Illusions of Objectivity

Rabbi Avi Shafran writes:

Some American journalists assigned to the political beat are having a hard time. Their dilemma is named Donald Trump, a man they don’t feel they can cover objectively.

Those troubled are reporters with a liberal bent, and that, of course, means most of the profession. The vast majority of mainstream print and electronic media personnel are well entrenched on the left end of the political spectrum. To be sure, one needn’t be a social or political liberal to regard the Republican presidential candidate with concern – many in Mr. T.’s own party are distancing themselves from him – but “progressive” citizens have a particular revulsion for the controversial candidate.

And so, while the intrepid reporters soldier on in the quest for fairness, impartiality and objectivity, they are finding it hard to maintain their professional standards, or even the façade of neutrality.

Jim Rutenberg, the New York Times’ “media columnist,” lamented his and his colleagues’ predicament.

“If you’re a working journalist,” he wrote, “and you believe that Donald J. Trump is a demagogue playing to the nation’s worst racist and nationalistic tendencies, that he cozies up to anti-American dictators and that he would be dangerous with control of the United States nuclear codes… you have to throw out the textbook American journalism has been using for the better part of the past half-century, if not longer, and approach it in a way you’ve never approached anything in your career.”

“You would move closer,” he continued, “than you’ve ever been to being oppositional. That’s uncomfortable and uncharted territory for every mainstream, nonopinion journalist I’ve ever known, and by normal standards, untenable.”

Mr. Rutenberg’s honest confession of discomfort is commendable. But it’s also somewhat amusing, because, while Mr. Trump may be an outsize (one might even say yuuuge!) challenge to the media’s objectivity, the notion itself of journalistic impartiality is more veneer than substance. There are other fairness challenges that reporters routinely face and fail.

Posted in Journalism | Comments Off on Illusions of Objectivity

The Ellul Challenge

Rabbi Yitzchok Adlerstein writes:

“If they understood the effect the chiming of the church bells had on the Jewish soul, they would never stop them.” So observed a Torah sage of a different generation, when the grandeur and power of the Church further demoralized an impoverished and persecuted European Jewry. If the Pew Research Center is correct, today’s worry should be the growing silence of those bells. In this we find a challenge as Elul is upon us, and as we look towards the yemei ha-din…

Not so long ago, Jews would pithily observe, “Vi es christelt zich, azoy yidelt zich.” The translation loses all of the flavor, but the meaning is something like “whatever is happening in the Christian world, is going to happen in the Jewish world.” We would not be amiss if we modernized that to “Vi es un-christelt zich, azoy yidelt zich” – whichever way Christianity is unraveling, Jews will follow suit. And follow suit we certainly will, unless we act less like the Fiddler on the Roof shouting one word slogans at questions, and more like the am chacham v’navon we are supposed to be.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on The Ellul Challenge

The Trump Tallis and Outsider Journalism

Rabbi Yitzhok Adlerstein writes: When a black pastor in Detroit draped a tallis around the shoulders of The Donald, Jewish tongues started clucking with disapproval. “Cultural appropriation!” “He’s an anti-Semite!” Notably, the vehemence, as best as I could tell, all came from Jews on the left – politically and religiously. Perhaps their real discomfort was in the realization that Donald Trump wears a tallis more often than they do. The rest of us were mildly amused (if anything about this strange campaign can be said to be amusing), and wanted to know more about the pastor and his church. (Hint: It is a Pentecostal church. There are lots of black Pentacostal churches, full of people who are pro-Israel, certainly more so than the elites in Haaretz who were quick to condemn the incident.)

The real cultural appropriation came from Jewish circles, which had to scramble to figure out what a tallis was, why the benighted religious Christians believed that Jesus wore one, and why they had to be wrong. Savor this, from an article in The Forward, authored by a “soferet” and designer of the famous Tefillin Barbie:

“In the religion known as rabbinic Judaism, rectangular garments are required to have knotted tassels on the corners, following the Torah. According to the scholar Dafna Shlezinger-Katsman, in Jesus’s era, people in the eastern parts of the Roman Empire routinely wore a rectangular thing called a pallium, and therefore people who wanted to observe rabbinic Judaism probably put tassels on their pallia. …A tassel-equipped pallium is what the early rabbis were probably referring to when they said “tallit.” …The tassels on the religious Jews’ pallia probably stood out to those in the know, but those who weren’t savvy to the significance wouldn’t have cared especially…Jesus may or may not have worn a tallit, depending on whether he was the type who wore pallium and whether he was inspired to mark himself as part of the rabbinic in-group by attaching tassels to it. …Quite possibly Jesus, too, thought there were more important issues to focus on. …Having a special rectangular garment with tassels that you wear during prayer seems to have been a late medieval development, according to scholars like Elisheva Baumgarten.”

