Kesher Talk: 03/09/2003

Friday, March 14, 2003

Common sense on talking politics and ethnic alliegances. Gary Farber at Amygdala (BTW one of the best blogs around) patiently instructs Kevin Drum in how to discuss neoconservatism without being anti-semitic. As I said in the comments, Gary's explanations are such blindingly common sense that I have to wonder why a smart, sensitive liberal like Kevin is so obtuse on this one topic.

But Kevin's choice of words gives me a hint: He says, "Neocons are 'rabidly' pro-Israel." Rabidly. Um, Kevin, mayn't we infer that you have a bit of an agenda of your own when you use such an inflammatory adjective? Do you describe Texas Hispanics, many of whom have family and business south of the border, as "rabidly" pro-Mexico?

PS Personal disclosure: I am an actively Jewish social liberal and fiscal conservative with strong libertarian leanings, who believes Israel should be treated like any other nation. My conviction on this stems as much from my sense of fair play and justice as from my Jewish connection to Israel. I credit my Jewish connection to Israel with sensitizing me to the facts of Israel's mistreatment in the international community and my desire to take the time to find out what is really going on. Likewise, it would be reasonable to expect an American of Bosnian ancestry or Mexican ancestry or Irish ancestry to pay extra attention to their ethnic homeland, and therefore to have more information on the topic than your average Joe Sixpack. I appreciate some of the positions of the neoconservatives, but I would never characterize myself as one; I think of myself as a liberal who appreciates how the free market works. So what good are these labels but to pigeonhole people, in the pursuit of an agenda?

PPS Everyone has linked to Jonah Goldberg's dissection of Jim Moron (sic), another patient march through logic and facts. Kevin: please read both, apply to all political questions of ethnic allegiance, and stop throwing up your hands and dithering whenever J-E-W-S are the group under discussion. And if that's difficult for you, ask yourself why.

UPDATE: Kevin responds. I take his point that "insisting on superhuman precision of language" tends to chill the discussion. However, tone counts for something, and being disingenuous about word choice can come across as an evasion of responsibility. "Rabidly pro-Israel" is a cliche which implies something about the writer's agenda, as Dr. Frank points out by getting out his thesaurus.

Kevin wonders if there isn't a double standard operating when Bush's Christianity can be discussed as an influence on his foreign policy but neo-con's Jewishness can't. I don't think all mention of ethnicity or religion in foreign policy decisions and lobbying should be excised. These are important parts of our lives and they do inform our decisions. My rule of thumb would be: if a different country/religion/ethnicity were at issue, would you talk about it the same way? If not, why not? Can you approach the subject honestly and have something fresh to say about it, or are you buying into easy stereotypes?

In Bush's case, one man - who happens to be Christian - is being discussed. As Gary and others pointed out, neo-cons and Jews are diverse, overlapping, but not synonymous groups. Not all neo-cons are Jewish, not all hawks on Israel are Jewish, and not all Jews are hawkish on Israel or invading Iraq. A group is being discussed and its diversity is being ignored. Also, pointing out Bush's Christianity doesn't automatically accuse him of dual loyalties, whereas that is always the subtext with Jews and Israel.

I have some more thoughts, but I got up very early this morning to catch my flight back to NYC and I still have to finish learning a haftarah for tomorrow morning. (Essay question: Was the ethnic cleansing of the Amalekites justified? Why or why not? Should the Kenites have tried to bring everyone to the negotiating table? Was Sha'ul being merciful, greedy, weak, or some combination of the three? Is Shmu'el a wise veteran of foreign affairs, forseeing consequences Sha'ul cannot, or a raving loony with a sword? Was mentioning Sha'ul's height a cheap shot? Discuss. This will count for 40% of your final grade.)

UPDATE: Haftarah went well. Continue discussion of "Jewish influence" on Bush's Iraq policy here and here.

Moran's misery grows: From this afternoon's CongressDaily:

When the six senior -- and Jewish -- House Democrats Wednesday signed a letter expressing their revulsion at the recent comments of Rep. James Moran, D-Va., and stating they will not support his re-election, they were motivated by their deeply personal concerns about the history of hostility toward Jews in the United States and elsewhere and by the current unusually tense political climate. "There are consequences to what [public officials] say," said Rep. Benjamin Cardin of Maryland, one of the six signers. "What Jim Moran said is very dangerous. It gives cover to people who are anti-Semitic. When that happens, it's important for colleagues to speak up." Rep. Martin Frost of Texas said: "We wanted to make it very clear that his kind of comment is unacceptable in contemporary American politics. It was basically a libel against the Jewish people."

Rep. Henry Waxman of California, the senior Jewish member in the House, took the lead in writing the letter because of what Moran said about Jewish support for the war in Iraq plus the broader context of international terrorism, according to a spokesman. "He has strong views, and he wanted to make them public," the aide said. Although many other Jewish members would have been eager to sign the letter, Waxman deliberately limited the number of signatures to enhance its impact. Each of the signers has been elected to at least eight terms, and three are ranking members of House committees -- Waxman at Government Reform, Frost at Rules and Rep. Tom Lantos of California at International Relations. Of the other three, Cardin and Rep. Sander Levin are ranking members on Ways and Means subcommittees and Rep. Nita Lowey of New York is the Foreign Operations Appropriations Subcommittee's ranking member. Additionally, House Minority Leader Pelosi today announced that Moran had stepped down as a regional whip at her request. "I have taken this action because Congressman Moran's irresponsible remarks were a serious mistake," Pelosi said. "As I said earlier this week, his comments were not only inappropriate, they were offensive and have no place in the Democratic Party."

With Frost and Lowey as past chairmen of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the letter was extraordinary in stating that the signers opposed the re-election of a colleague in the Democratic Caucus. Although they were not seeking to influence the emerging discussion of possible Democratic primary challengers to Moran in his district, they wanted to make clear that he cannot count on support from them -- or, presumably, from other colleagues -- if he seeks re-election.

The Democrats said they saw no parallel in the Moran case to the successful primary challenges in 2002 to then-Reps. Earl Hilliard of Alabama and Cynthia McKinney of Georgia because of their hostile remarks and votes on Israel; in each of those cases, opposition to the incumbents came from outside Jewish groups, not from fellow House members. ...

Interfaith dialogue revisited, she said with a straight face. More brouhaha between Catholics and Jews, this time over Mel Gibson's upcoming uber-traditional film of the life of Jesus of Nazareth. (These links should lead you to all the other links on the topic, including my comments in Susanna's threads.) (Many thanks to Diane, whose links introduced me to Paula Fredriksen, scholar of early Christianity and Catholic convert to Judaism.)

PS Previous brouhaha over the Vatican's cozy relationship with Arab regimes here. Previous brouhaha over Catholic doctrine on converting Jews partly here. A related post on interpreting holy scripture here.

Soul Journey. My brother's fourth CD has just been released. If you like intelligent jazz piano from a respected mainstay of the New York jazz scene, you can purchase a copy here. (He took the cover photo of New York harbor at sunset from his apartment in Park Slope.)

Thursday, March 13, 2003

Happy Trails. I am going back to NYC tomorrow at the crack of dawn, and boy do I not want to. I spent three glorious hours on my favorite Barton Creek Greenbelt trail this afternoon, under clear skies and 85 degree weather (memo to self: always pack shorts and sandals when visiting Austin, no matter what time of year or what the weather forecast says). Tomorrow it's supposed to get into the 40s in Manhattan, if I'm lucky.

There is a particular fragrance and quality of the air in the Hill Country, when it's hot and dry and still on the trails (except for an occasional slacker mountain biker whizzing by) and recent rain has swelled the creek with robust waterfalls and viridian swimming holes. (Disappointingly, my return date is about two days in advance of bluebonnet season, although I spotted a clump of Indian paintbrush on the median of 360 between Mopac and Westbank.)

I haven't been motivated to go hiking from New York (although there are plenty of group day trips to lovely trails in Jersey and upstate), partly because my heart belongs to the Balcones Fault. I lived in Philadelphia for 10 years and hiked a lot in Fairmount Park and up into the Delaware Water Gap area. It's very pretty, and we don't have much in the way of fall foliage in Texas, but I spent three childhood summers at Echo Hill Ranch near Kerrville, and no other landscape feels like home.

