by Dan J Kroll

It never ceases to amaze me when a character changes the way that they treat another when they suddenly find out that they're related. If you dislike someone, man up and hate them even when they turn out to be your long-lost kid.

It never ceases to amaze me when a character changes the way that they treat another when they suddenly find out that they're related. If you dislike someone, man up and hate them even when they turn out to be your long-lost kid.

Obviously, I'm talking about Caleb and Asher. Remember the good old days when Asher was clobbering Caleb with a briefcase? Gosh, that really takes me back. Don't get me wrong because I do like that Caleb has finally ditched his mountain man "I don't give a damn about anyone" machismo and started showing that he does have a heart. I just don't understand why people can develop such strong hatred for people until they get to know that person a little better. I'm sure there's a sociology research paper somewhere in there.

I have to admit that I really thought that Asher was playing JR and the rest of the Chandlers. It would have made for a much more jawdropping plot twist if, let's say, it were to be revealed that Asher was really Adam's son -- not Caleb's. It would have been particularly interesting if, when Asher had gone to pick up AJ from Wildwind on Halloween night, he and the young boy just vanished. JR, who'd been using Asher to stick it to Caleb, would have been stunned to learn that he'd been double-crossed by his half-brother. I was, however, reminded by one viewer that DNA tests prove nothing in Pine Valley.

It's obvious by now that I love when the show addresses history. I'll even accept nods to history when they are an obvious attempt to draw two characters together. Such was the case with Erica sharing with Caleb how she and Kendall first crossed paths and became bitter enemies. Of course it's something else the two have in common that could fuel their getting together.

This may not be a popular opinion, but I almost wish that Kendall and Erica were still enemies. I love the happy Kane women thing, but there is also a side of me that enjoys seeing someone make Erica's life miserable. If not a daughter antagonist, then please let it be someone who is young enough to be her daughter. Was Erica ever inexplicably absent for a period of time in the past? Maybe she was Sonia Reyes and had plastic surgery to look like Erica Kane... Okay, I'm stretching now. I'm just really trying to find some twists that would keep my interest levels buoyed.

Nick Pearson... blah blah blah... paid off... blah blah blah... David Hayward... murder... I don't care anymore. I want to care. Really, I do. I thought David was much more interesting alive than he is now that he's dead. There were no dirty secrets that were dug up to change the way you felt about the not-so-good doctor. Granted, David had become sort of cartoonish with his villainous ways in recent months. I can't help but think that if the show really wanted to kill off David, it should have done so a year or so ago when everyone expected it. There is a purported huge, massive, ginormous, shocker of a storyline twist that is promised for this storyline... but I'll believe it when I see it.

What could that twist be? Here are some of the possibilities.

• David isn't really dead. He's lounging on some tropical island somewhere waiting for Ryan to get the sizzle seat. • David had planned to kill someone else and accidentally killed himself. • David isn't dead, but his unknown twin brother is. Surprise everybody, you got the wrong one! • David is dead, but he has a twin that will surface in town and try to avenge David's death. • Someone unexpected killed David and it takes everyone by surprise. • (More like a 5A) I killed David during a bout of amnesia.

So which of those six scenarios is the most likely? Which would you most like to see play out on-screen? Let me know the answer to both by sending me some email. You can do so by clicking here or by using the link at the close of this column.

By now, you've probably read our article announcing that "permanent" exit of Thorsten Kaye as Zach Slater. I immediately recalled that in last week's column I said that I really hoped that Zach wouldn't be killed off. Well, it looks like once again something I said in my column ended up making it to the television screen. First, let's look back at what I said:

I suppose the other option is that Zach has to defend his family and he pulls a gun on the unknown stalker, kills him, and then goes off to jail. If that's the case, Zach will end up in jail before the person who killed David.

It appears that Zach will now be "killed" off in a plane crash. I put killed in quotation marks because we all know that the body will probably be missing, meaning that the door is open for a Mir-Zach-ulous resurrection in a future Sweeps period.

Whether you are a "Zendall" fan or not, I think most viewers appreciate that Thorsten Kaye has a lot of fans. If he leaves the show, will the fans continue to tune in? With the way things are going right now, there's not much to in for so as it is... so a lot of fans could tune out after Zach is killed off.

I don't know what the show was supposed to do if the network and Thorsten Kaye were unable to come up with some sort of deal to keep Kaye working regularly on the show. Susan Lucci flies back and forth from the East Coast to film her scenes. James Franco filmed about a month-and-a-half's worth of episodes in three days or so for General Hospital. Why couldn't something similar be done in this situation?

None of us are privy to what goes on behind-the-scenes, so it's not fair of me to really speculate. I just don't think that losing a third male star is going to help AMC. I am still not over losing David Canary. I'm sure I'm a total jerk for not wanting Canary to retire of his own volition. So let me be that jerk and say that I want Adam back. ABC, do whatever you can to have David Canary return.

As every AMC fan knows, the show was preempted last week for a presidential news conference. While I enjoyed a day with a little less work, I did find myself wondering something. A week earlier, fans were groaning because ABC scrapped a day of new programming in order to broadcast a "classic episode" of All My Children from 2004. While I received oodles of emails regarding the classic episode, no one wrote in to grumble about the preemption for news coverage. So I thought I'd ask your thoughts on this: Does it matter why AMC is preempted or are you guys just vehemently opposed to reruns?

Finally, Days of our Lives celebrates its 45th anniversary this week. NBC announced that DAYS -- the only soap that it still broadcasts -- has been renewed through September 2013. That's a huge boost to this genre that we all love. So even if you don't watch DAYS, I hope all of you will raise a glass to toast some good news for our soaps.

dan