Except that it wasn’t. Unless we assume that the Babylonian Talmud is of late medieval development. I can’t tell you how much a tassled Roman pallium would set you back on Ebay in fourth or fifth century Iraq, but they seemed to know about it and its role in davening:

“R. Yochanan said, “Were a verse not written, it would be impossible to say it. This teaches that the Holy One, Blessed is He, wrapped Himself in a tallis like a prayer leader and demonstrated to Moses the order of prayer.” (Rosh Hashanah, 17B)”

Posted in Journalism, Judaism | Comments Off on The Trump Tallis and Outsider Journalism

Conservatism In Crisis

Rabbi Avi Shafran writes: The alt-right’s “intellectual godfather,” in many eyes, is Jared Taylor. Although he characterizes himself as a “white advocate,” he strongly rejects being labeled racist, contending that his “racialism” is “moderate and commonsensical,” a benign form of belief in the “natural” separation of races and nationalities. He contends that white people promoting their own racial interests is no different than other ethnic groups promoting theirs. He has said, “I want my grandchildren to look like my grandparents. I don’t want them to look like Anwar Sadat or Fu Manchu.”

Pointing to the homogeneity of places of worship, schools and neighborhoods, he insists that people “if left to themselves, will generally sort themselves out by race.”

Certain of Mr. Taylor’s beliefs may resonate with some Orthodox Jews. We may rightly eschew racism (seeing black Jews, for instance, no different from white ones), but we tend to be less than enamored of some elements of various minority cultures; we deeply value ethnic cohesion, preferring to live in neighborhoods among “our own kind”; and we have serious problems with certain elements of “progressive” western civilization and multiculturalism.

Mr. Taylor, in fact, welcomes Jews. He has said that we “look white to him.”

That sentiment though, is not typical among others under the alt-right umbrella.

Even a nuanced rejection of non-western cultures inevitably attracts genuine racists and haters, and devolves into rejection of the eternal “other”: Jews. The American far right has always embraced, inter alia, one or another form of Jew-hatred. More balanced members of the alt-right refer to their “1488ers” – a reference to two well-known neo-Nazi slogans, the “14 Words” in the sentence “We Must Secure The Existence Of Our People And A Future For White Children”; and the number 88, referring to “H,” the eighth letter of the alphabet, doubled and coding for “Heil Hitler.”

And even Mr. Taylor has permitted people like Don Black, a former Klan leader who runs the neo-Nazi Stormfront.org web forum, to attend his conferences. He may or may not endorse Black’s every attitude, but neither has he rejected his support.

Back in the 1960s, the John Birch Society, then dedicated to the theory that the U.S. government was controlled by communists, was condemned by the ADL for contributing to anti-Semitism and selling anti-Semitic literature. The brilliant and erudite William F. Buckley Jr., the unarguable conscience of conservatism at the time, recognized the group’s nature, and the threat its extremism posed to responsible social conservatives. In the magazine he founded, National Review, he denounced and distanced himself from the Birchers in no uncertain terms, contending that “love of truth and country call[s] for the firm rejection” of the group.

It is ironic that it has fallen to the Democratic presidential contender to make a distinction between responsible Republicanism and the current loose confederacy that includes haters.

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on Conservatism In Crisis

Jill Soloway: ‘Any Moment That I Have to Call Trump Out for Being an Inheritor to Hitler, I Will’

solowaysq

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Jill Soloway: ‘Any Moment That I Have to Call Trump Out for Being an Inheritor to Hitler, I Will’

Celebrity Rabbi, Asked to Pray for GOP, Picks Mourner’s Prayer

Should not the Jennifer Rubins of the pundit world be replaced by right-wing pundits of the variety that the voters actually support? Or should WAPO continue to pretend to have right-wing commentators when they only have jesters? What will that do over time to their and others reputation as a supposed media source?