I didn't get to Enchanted Rock this time around, but a friend and I scrambled all over Pedernales Falls yesterday, which was just as good except we had to leave too soon.

PS Not to mention meals with most of my friends and leading morning minyan at my old shul and seeing Howard Waldrop at Bruce Sterling's SXSW party and real salsa and chips... (memo to self: next time make room in the schedule for barbecue...)

Carnival Time. Sorry to post this so late, but this week's Carnival of the Vanities is up at Daily Rant. I've got an entry. Great job, Jay and Jane!

Pandering to his political base, Saddam hands out the pork: Palestinian families, one related to a suicide bomber and 22 others whose relatives were killed by Israeli forces, received $245,000 in checks from Iraq today.

How journalists cover Judaism: Not surprisingly, according to WORLD magazine, they 'just don't get it.' Journalists sort of understand what we do, but have no idea about the import aspects: why.

Wednesday, March 12, 2003

Five Vital Lessons From Iraq/ Paul Johnson doesn't think France should be allowed to play with matches.

The British have learned this over 1,000 years of acrimonious history, but it still comes as a shock to see how badly the French can behave, with their unique mixture of shortsighted selfishness, long-term irresponsibility, impudent humbug and sheer malice. Americans are still finding out--the hard way--that loyalty, gratitude, comradeship and respect for treaty obligations are qualities never exhibited by French governments. All they recognize are interests, real or imaginary. French support always has to be bought. What the Americans and British now have to decide is whether formal alliances that include France as a major partner are worth anything at all, or if they are an actual encumbrance in times of danger.

Read the rest. (via Silent Running)

Rep. Moran sinks further into oblivion: As I pointed out yesterday, according to Virginia Democratic Representative Jim Moran, we would not be going to war with Iraq "if it were not for the strong support of the [American] Jewish community."

The White House and Democrats have rightfully condemned Moran. But not all of them have done so too harshly.

The White House Press Secretary, Ari Fleischer, was clear: "Those remarks are shocking; those remarks are wrong, those remarks are inappropriate; and those are remarks that should not have been said."

But God forbid that Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, who spent weeks bemoaning the racism of the Republican party in the Trent Lott affair, should actually tel Moran to quit. "I think Mr. Moran made comments that were unfounded, baseless and very out of line. I think it's a sad day when comments like that are made ...[but] I don't think that Mr. Moran ought to resign... I think there are other ways with which to make sure that comments like this don't occur."

So, Tom, what did you have in mind? Duct tape over his mouth?

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, released a statement yesterday afternoon saying his comments "have no place in the Democratic Party," while House Minority Whip Steny H. Hoyer, Maryland Democrat, said not only were Mr. Moran's comments inappropriate, but the premise was fundamentally incorrect. Still, neither said Mr. Moran should resign.

Hoyer claimed that everyone says something stupid once in a while - it is no reason to resign, right? "I think he said a stupid thing. I think Mr. Moran thinks he said a stupid thing. If we all resigned every time we said a stupid thing, we'd all be gone..."

And what a shame that would be...

Jim Geraghty has Moran's rap sheet, while Ramesh Ponnuru makes some unflattering comparisons between how Republicans handled Trent Lott and how Demorats have handled similar cases. And Cliff May points out that scapegoating Jews is not a new phenomena among the anti-war activists.

Meanwhile, The Washington Post gets to point out that it has been against Moran for a long time, while whining 'can't we all just get along' :

It's perfectly legitimate to debate Israel's place in U.S. Mideast policy, or Israel's own behavior; charges of anti-Semitism shouldn't be permitted to stifle criticism. It's not anti-Semitic to stand up for Palestinians' human rights. It wouldn't necessarily be anti-Semitic -- just demonstrably wrong -- to argue that Mr. Bush's Iraq policy is motivated primarily by a desire to protect Israel. But the argument moves from merely wrong to patently offensive when it attributes to Jews or "the Jewish community" a single view and a nefarious influence. Some Jews and some non-Jews, in Israel and America and Europe, support disarming Iraq; some don't. In their respective countries, they try to make the arguments on their merits. Mr. Moran and his ilk should do the same.

