel.

So, what happens if Israel does nothing?

Iran would continue on their path toward nuclear weapons and act upon their ideology of destroying Israel. For Israel to do nothing would be akin to aiding in their own elimination.

For those who claim Iran has never advocated the elimination of Israel…

Popout

That leaves us with the question of what do we, the United States, do in regard to a possible or probable preemptive strike by Israel?

For the United States, doing nothing, as in not providing assistance to our ally, or actively trying to stop Israel, is unthinkable. Not that there aren’t people thinking of doing nothing or actively advocating inaction, there clearly are such people but should their call for Israel NOT to act or to take care of itself while we simply not become involved, come to fruition…

We would, at worst, be guilty of ALLOWING or AIDING in Israel’s destruction while sitting idly by.

If we are going to be blamed whether or not we participate, and as Israel is one of our most steadfast allies, the moral implications of doing nothing are of great concern. We SHOULD be ready to offer whatever assistance Israel might need.

This should not be construed as believing without U.S. assistance, Israel would be incapable of carrying out such a mission but, assistance from the United States, be it in the form of refueling, intel, rescue or some type of ordinance would no doubt be helpful.

Iran will direct Hezbola to fire rockets into Israeli cities forcing Israel to defend itself from 2 fronts. This too would be a place where US assistance in the form of Patriot missile systems would be of great help.

Obama’s goal is to string this along through the election without action being taken by Israel with or without our assistance. If push comes to shove, Obama will take as minimal a role as possible but try to play it into something much bigger with the Jewish voting bloc while at the same time, trying to downplay it in the Muslim world.

While Obama tries to score points with Jewish voters by applying sanctions against Iran, it’s a smoke screen. Jewish voters need to look at the sum total of Obama’s actions over the last three years to see where he will stand should he be reelected and if they do so honestly, they will not vote for him in November.

It is not at all hard to suspect that Israel and Prime Minister Netanyahu have told Obama and his administration of their plans and given Panetta’s disclosure of their timetable, the sharing of sensitive information is over. Netanyahu, upon his arrival in Washington on March 5^th, should make it clear to Obama that unless he goes all in with Israel, he should simply get the hell out of the way.

A President’s actions regarding our strongest allies in times of their need is a direct reflection on how that President would react to direct threats to OUR nation.

For those who believe that the world would be at peace were it not for U.S. involvement or that any involvement by the U.S. in THIS situation will make the region less stable…

Nothing is less stable than those who believe in rainbow farting unicorns.

Osama and Israel: The Silence of 'Friends'

Oscar Wilde noted "true friends stab you in the front." Which explains why President Obama-- the self-proclaimed "best friend Israel ever had" -- has decided to cut funding for the Jewish state's missile defense system at the same time he wants to restore funding to UNESCO. (Israel's best friends will remember that the President was forced to cut support to the traditional anti-Israel agency by federal law because the organization recognized the Palestinian Authority as a state.)

If that wasn't enough evidence of the President's "unshakeable bond" with Israel, these policy decisions come exactly at the same time Israel is engaged in a cold, covert war against Iran and making preparations for a possible strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. As the song goes, "That's what friend are for."

The president really believes -- as a friend -- that Israel should do nothing with regard to Iran except boost its ability to defend against a nuclear attack and focus on reaching a peace treaty with the Palestinian authority. President Obama still believes that the key to neutralizing Iran and its alliance with Hamas and Hezbollah is for Israel to cut itself down to the size and shape of the Palestinians' liking.

What is Israel to make of the fact that as the Syrian regime continues to murder people with the help of Iranian technicians and military equipment, senior officials in the administration have said almost nothing about the killing? Instead, the administration is focusing all of its diplomatic and military acumen on discouraging Israel from doing anything to figure out ways to reduce the number of people that could be slaughtered by Iranian aggression.

It is a hallmark of the administration's "friendship" with Israel that is knows slightly more about Israel's strategy and thinking on Iran than it does about when North Korean dictators die. Israel has not decided to launch a full-scale aerial assault on Iran nuclear sites. An attack could and would take multiple forms. It will engage in asymmetrical activities that no one outside of a small circle of individuals knows about. It could be more like the raid on Entebbe than the bombing of the nuclear reactors in Syria and Iraq. Or it could be both. In any scenario no one outside of Israel and its covert agents in Iran, Syria, and elsewhere will know how or when it will happen. If at all.

There is one element of the effort to go after Iran that is certain: No one in Israel's chain of command believes the Obama administration will support pre-emptive military operations, whether they be against Hamas, Hezbollah, or Iran.

It's not just the White House being clueless about the situation. If Iran will assist Assad in killing Syrian civilians by the tens of thousands, what would it do to damage and destroy Israel if it had the chance? Rather, it is the fact that the President truly believes demanding more from Israel and little from the Palestinians is the key to lasting peace. Which is why when touting his administration's military aid to Israel, it is always about defensive systems. And it's why he can square cutting funding for such programs with restoring funding to UNESCO as well as a multi-billion-grant program to support the "Arab Spring."

Recently the White House released a 7-minute video touting that "unbreakable bond." Apart from the fact that it full of misinformation and inaccuracies (e.g., its brazen claim that the U.S. strongly supported Israel when it was maligned by the UN's Goldstone Report; or the shameless way it takes Netanyahu's comments after a meeting with Obama out of context), two things stand out: It exalts as special the usual rhetoric about Israel's right to exist. And even then, as theAmerican Thinker pointed out: It is only 7 minutes long. That's because it overlooks all the attacks on Israel's efforts to protect its borders and augment its pre-emptive options. If they were included, it wouldn't just be a video -- it would be a mini-series.

Most telling, especially at a time when Israel clearly is preparing to step up its ongoing assault on Iranian assets, is what Obama has not said and done. As Martin Luther King put it: "In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends."