It is Almost as if Someone Planned It!

On a Roll

President Barack Obama has the support of 61% of Jewish voters, compared to 28% for Republican Mitt Romney, a new poll says. That’s a big jump from just a few months ago.

This is the headline and picture from the Forward tonight.  Wow!  Obama is recovering Jewish support rapidly.... who could have predicted this headline.  OK, I did.  This morning as a matter of fact.

Personally, I believe that this is just a classic "rope-a-dope" strategy.  That means the Democrats are overplaying the depth of Obama's Jewish problem to set expectations as low as possible and will overstate any positive trend in Jewish opinion between now and the election.  When the Jewish poll numbers bounce back after the inevitable Democrat counter push, they will declare the Romney has somehow lost the Jewish vote.

It is a little sooner than I expected, but it fits the formula.  The momentum is with Obama on the Jewish Vote!

The poll, released Monday, shows Obama with 61 percent of the Jewish vote, as opposed to 28 percent for Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who is the likely Republican nominee.
That’s an improvement for the president over a previous AJC survey in September, when Obama scored 50 percent and Romney 32 percent.

I wonder if this means that they think this is the best it will get for Obama?

Conflict in the Jewish Community in Belgium

Last week I wrote a post about why it is so hard to get American Jews to care about Anti-Semitism.  In the article I did an amateur statistical analysis of the world wide anti-Semitism report for 2011, in which I concluded that Belgium was the most dangerous place in Europe to be a Jew.

With a very small Jewish community, that is already split by culture, the pressure of the situation is causing problems in the community.  The Jewish Press reports that the Jewish Community is split over support of a Belgian "fact finding" mission to the West Bank to look at Jewish settlements.

While I am generally in support of fact finding, I worry that the European delegation is going to Israel with the intent of finding problems with the Israeli settlements.  I am doubtful that it will be an objective analysis.

I feel for the Jews in Belgium, if history is any guide, their strategy of criticism of Israel will not ultimately work in easing the anti-semitic pressure on their community, but I understand why they would want to give it a try.

Obama Losing the Jewish Vote? Maybe...

There have been a number of articles recently about how Barack Obama may lose a significant number of Jewish votes in the up coming election.  Surprisingly, a lot of these stories are coming from the left including:

Michael Tomasky at the Daily Beast laments Obama's "low" poll numbers among Jews:

The poll, conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute in early April, found that 62 percent of 1,004 American Jews surveyed said that they would vote for Obama. That sounds like an agreeable enough figure until you recall that he got 78 percent of the Jewish vote in 2008.

and J.J. Goldberg at The Forward worries over the flight of Jewish money from the Obama campaign:

No less alarming, Republicans are faring better than Democrats among wealthy Jews (including those giving less than $1 million). That’s unprecedented.And if Obama manages to make up the shortfall through small online donations, a feat he mastered in 2008, what are the implications for Jewish influence in the Democratic Party?On the other hand, what if these new Jewish mega-donors become a force within the GOP? Most of them appear to be entrepreneurs and investors alienated by Obama’s fiscal policies. Many are outspokenly progressive on issues like abortion, gay rights and the environment. If they end up gaining the clout their donations suggest, then liberals might have to rethink their fear and loathing of the other party. Watch the money.

The right is quick to pick up on this because it fits with there desired narrative that American Jews will abandon the Democrat party and come over the Republicans.   Jonathan Tobin at Commentary Magazine details it quite well.  No doubt that the Republicans think that this serves them well.

Personally, I believe that this is just a classic "rope-a-dope" strategy.  That means the Democrats are overplaying the depth of Obama's Jewish problem to set expectations as low as possible and will overstate any positive trend in Jewish opinion between now and the election.  When the Jewish poll numbers bounce back after the inevitable Democrat counter push, they will declare the Romney has somehow lost the Jewish vote.

It isn't hard to spot their strategy to improve their position among American Jews.  Just look at the Jewish Values Survey 2012, done by the Public Religion Research Center.  This survey was less a Jewish Values survey than it was a How American Jews Values Will Impact How They Vote in the Upcoming Presidential Election Survey.  Almost all of the questions were political and carefully looking at the results will give you a good idea what line of attack will be used to convince the Jewish community to renew Obama's presidency.

For example, the survey results say that more than 8 in 10 Jews (87%) view the Holocaust are somewhat or very important in informing their political beliefs and activities...  and then you have an Obama speech at the American Holocaust Museum and the establishment of the US office to oversee actives to prevent genocide... (too bad he appointed someone who has an anti-Israel record to head up this office, but the details are not important.)

Also, the survey reports that nearly two thirds of Jews (64%) want the government to do more to reduce the gap between rich and poor and that 81% of American Jews support the idea of a tax on American making $1 million a year or more.  Both of these are talking points that I would expect to see from the Democrats between now and November.

Finally, the Jews who responded to this survey were asked about their opinion of three different religious groups:  Muslims, Evangelical Christians, and you guessed it... Mormons.  Why did they ask Jews about Mormons?  Of course it is because of Mitt Romney... if Rick Santorum would have been polling better they probably would have asked about Catholics as well.

Of the three groups, Mormons fared the best with a rating of 47 on a 100 point scale.  Muslims were second at 41.4 and the Evangelical Christians were a distant last place with 20.9.  So, if Romney appoints an Evangelical Christian as his running mate, this will be hammered away in the Jewish community to erode Jewish support for Romney.  I am sure that they were disappointed that American Jews regarded Mormons more highly (by almost 2.5 times) than Evangelical Christians.

More insidious is the effort to create problems between the Jewish and Mormon communities where none really exist.  I would suspect that we will begin to see articles about tensions between the Mormon and Jewish communities... We have already seen a few of these such as Elie Wiesel's call to have Romney stop the posthumous baptism of Holocaust victims into the Mormon Church, a practice which is already banned in the Mormon Church.   Then as if by magic, a few days later there was a widely reported Associated Press story that Anne Frank may have been baptized by a Mormon church somewhere in the Dominican Republic.  The story turned out to be unverifiable and it didn't really catch on in the American Jewish community because of the relatively good opinion Jews have of the Mormon Church.

The bottom line is that the Democratic Party will be looking very hard for any sign of antisemitism in Mitt Romney or his running mate in the coming months.  Any ambiguous statement will be misconstrued and magnified by the media.  Absent any major gaff, I am sure that they have a few more planted stories up their sleeve and I will will point them out when I see them.

You Really Need a Score Card...

The Arab News (the official Saudi Arabian news outlet) reported on a ship carrying weapons that was intercepted by the Lebanese army

Lebanese authorities seized a large consignment of Libyan weapons including rocket-propelled grenades and heavy caliber ammunition from a ship intercepted in the Mediterranean, the army said on Saturday.  It did not say where the vessel was heading but the ship’s owner told Reuters it was due to unload in the northern Lebanese port of Tripoli.

Make sure you read that closely... The Lebanese "authorities" seized a ship at sea that was heading to unload at a Lebanese port.  Why would they need to seize the ship at sea if it is heading towards their own port?

The article goes on to explain that the port city of Tripoli is largely a Sunni city that is supportive of the rebellion against Syria's Bashar Assad.

For years Syria has been meddling in Lebanese politics by supplying Hezbollah, which started as a popular uprising of Lebanese Shiites.   In recent years Hezbollah has managed to gain a significant amount of power in Lebanon, primarily through a combination of democratic participation with a healthy dose of unauthorized military force.  So, with Hezbollah, Syria was able to reestablish the direct authority it lost after Lebanon expelled the Syrians during the Bush administration.

Clearly the Syrian civil war (can we call it that yet?) is in danger of spreading to Lebanon.  Although, I am still not sure who is in power in Libya and why they would send weapons to the Syrian Rebels.

Shabbat Shalom!

Shabbat is approaching and I am very much looking forward to the weekend.  This concludes my second official week of blogging and I am again declaring it a success.

Despite the fact that I have not actively promoted the blog, I have picked up readers from across the the world, locations as exotic as the UK, Israel, Belgium, and Texas.

While my style is still developing, I have produced 26 posts and am generally pleased with the quality of the writing.

Next week I will do more to promote the blog and hope to ramp up visitors quickly.

Thank you for reading and I wish you a meaningful, restful Shabbat.

Chelm

Let Self-Righteousness Flow Like a Mighty Stream

A video of an EPA enforcement official likening his "enforcement philosophy" to the Roman method of occupation of of Anatolia is making rounds on the internet.  People are outraged by this and justly so.

I wanted to weigh in on this issue, because Roman philosophy on the application of physical force is a central theme in the history class I teach on the Classical period in Jewish History.   It is one of the key differentiators between the ancient Israelites and their neighbors.





What Mr. Armendariz is describing is a common ancient world tactic.  Remember that in the ancient world, when you conquered a village, you had legal claim to absolute property rights to the contents of that village; all physical property including people.  The people were often rounded up and sold as slaves.  This legal claim is based on the idea that the gods had given you the ability to conquer the village, therefore it was their will that you have it.  To not conquer would be to show weakness and reject a gift from the gods.  There was no moral problem with slaughtering all the inhabitants or torturing them to death.  It was your right to do with them as you willed.

If you want a biblical example of this, look at the story of Abraham when he conquers the Kings who had sacked Sodom and kidnapped his brother Lot.  The King of Sodom had lost everything in an act of war, Abraham had won it all in an act of war, therefore legal claim to the property was Abraham's even though you could directly trace ownership to Sodom's King.  Abraham ultimately gave all the property back even though he did not have a legal requirement to do so.

The Romans were a little different from most of the ancient world in this respect, because they saw more utility in letting a village survive rather than sacking it.  Sure, selling everyone as slaves and taking everything, they owned had a short term benefit, but there was more economic advantage in letting the village survive and pay taxes to the Republic.  If they were good they might even become Roman citizens.

What Mr. Armendariz is advocating, is that making an example of the first five people you encounter will create an environment of fear and the remaining ones will be easier to handle.  This is indeed a Roman tactic.  It works.  It is based in the real world.  However, it is not so good for those five people who were tortured to death and it also does not create a positive or constructive environment for the reminding villagers.  They know it can happen to them at any time, at the whim of the Roman General.  Mr. Armendariz is admitting that his prosecutions have been arbitrary and with the purpose of demonstrating his power not enforcing the law.  It calls into question every enforcement decision he has made in his career.

More importantly it reveals an Ancient Pagan world view.... that power is justification.  If you have the power (in this case legal enforcement authority) then you have the right.  Because he is on the correct moral side... as the protector of the environment, he is justified in this using this method to make it easier to achieve his goals.  Even though such prosecution is illegal.

In reality, prosecutors do this all the time, but to publicly admit it and openly train your staff in these tactics is really crossing the Rubicon.  Mr. Armendariz should act in the interest if justice and enforcement of the law.. not as crusader against evil doers.

This is the environment of fear of government regulation that makes it very difficult to conduct any meaningful business in this country and it is delaying the economic recovery.

Judaism rejects this tactic and the Jewish idea of justice has ultimately won out in the Western World.  We can not let power addicted people bring us back to Roman rule.

Book Review: Torah From Heaven, The Reconstruction of Faith

I know that it is customary to read through an entire book before writing the review, but I thought it might be fun to document my thoughts as I worked my way through it.

Why I Picked This Book

I found Torah From Heaven in a Barnes and Noble in New York.  My son and I were there for a college visit and I wanted to pop in to the store, because I thought that the Jewish book section in New York would be better than where I live.

I was right, but not so dramatically.  The book Torah From Heaven, The Reconstruction of Faith, by Norman Solomon caught my eye.  Immediately, I was suspicious because of the title. I was not sure of the view point of the author, but after flipping through the book I realized that Reconstruction was intended in the literal sense... not in the sense of the Reconstructionist movement in Judaism.  (Not that I have anything against Recontructionists, but that topic does not really interest me right now.)

Reading the book jacket, I found that the author was an academic residing in Oxford and that he was struggling with one of the essential issues that I struggle with in my attempt to practice the Jewish faith.

In the modern world there are two prevailing theories of the basic texts of Judaism.  First, is the Orthodox view that the Jewish texts are direct communication from God, unalterable and unchanging over the course of the last 5000 years.  Second, is the critical view that the Jewish texts were compiled over time by different authors with various political agendas that may or may not be divinely inspired.

The problem with the first view is that there is significant (albeit indirect) evidence to the contrary.  So, unless you are capable of putting aside nagging doubts and going head down into a program of intense study in the traditional yeshiva mode, it is difficult to build a consistent faith around this view point.

The problem with the second view is that if the texts were compiled in such a mundane manner, there is absolutely nothing special about them.  So, unless you are able to carry on with a tradition that is antiquated and possibly meaningless, this explanation is also not satisfying.

So, this book addresses the fundamental question facing Judaism today.  How to keep an important and old tradition relevant and meaningful in the modern world.


The Orientation (Introduction)

I was fascinated by the introductory chapter, which is called "Orientation."  In it Solomon goes through a brief synopsis of his life, his Jewish struggle and why he has come to write this book. He started as life as the child of Jewish, but non-observant parents.  He was drawn to religion and studied it at every academic opportunity.  Ultimately, he was decided that to the approach of the German Modern Orthodox Jews was his own and became a Rabbi in that tradition.  His parents of course were not understanding of his sudden religious fanaticism.

He shares his struggles as the leader of a congregation, his doubts, and some conversations with peers about the some of the ways in which Orthodox Theology is attacked in the modern world.  He was uncomfortable with the approach of having private doubts and still publicly proclaiming complete confidence in the opinions of the sages and medieval commentators about the problems that modern scientific discourse poses to the textual tradition.

He discusses some of the idiosyncrasies of interfaith dialog and dialog within the different streams of modern Judaism.  Ultimately, he sets the stage for the discussion well and I was looking forward to the rest of the book.


Chapter One: Holy Books

In this chapter Solomon goes through the history of the text, being very careful not to go even one step beyond the available evidence.  Very often, biblical critics make very broad claims based on somewhat thin grammatical evidence, but Solomon makes no such mistakes here.  Similarly he does not assume the premise of the Talmudic withers either.  It is a very straight forward look at the text and how it compares with the later tradition that developed the Talmud.    His approach is very honest and straight forward, not an easy achievement.

A note of caution is that this is not an introductory book.  If you do not have a basic knowledge of Jewish History, you will find this text very slow going.  You must know the difference between the First and second Temple periods.  You must have an idea of who the classical authors, such as Josephus and Philo of Alexandria are and why their works are important.  He cites these as evidence of how the text was viewed in the classical period.

Next Chapter


I am looking forward to the next chapter which details the written and oral Torah.  Overall, this part seems to be a good introduction to the text and how it has been interpreted over many thousand years of Jewish History.

Other books by Norman Solomon:

The Great Iranian Hope

Last week I posed the question "Is the Iranian Threat an Exaggeration?"  While I do not believe that it is, I certainly hope that I am wrong.  It turns out that I am in good company.

The US Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, made a public comment about IDF Defense Minister's, Benny Gantz, assertion that Iran was a rational actor and would not seek to actually build a nuclear bomb.  His theory is that they are looking to get the capability, but will not go beyond that to actual construction.

Ynet quotes Panetta as saying:

"I would hope he's correct and he knows something more that I do," Panetta said during a visit to Chile. "I do not have any specific information that indicates (the Iranians) have made any decision one way or another" on whether to build a nuclear weapon, Panetta told reporters after meeting his Chilean counterpart Andres Allamand.

I also hope that he is correct, but I still have this nagging feeling.  It is important to note that there is a bit of a word game going on here.  If you are not following the conversation closely, you are likely to miss the fact that no one disputes that Iran is going through all the steps necessary to build a nuclear bomb, but there is no specific information that they have made the decision to complete the final construction.  It sure seems like a lot of effort to go through if you are not going to actually finish building the bomb.

I suppose that it is technically true that I could build an irrigation system, plow the field, plant the seeds, water the fields, fight the weeds, fight the insects, and then finally decide not to harvest the crop... but the likelihood of that is very low.

Iran has decided to make these preparations in the face of credible military threats front he US and Israel as well as international sanctions.  They are risking becoming the next North Korea or Saddam Hussein.  So why pay the price if you are not going to reap the rewards?

Update:  If you want to read the whole interview with Gantz, you will find that the statement about a rational Iran that probably won't build a nuclear weapons was a little overblown in the post.

Ewwwwwww!

I am totally mortified by this...  the result of the Arab Spring in Egypt.  The new Islamist controlled Egyptian parliament is considering a law that would allow a man to have sex with his dead wife up to six hours after her death.  I repeat... Ewwwww.

I had no idea that this was a thing... is it cultural?  Is this common in the Middle East?  I have never heard of this.


I would think that this would be contrary to Islamic Law as desecration of a corpse, but Ynet reports:

Yet, this was not the first time Egyptians caught wind of the "Farewell Intercourse" law. The law was first introduced in a fatwa (Islamic law) issued by a Moroccan cleric last year. Zamzami Abdul Bari said marriage remains valid even after death. He also said that women have the right to have sex with their dead husbands.

Jewish Law would certainly forbid this... a dead body as a former container of a human soul is regarded with respect.  

Another Approach to Israel Needed in Liberal Judaism

I have posted several times about Peter Beinart, who I heard speak the other night, while he was out promoting his new book.  While it is tempting to point our areas of disagreement, I do want to post on one particular point he raised that I believe has a lot of merit.

His summary of the state of Zionism today is basically this:

The Holocaust and subsequent Israeli wars were unifying events in the Jewish history.  However, the latest of these was in 1973 and there is a whole generation of Jews who are into middle age and have no memory of a time where the existence of the State of Israel was seriously threatened.

The "Jewish Establishment," by which Beinart means the leadership of major Jewish organizations, is generally older, with a direct memory of these events.  The younger generation does not.  This creates a disconnect between younger  Jews who have no concept of a world where Jews are the underdogs.  For Jews 40 and younger, Israel has always been powerful and generally secure.  Direct clarity of why there needs to be a Jewish state and what kind of state it should be no longer should be taken for granted.

Conclusion:  Young Jews are generally disengaged from Israel and at odds with the leadership of the major Jewish organizations... not exactly news.

...but he noticed another trend.  This disconnect is not true among younger orthodox Jews.  

Modified Conclusion:  Young Liberal Jews are generally disengaged from Israel and at odds with the leadership of the major Jewish organizations.

Because Orthodox families are more likely to have children, less likely to intermarry, more focused on daily Jewish study, and more involved in their Jewish communities, their proportional influence on Judaism in Israel and abroad has risen dramatically.  This fact is reflected in the makeup of Jewish organizations.  Involved, younger Jews are much more likely to be from the orthodox rather than the liberal traditions.

Additionally, Orthodoxy teaches that the Jews are in Israel because the land has been given to them by God.  Simple.  All other policy flows from this indisputable assertion.

In the liberal and secular communities this is not so clear.  If you ask the leaders of major Jewish organizations why Israel should exist, you will get answers such as: it is the only democracy in the Middle East, it is a center of technological innovation that helps the world, and you will not get answers such as: because God wants it that way.  These answer leaves Israel vulnerable every time a 19 year old Israeli soldier makes a mistake that is caught on video.

Beinart is noting the inescapable conclusion that the secular reasoning for Israel's existence is no longer urgent or clear... and the more Israel has to dirty its hands in the messy business of running a State it is diminished.  In short, we are losing young Jews educated in the liberal tradition on the issue of Israel.  They have a default policy of unilateral disengagement.

The effect of this is that politics in Israel and in the Israel-concerned American Jewish community is trending to the right.  The political left has found itself helpless to dislodge the right leaning Israeli government or even cast it in a negative light.  Despite an all out attack on Bibi Netanyahu by the left, he is running the most stable and effective Israeli government in years..

So, the American Left is forming organizations such as J-Street to create a voice for Liberal Judaism in the public debate about Israel.  The problem is that, in general, politically active Liberal Jews do not care and would rather be involved in domestic political causes, if they are involved at all.

In an attempt to change this, Beinart and those like him are taking up the cause of Palestinian suffering.  Jews can not stand to see others suffer...  particularly, if that suffering can be blamed on Jews.  The problem, of course, is that the situation is very complex and does not lend itself to simple solutions.  Everything that is said in this community can (and will) be taken out of context and used as a public relations hammer against Israel in the international community.  This is a political approach and political approaches are dependent on the current situation, which changes daily in the Middle East.

This argument is also very dangerous because if you accept this view, when Israel does not act perfectly, its legitimacy is called into question... and Israel is not going to act perfectly with respect to the Palestinians or any other issue.  Any attempt to establish Israel's legitimacy by secular reasoning is ultimately going to run into this problem

So how do you combat this in the Liberal Jewish community?  I believe that the answer is actually very simple.  We, as a community, need to acknowledge that God is central to the establishment of the modern State of Israel.  Most people who care about Israel in this country believe that the Jews have returned to Israel because God has a plan for the world and he willed it to happen.  Those who don't believe this, simply disengage. This is an uncomfortable thought in Liberal Jewish circles, but is also undeniable if you think it through.

If there is no God, Israel is not important.
If there is a God, but He is not involved in the world, then Israel is not important.  
If there is a God, and He is involved in the world, but God does not hold a special place for the Jews, then Israel is not important.

...but if there is a God and He cares about the Jewish people, Israel is very important... and everything that follows.

So, if you want Liberal Jews more engaged in Israel, teach about God's relationship to Israel.  Teach that the Jews have a unique purpose in this world that can only be fulfilled by us individually and collectively.  Encourage people to study our tradition and seek their part in that purpose.

When you do that, empathy for the Palestinian cause will naturally flow from the words of Torah... and then we will have a basis to discuss the how to balance this with the needs of the Jews to form a home in our land.

This life we live is complex and God in His wisdom has given us a lot of imperfect choices.  We must struggle with the balance between survival and generosity.  Judgement and Mercy.

Hillel said: "If I am not for myself, who will be for me?  If I am not for others who am I?  If not now, when?" 

These words are as true now as they were when the independent Jewish Hasmonean state was losing its autonomy to the Roman occupiers.