Update: Finally, Jonah Goldberg weighs in too.

Nelson writes:

Hello Alisa.
I have an idea that could help clarify a bit the discussion about why more Palestinians have died in this Intifada than Israelis.
It is the following:
To classify the dead according to their origin is wrong, because Israelis have not been killing Israelis, but Palestinians have been killing each other.
Thus, the results should be presented as the total numbers of those killed by the Israelis compared to all those killed by the Palestinians. This last number would include not only those who have been lynched as suspected collaborators of Israel, but also those who died in "work accidents" and the suicide bombers themselves, because what they all have in common is that they were killed by Palestinians (in the case of the suicide bombers, by Palestinian suicide bombers).
I know it may seem somewhat repellent to lump together suicide bombers and their victims, but they were not killed by Israel and it is the Palestinians who are responsible even for their death.
If we classify the data this way, I think we'll obtain more realistic numbers that would help subvert Palestinian victimology.

I have to agree that this would be a much more correct approach. After all, it is a blame game, and blame should focus on the killers, not the killed.

Tuesday, March 11, 2003

Jews in the military. West Point's Jewish chaplain is heading for Iraq to be with his troops. He served in the US Army in Korea, Turkey, Germany and Italy before studying for the rabbinate in Jerusalem.

“When you look at traditional Jewish values, they overlap very well with American traditional values and the Army’s traditional values: loyalty, duty, selfless service, honor, integrity, personal courage, respect. That translates 100 percent Jewish,” Rabbi Huerta says.

Remember last year when well-meaning German authorities were asking Jews to not wear yarmulkes in public, for their own safety? Well, this article is from last week.

It was a scene dripping with historical irony. On a street in this transformed former capital of Nazi Germany, a German man this week approached Philadelphia Rabbi Jacob Herber, here as part of a delegation of American spiritual leaders, and advised him to remove his kipa, fearing for his safety.

. . . A group of American rabbis this week was being warned repeatedly by a variety of Jewish community sources not to public identify themselves as Jews while walking through some sections of this bustling city. . . Along with the warning about their yarmulkes, the rabbis were cautioned also by Jewish officials in Frankfort and Berlin to keep a low profile.

. . .parts of Berlin and Brandenburg are unsafe for Jews to travel

because of well-organized, well-financed Muslim gangs, independent of Saudi financing, which intimidate the more moderate Turkish Muslims. Sound familiar?

U.S. Congressman says Jews are orchestrating the war in Iraq: These were the words of scandal-ridden Virginia Democrat Jim Moran:

If it were not for the strong support of the Jewish community for this war with Iraq, we would not be doing this. The leaders of the Jewish community are influential enough that they could change the direction of where this is going, and I think they should.

Jack Moline, rabbi of Agudas Achim synagogue in Alexandria, knows that Moran is much beloved by many of his constituents. "I like him, too," says Moline. But even this Democrat's staunchest supporters won't back him anymore. Yesterday the rabbi -- along with many other Jewish leaders -- called on Moran to resign. "We have reached the end of our patience with Congressman Jim Moran and his treatment of the Jewish community and its concerns."

The Washington Post has more on his past indiscretions, while the Washington Times and CNN chronicle his attempt to weasel out of his current predicament without actually recanting or apologizing.

Monday, March 10, 2003

A time for mourning, a time for celebrating. Always a mainstay of traditional communities, the chevra kadisha - the volunteer organization in the Jewish community which prepares dead people for burial according to Jewish law and takes charge of meeting the needs of the grieved family - is making a comeback among liberal Jews. Jewish small world department: I am a member of three of the congregations mentioned in the article, and I used to attend High Holy Days services in Philadelphia led by Rabbi Holztman, who was the first female rabbi I ever met, who opened the door for me to return to Judaism after decades away.

I was very moved by the story of a dedicated ad hoc chevra kadisha, the Stern College students who read Psalms every Shabbat for months in a tent next to refrigerated unidentified WTC remains. Read it if you haven't already.

How Kosher is New York? For those of you who have not been following this issue, various levels of civil government are trying to weigh in on what is or is not kosher.

Erica Schwartz discusses the most recent case in New York (The Wall Street Journal, Mar. 6, subscription required) -- Governor Pataki's "Emergency Kosher Law Protection Act of 2003."

It's intended to cheer up disheartened kosher consumers who were upset when the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal of a decision declaring New York State's kosher laws unconstitutional. Those laws, which required foods to satisfy Orthodox guidelines of kashrut in order to be labeled kosher, were challenged by the Yarmeisch brothers, whose Commack Kosher Deli and Market in Commack, N.Y., is under the kosher supervision of a Conservative rabbi. Oy vey is mir.

The old "Is it really kosher?" question is nothing new in the Jewish community, especially in the Orthodox Jewish community where the rules are that much more stringent. As those of us who've grown up in this tradition know, foods and restaurants are constantly falling in and out of kosher stardom.

We can all remember the days of eating Hydrox chocolate sandwich cookies instead of Oreos (if you've never heard of Hydrox, count yourself lucky) and the days of avoiding M&Ms as if they were chitlins. There were the days of walking past Krispy Kreme and trying to convince ourselves that Dunkin' Donuts were every bit as good and of watching our less religious friends nosh on the Hebrew National and Shofar hot dogs at Yankee Stadium. (No one who speaks Hebrew or has ever heard the shofar blown actually accepts these certifications). Fortunately, today, Oreos, M&Ms and Krispy Kremes are all kosher even by Orthodox standards, and a kosher stand accepted by all Jews now sells dogs in The House That Ruth Built. (Or was it Rebecca?)

The point is, each Jewish community has rabbis to help sort through these issues, local religious councils to give us the "go ahead" or the "stay away." My rabbi has told our congregation not to trust the kosher certifications at our neighborhood deli, but another rabbi has surely told his community to make certain that when they go, they order the stuffed cabbage. Different communities hold by different levels of kashrut, and so it goes with every aspect of Jewish law. The irony here is that while "kosher laws" seem to be directed at satisfying the more observant Jew, it is actually the less knowledgeable Jewish diner for whom the kosher laws were constructed in the early 1900s.

"The original intention," explains Rabbi Menachem Genack, rabbinic administrator of the kashrut division of the Orthodox Union, "was to protect unknowing consumers who went looking for kosher meat and ended up with horse meat" (horse is inherently an unkosher animal). On the other hand, for those Jews who carefully adhere to halacha, or Jewish law, no amount of assurance from New York State can compare with the certification or disapproval from a trusted rabbi. This is why food establishments that claim to be kosher post their certifications in the window with the name of the supervising rabbi -- leaving it to the consumer to decide whether that kashrut is sufficient or lacking.

If the state is determined to better the lives of kosher Jews, what authorities can and probably will do is make sure that each market or restaurant's sign is not just some meaningless certification written in a compelling Semitic script, but an accurate and truthful representation of that establishment's level of supervision. For the state to do anything more would, well, not be so kosher.

Sunday, March 09, 2003

Lazy times in Austin. I didn't go to my friend Adina's panel yesterday (on Effective Social Networks) because I was saving my free SXSW day pass for today so I could see the Weblog Awards, but I got lazy and blew that off too. But Heath Row transcribed the panel.

I sat on my friends' deck and watched cardinals, titmice, chickadees, goldfinches, and red-headed woodpeckers cavort around their backyard, and practiced the haftarah I am chanting this coming Shabbat at one of my congregations' New Member Shabbat, back in NYC. (I've got to learn it well enough to do a dress rehearsal with the cantor before Friday - I've chanted many haftorot, but not at that shul before.) Tonight - pizza with my longest-known friends in Austin. I knew them before they were married and now they have blindingly cute 5 and 3 year old boys.

I will use my pass tomorrow for the exhibit hall, visit the HerDomain booth, collect whatever pathetic freebies tech companies are giving away in this economic climate, and roam around the evening parties. I have been getting into intense political arguments with several HDers on our email list - I wonder if I will run into them. Of course we are all much more polite in person than we are online.

Kesher Talk

Friday, March 14, 2003

Thursday, March 13, 2003

Wednesday, March 12, 2003

Tuesday, March 11, 2003

Monday, March 10, 2003

Sunday, March 09, 2003

Navigate this site

Previous Posts

Links

Archives