If Jews are not for Israel, who will be?  If Jews do not help the Palestinians, what kind of State is it?  And what are you going to do about it?

Before you can have this conversation, you need to acknowledge and develop an understand of our relationship with God.  Strangely, not an easy task in our community.




http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/view_photog.php?photogid=2280

Israel Inside: A Great Film About a Great Country

On Tuesday of this week, I had the opportunity to screen a great film.  It is called Israel Inside, How a Small Nation Makes a Big Difference.  The DVD releases officially on May 29.  It is a great film and can be a good teaching tool on the subject of Israel.  It does not delve into the Palestinian conflict or anything political at all.  Instead it focuses on how such a small, young country consistently ranks in the topic of scientific, economic achievement.  But more importantly, that despite the conflict raging around them, the Israelis constantly rank among the happiest people in the world.

On Ynetnews today, Michael Steinhardt writes about one of the key factors in the movie... Chutzpah.

Dr. Tal Ben Shahar hosts the film.  He is a professor of positive psychology and does a great job identifying the factors (or actualizers as he calls them) at work in Israel that make it such a remarkable nation.  

A second clip worth watching is the section on Tikkum Olam.

One Vote for Mel Gibson's Judah Maccabee

I am excited about the prospect of a Mel Gibson Judah Maccabee movie.  Say what you like about the man, Mel Gibson knows how to make a film and does a particularly good job of epic hero movies.  I was quite disappointed when I heard the project may not happen.

Judah Maccabee has always been one of my favorite stories and I have read every book I can find on the subject.  A Judah Maccabee film would be quite problematic for a number of reasons.  First, the theological message is complex.  The sages of the second temple period were not fans of Judah or the dynasty that he put on the throne in Israel.

As a holiday, Chanukah does not even warrant its own section of Talmud to document its customs.  The nationalist and messianic fervor the story can generate had ended in complete tragedy by the end of the first century CE.

Still, it is a powerful story and to have someone with the resources and the storytelling skill of Mel Gibson produce the film would be... well epic.

I am still hoping it may happen, but will continue to teach about Judah and his brothers every chance I get.

60 Minutes Blames Israel for the Flight of Christians from Bethlehem

Image: Salvatore Vuono / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Apparently I missed an interesting piece on 60 minutes the other night, where they documented the flight of Christians from the West Bank city of Bethlehem.  They blamed Israel, checkpoint, and security measures for this problem.

Alana Goodman over at Commentary magazine does a good job of deconstructing the piece.

A few questions she asks are...

1. Palestinian Christians are fleeing the West Bank, but the Palestinian Muslim population is growing. Why is that? If Israel’s irksome presence were the chief driving factor for the migration, wouldn’t both populations be leaving the area at roughly the same rate?

2. Christian communities are dwindling in size across the Muslim world.

3. The Christian population inside Israel is growing.

It was noted in the comments on this article that they did not interview any Christians who had fled, which is interesting because that was the subject of the article.  I will have to see the piece for myself before I can comment on it.

The question I have is, if 60 Minutes really got it this wrong, why would they do that?

Big Noses, Jewish Punk Rock, and Breakfast Cereal

I think that I may have found my new favorite band...  The Groggers, a self described Jewish Punk Rock band that has made headlines in the Jewish world recently for a rather unorthodox marketing partnership.

Their song Jewcan Sam (A Nose Job Love Song) is totally wrong and totally funny.   The story was reported in the Jewish Press reads:

Miami plastic surgeon Dr. Michael Salzhauer, decided on an original, innovative, funny and relatively cheap way to reach the potentially bottomless market of nose job enthusiasts – young Jews ages 15-30 – and have fun doing it. So he hired the Groggers, an up and coming Orthodox rock band from Queens, and traded a nose job for their young Depardieu -lookalike leader Doug Staiman in return for the hilarious Jewish video entermercial “Jewcan Sam.”  

Yes, you read this correctly.  Jews in the age range 15-30 are the primary target for plastic surgeons and he  reached out to this demographic with an entertaining music video.  For some reason the ethics board of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) has decided that this tactic may have crossed a line.  Really it is hard to imagine that anything could get the ASPS excited, but this apparently did it.  My guess is that the ethics board will be unable to come up with a reason to sanction Dr. Salzhauer, but will most likely add a section to their code entitled "Promotional Celebrity Nose Jobs."  Mazal Tov.

I winder if Martha Quinn envisioned this back in the day when we were all running around with our "I Want my MTV" buttons?

While I personally am not a candidate for a nose job, I do appreciate good music, talented musicians, and funny music videos... like this one:

Warning:  This video contains before and after nose job shots, moyels in the operating room, references to nasal circumcision, breakfast cereal icons, knives, cigar cutters, scissors, and shallow but attractive love interests.

 

I absolutely hated it, which is why I felt compelled to go and listen to more of their music.  I immediately found Eishes Chayil, which is a reference to Psalm 31, usually translated as "A woman of valor."  In traditional Judaism, the husband sings this to his wife at the Shabbat dinner table to make sure he understands how much he loves and appreciates her.  "Greater than rubies is a woman of valor..."

This song captures that exactly, except in a creepy stalker sort of way.




Again, very funny, but very wrong.

I am sorry but these guys are talented and I can not help but like the music.  I have not listened to all of it yet, but who can resist such titles as: The Shidduch Hits the Fan, presumably its sequel "GET", and Upper West Side Story, all from the Album There is no I in Cherem.


For my friends who need a dictionary to understand the humor, a Shidduch is a Jewish engagement for marriage, a Get is a Jewish divorce, and a Cherem is a term for Ban used to excommunicate someone from a Jewish community.

No doubt these guys are funny and I feel guilty enjoying their irreverent humor. Did I mention that I like the music?

My Impressions of Peter Beinart: LIVE!

Last night I went to see Peter Beinart speak, live and in person.  He was hawking his new book, the The Crisis of Zionism.  Yesterday, I was pretty rough on him with my post about obnoxious speech and felt a little guilty sitting in the audience just listening to him quietly.




I have to say, he is an impressive guy.  Very intelligent and well spoken.  He laid out a well reasoned argument based in the idea of a Jewish State with empathy for the plight of the Palestinians.  He decried their dehumanization and harsh treatment.

Then he criticized the "Current Jewish Establishment" for stifling debate and being dishonest in their lack of criticism of the Israeli government.  His main argument being that unless you present both sides of the debate, younger more liberal Jews will think you are dishonest and disengage.

The funniest line of the evening was when he was talking about the controversy his books have generated in his family.  His mother told him that he was lucky his grandmother didn't know how to blog.  I think that we all may be lucky our grandmothers don't blog.

He used his normal style of argument, which is to build significant connection with the audience by saying things that sound completely reasonable.  In a liberal Jewish congregation we are very quick to identify with the people who are suffering and he painted a harsh picture of life in the West Bank.  As the evening progressed and he became more comfortable his exaggerations became bigger.

A few things that I noted:

• He criticized Israeli settlers and settlements, but did not provide a definition of a settlement.  I wish I had asked him to define the term as he meant it.  (I will do a more detailed post on why this is important later)
• Even though he was advocating balance in providing information, he never once mentioned Israelis in the south of the country who suffer almost daily rocket attacks from Gaza.  He never once expressed empathy for Israelis under attack.
• He claimed that the negotiating position of the Israeli government prior to Bibi Netanyahu was a return to one of 1967 borders plus minor land swaps, which is demonstrably untrue.

But the one thing that struck me most was his criticism of the Birthright Israel program.  Birthright Israel (Taglit in Hebrew) is a program that gives college age and young adult age Jews a fully subsidized  opportunity to visit the land of Israel.  The program has been very successful at getting younger Jews to connect with the land and Jewish people who live there.  According to Beinart, connecting younger (liberal) Jews to the land of Israel is one of his major goals.

So why the criticism of the Birthright program?  He is concerned that the Jewish establishment is deliberately blocking the Birthright participants access to what is happening in the West Bank.  He feels that we are being dishonest to the young people who take the trip by keeping this information from them.  He is worried that once they discover the truth, that it will sour them on the land of Israel and we will lose them to the Jewish people and the Zionist cause forever.

This all sounds very reasonable... unless you know anything about the Birthright organization and how it operates.  The birthright program licenses travel agencies to put together tours and market them to the Jewish community.  They make all manner of themed tours.  They have outdoor sports (mountain climbing, hiking), Shakespeare, LGBTQ, Fashion, Russian, themed trips.  This only names a few... look here for a more complete list.

In short, wherever there is a market, there is a trip.  There is one catch.  For the touring companies to be paid, they have to take the students to a list of defined locations.  These include the Kotel (Western Wall), The war memorial on the Golan Heights, A Kibbutz, Masada, etc.

So why don't they take these students to the West Bank and Gaza?  It's simple security.  Here is the security Statement from the website.

Our tours do not travel to or through areas of the West Bank, Gaza or East Jerusalem, other than the Jewish Quarter of the Old City (changes are possible when permitted by the security authorities). Throughout each day, itineraries are cleared through the official government authorities which also review all educational field trips for Israeli schools and educational institutions. A GPS (Global Positioning System) is carried by each group so that authorities are aware of each group's location at all times. A group's itinerary will be changed immediately to reflect any heightened risk or security concerns.

For whatever reason the Birthright planners feel that people might not send their kid to Israel if they require them to go to the West Bank.  They would be targets.  How could you guarantee their safety?  What Mr. Beinart is doing is advocating the end of the Birthright program... because no one would go.  This would be fine with him, because Birthright is an effective means of getting past the news coverage of Israel and see the beauty of the country.

There is nothing preventing a Birthright organizer from putting together a trip that focuses more on the conflict with the Palestinians.  If it is not here, it is most likely because there is no market.  So, Beinart wants to change the whole program... in such a way that would kill it.

Overall, I disagree with Beinart on most things.  However, he is a good thinker, a good speaker, a good writer and he will continue to be important in the Jewish community.  What can I say, I liked the guy.  Let's not give up on him yet.

Viral Video on Iran is Laying the Foundation for an Israeli Attack

A few days ago, I posted on the subject of a nuclear Iran and if the fears of an Iranian bomb are exaggerated.

The Youtube Video below has gone viral with over 2 million hits in the last few days.  In it a couple of Israeli filmmakers make a convincing case that Israel will have to do what it will have to do.

Pay particular attention to the idea of cognitive dissonance and how we wish something so horrible as a nuclear bomb blast over Tel Aviv was not possible.  Israel does not have that luxury.

While they are not speaking on behalf of the Israeli government, this is a major PR move and I think that all signs point that some kind of action against Iran is ... if not imminent at least closer than before.

The Worst Fundraising Pitch in the World

Imagine for a minute that you have been approached to contribute a large sum of money to a well known non-profit organization...

Fundraiser:  Thanks for taking the time to meet with me today.  You see, we are the largest organization of our kind.  We provide financial assistance to the elderly, unemployed, and housing assistance to the poor.  We help define educational standards and build critical infrastructure.  We do a lot of other things as well, but the list is too long for one conversation... and the truth is that we are in some financial trouble right now.  We need to raise funds in order to make certain we can continue to provide our services without interruption.  So, we are targeting wealthy individuals like you to contribute more.

You:  (Reaching for your wallet) Wow! Sounds like you do a lot of good work.  I already give a substantial amount, but I would love to contribute more.  How much do you need?

Fundraiser:  I'm not really sure.  How much can you afford?

You:  Excuse me?  I am not sure I heard that right, you don't know how much you need?

Fundraiser: Not exactly, but we know we need more.  The things we are doing are so important that we are just out raising the money, we'll decide how much is enough later.

You:  Oh I see...  I wouldn't normally do this, but I am anxious to do my part.  Perhaps I could see a copy of your budget and then I could decide how much I can give.

Fundraiser:  Yes about the budget.. well, unfortunately, we don't have one.

You:  You don't have a budget?

Fundraiser:  No, you see... we got a new CEO in 2008 and since he has been in charge, we haven't needed one.  We just take what we spent previous years and go with that.

You:  But there was a major financial collapse in 2008, everyone has had to tighten their belts.  You are still using the same budget assumptions?  No wonder you are in financial trouble.  I don't think your new CEO is doing his job.

Fundraiser:  He is a really nice guy, very personable.  Handsome, good speaker, very popular.  Represents the organization very well.  He graduated from Harvard and won a Nobel Prize.

You:  But you haven't had a budget in almost four years.

Fundraiser:  It isn't really his fault.  It's our board of directors.  They are hopelessly deadlocked and they can't agree on a budget.

You: But he is the CEO, why hasn't he sat them down in a room and told them that he can't run the company without a budget.

Fundraiser:  Between you and me...  it's better if there is no budget.  If we have one there will be no avoiding major cuts in important programs.  Without our programs, people will go without food and lose their homes.  Elderly people will starve and freeze to death.

You:  But if you are having financial problems, where are you getting the cash to run the programs now?

Fundraiser:  Our board managed to secure a very large line of credit.  We are using that until we can get kind and generous people like yourself to contribute your fair share.

You:  That is insane.  You are heading towards a total collapse.  There are a lot of people who depend on you.  If you don't control your spending, you will eventually run out of money and I only have so much to give.  What you are doing is totally immoral it is going to lead to a disaster.  Your CEO should be fired.

Fundraiser:  Well, we are pretty sure you can afford it.  But remember it's not the CEO's fault, it's the board of directors and the bad economy.

You:  I am going to have to be honest with you.  I would like to contribute and the work you do is very important, but until you get your finances straightened out... any money I give will be wasted.  Come back to me for more money when you get a new CEO and have a real plan on how you will spend it.

Fundraiser:  We have been getting a lot of that lately.  If you change your mind, you can contribute here...

Peter Beinart: A Great Example of Obnoxious Speech

A few days ago I posted regarding categories of speech.  In it, I identified a type that I call obnoxious/ aggressive speech.  This is characterized by the adherence to a single agenda without regard to the facts and there is way too much of it in the current political environment.

Today, in the Daily Beast, Peter Beinart has handed me a perfect illustration of this concept.

In his post Wilf's Colonialism Denial, Beinart attacks MK Einat Wilf for redefining Zionism to erase it of its colonial origins.  Beinart makes a brilliantly reasoned argument, supported by ample evidence, including writings of the great Theodore Herzl.  Reading his article, I found it impossible to disagree with his premise, his evidence, or his reasoning.   I decided to research it a little further, and what I found was that MK Wilf never tried to deny Israel's colonial past.

His entire blog post was written to deny an argument that Wilf never made.

I must admit that I suspected this was the case, because he was so rude as to not provide a link to the original article.  This required me to spend 15 seconds of my time to Google it and I found it right on the Daily Beast website.

Why is it so Hard to get American Jews to Care About Anti-semitism?

The Kantor Center at Tel Aviv University recently released its report on antisemitism worldwide for 2011.  The report was greeted by headlines that the number of major incidents declined significantly between 2010 and 2011.  The reason for the decline is not really clear and no one is really sure if this is good news or not.

I decided to dig into the numbers a bit and found some interesting data that may explain US attitudes towards anti-semitism.

Shabbat Shalom

Well everyone, it is Friday and I am ready for Shabbat.  My first week of active blogging is complete and I am flying the Mission Accomplished Banner and declaring it a success.

I would like to thank both of my loyal readers for supporting me as I develop Wiseman of Chelm and I find my voice in the blogsphere.

I expect this new blog to be an adventure and am grateful for all of the wonders of modern technology that gives voice to the voiceless.

Have a meaningful and restful Shabbat.

Best wishes from Chelm

Anatomically Correct Legos...

King David sees Bathsheba bathing from his roof.
(Picture done by The Rev. Brendan Powell Smith at the Brick Testament)

I love Legos and the outcry by the feminist organization SPARK really pains me.  What is their problem with the toys?  The Fox News article explains that:

Hillary Clinton Unsays Everything Obama Said at AIPAC for the Benefit of the Arab World

Over at Yidwithlid Jeff Dunetz writes about a Hillary Clinton's discussion of American democracy in Tunisia.  While his position that Hillary was probably lying to them is a reasonable one, I disagree with Jeff's analysis.  I believe that Hillary in a moment of complete honesty said exactly what she meant.

Getting to the Truth is Not Easy

In yesterday's post about categories of bad behavior and went into some detail about what I call aggressive and obnoxious political speech.  Over at Commentary Magazine, Peter Weher has an interesting article about challenging assumptions where he discusses why aggressive and obnoxious political speech is so effective.

In the article, he reviews a book by Jonathan Haidt which describes that:

Reasoning is not good at finding the truth, according to Haidt. He argued that “conscious verbal reasoning is really good at confirming.” We’re like good lawyers or press secretaries; we seek out information to reinforce our existing opinions and try to justify everything. Once we sacralize something, we become blind to counter-evidence.    

In other words, when you combine your natural tendencies and prejudices with an aggressive and agenda driven group, you have an immediate support system that is comfortable and able to verify things you already believe .... consequently you will be much more likely to behave (vote, contribute, protest) in a way that benefits someone else's agenda for you.  You will also be less likely discover the truth and reach across real boundaries to establish lasting relationship with people who are different.

Is the Iranian Threat to Israel an Exaggeration?

We all hope so...

At the Holocaust remembrance ceremony in Israel today, Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu once again made the statement that a nuclear Iran would be an existential threat to Israel.

Wrapping your mind around the idea that a nuclear explosion over Tel Aviv would immediately eliminate a third of the population of Israel is not a comfortable exercise.  A second Holocaust is simply too horrible to contemplate and so while we might know there is a real threat... dwelling on it could be paralyzing.

Just Because You Are Paranoid Doesn't Mean They Are Not Out to Get You

Over at Israel Matzav, Carl in Jerusalem posts a link to a study that shows 50% of all Israelis believe that the Holocaust could happen again.  My thought is really, only 50%?

The interesting quote by one of the authors of the study:

"This substantial proportion [of the population] is an indication of Holocaust fears instilled in us from childhood, which are not necessarily rational, but they're part of Jewish-Israeli culture," Kimhi noted. According to Kimhi, these fears are a reflection of deep emotional and cultural sentiment that is not necessarily altered by changes in Israel's security situation or diplomatic circumstances.  

I wonder exactly what changes in Israel's security situation and diplomatic circumstances have eased Professor Kimhi's mind about the future?


Israel Matzav: Nearly half of all Israelis fear that it could happen again.

Justice, Justice Shall You Pursue...

This week the Department of Justice responded with a letter to US lawmakers regarding a lack of progress in prosecuting Palestinian terrorists who have murdered American citizens overseas.

In 2005 Congress enacted legislation setting up an Office for Justice for Victims of Overseas Terrorism after Koby Mandel, a Maryland resident, was stoned to death by a Palestinian terrorist while vacationing in Israel.

Setting up a system to prosecute people who murder American's in foreign countries seems like a wise security measure.  Successful prosecutions would be a significant deterrent that would protect Americans no matter where they are located.

Sarah Stern of the Endowment for Middle East Truth (EMET) was involved in the original legislation and will continue to push for answers from the Justice Department.

According to the letter sent to the Justice Department in the last six years of operations the office has only assisted in the prosecution of one terrorist who murdered a Christian Missionary in Indonesia, while in Israel there have been been 54 Americans killed and 83 wounded in terrorist attacks since the signing of the Oslo Accords.http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/view_photog.php?photogid=1408

Categorizing Bad Behavior and Determining How to Respond

The Constitution of the United States guarantees freedom of the press and freedom of religion.  Most people would agree that this is one of the contributing factors to America's greatness.  The ability for ideas to spread unhindered, directly increases economic innovation and reduces corruption in government.  This idea is so deeply imbedded in American consciousness that we find it difficult to imagine a society that believes certain categories of speech should be restricted.

In contrast, Judaism places a lot of restrictions on free speech.  There are whole categories of speech which are forbidden.  They are called as "loshen hora" or evil speech.  Gossip, blasphemy, cursing, and lies are three types of loshen hora that are to be avoided by Jews.  Jewish courts, when empowered, have had no problem handing down the harshest punishments to people for these speech crimes.

Science in Hebrew ??

This is an idea that could only have come out of Chelm.

Hebrew is a great, I love the language and one of my great goals in life is to become fluent in written and spoken Hebrew... but the reason I want to become proficient in Hebrew is not to access a trove of scientific materials.

Anyone who has studied languages knows that certain languages are better for expressing some ideas than others.  For instance, Hebrew is an incredibly nuanced language that has brought unique ideas about God into the world.  The ancient cultures that used Hebrew as their primary language did NOT develop science or scientific thought or anything similar.

English is a good language for science. It is precise enough to express scientific thoughts quite eloquently.  That is a primary reason it has become the medium for scientific exchange throughout the world.

Any attempt to force this into the Israeli universities will be a failure.http://www.freedigitalphotos.net/images/view_photog.php?photogid=1408

Jews are not Liberal Enough?

J. J. Goldberg at the Jewish Daily Forward looks at the data underneath the 2012 Survey of Jewish Values and comes to the conclusion that Jews are not liberal enough.

Of the 10 economic questions, on the other hand, only three drew liberal responses above 60%, while four questions actually yielded decisively conservative majorities. Among them: whether poor people have become too dependent on government assistance programs (54% agreed) and whether you’d agree to pay more in taxes to fund federal programs that help the poor (52% would not). And a whopping 90% say they “admire people who get rich by working hard.”

While I don't agree with his conclusions about why the data is this way, his analysis is fascinating and comes with the rare admission that the progressive economic agenda is out of step with mainstream Judaism...

Survey of Jewish Values reveals some interesting things...

Particularly about the people who wrote the questions...

The Jewish Data Bank has published the 2012 Jewish Values Survey which contains some interesting information.  The poll is highly political with a lot of questions about the Presidential race and economic issues facing the nation.  The poll was administered by the Public Religion Research Institute, which has liberal political leanings.

Even so, every now and then you see a question that leaves you scratching your head.  I am sure that Q.16 was somehow meaningful to the committee that wrote it.  But I can't figure out what information they tried to get through this question and why it would be phrased this way in a poll of Jewish Values.