Chaim Amalek writes: “She has the right to earn a parnassa (living), no? And how else could she, when she’s that old? When Trump becomes President (BH), I hope to make my living by explaining him to the Jews of the Upper West Side. I will be the anti-Rubin.”

Forward: “When Rabbi Meir Soloveichik was called to offer his roast, he chose to provide a broader perspective on the current situation of the Republican Party. Telling the audience he was looking for the right Jewish prayer for the moment, the young rabbi began reciting the mourner’s kaddish.”

Posted in R. Meir Soloveichik | Comments Off on Celebrity Rabbi, Asked to Pray for GOP, Picks Mourner’s Prayer

From A Time When Women Knew The Score (Or Men Were Less Beta)

From the Chateau:

Reader Mister Bicks digs up a very old tune (originally written in 1917!) with a message that’s more honest than you’ll hear from any singer today.

Thinking about your assertion that looks aren’t as important as charisma (for lack of a better word at the moment), I think of a great song The Andrews Sisters called “Oh Johnny” (written in 1917). Please read the lyrics, noting especially that in the song, even though Johnny is NOT handsome, the girl wonders why she is so infatuated with him. Well, it’s because he’s “very very bad” and he knows about love.

People back then knew well what we try to avoid today.

***

Oh, Johnny! Oh, Johnny!
How you can love
Oh, Johnny! Oh, Johnny!
Heavens above
You make my sad heart jump with joy
And when you’re near I just can’t sit still a minute
I’m so, Oh, Johnny! Oh, Johnny!
Please tell me dear
What makes me love you so?
You’re not handsome, it’s true
But when I look at you
I just, Oh, Johnny!
Oh, Johnny! Oh!
Da-da-da

All the girls are crazy for a certain little lad
Although he’s very very bad
He could be oh so good if he wanted to
Bad or good he understood about love & other things
For every girl in town followed him around
Just to hold his hand & sing

Americans, and women in particular, from a century ago were a lot more aware of, or at least a lot less antagonistic towards, ugly truths about the sexes and romance. It seems as if there was this pre-post-America age when Realtalk™ wasn’t a rebellious act of defiance but a normal, gentle undercurrent governing the flow of human society.

The explanation for this is multivariate, but I’ll stick to one that I believe is a major contributing factor that doesn’t involve an endless stream of propaganda by the gynocratic hivemind: American women were more “red pill” a long time ago because their contemporaneous American men were less beta. When men are alpha and in control of their nation’s public spaces and curators of their nation’s heritage, they’re giving women more of what women want (whether they’re consciously aware of it or not). Women in that kind of sexual market have daily reminders of how admirable and yes even sexy men can be, as opposed to Thee Current Year when American women are getting daily reminders of how contemptible, effeminate and anhedonic their men have become.

Women (and men) have forgotten about sex differences partly because the sexes have shed their dimorphic sexuality to conform to a unisex amorphous androgynous blob of mood-killing homoplasm. Women are now the aggressors and men the deferential lapdogs. Our cultural messages reflect this sorry sexual devolution and, not coincidentally, our native stock birthrate plummets as we import less progressive barbarians to fill the womb void.

Posted in America | Comments Off on From A Time When Women Knew The Score (Or Men Were Less Beta)

In Israel, racial profiling doesn’t warrant debate or apologies

I wish more First World countries were like this.

Haaretz January 8, 2010: While other democracies hesitate to resort to racial profiling, Israel takes the practice for granted.

A couple of months ago, I toured the IDF Ground Forces Command’s substances laboratory, a nondescript cluster of prefabricated huts at the Tel Hashomer army base near Tel Aviv, which serves as Israel’s brain-trust for every type of explosive used by armies and terrorists in the Middle East.
The lab’s commander, Lt. Col. Eran Tuval, a goateed officer-scientist with a mercurial temperment, ran around the courtyard, which was littered with leftover Qassam rockets and ominously labeled packages, setting off combustions with a cigarette lighter.

One fact he tried to impress upon me was the ease with which basic household items can be adapted into deadly devices. For example two bottles of liquid, one of them containing the hair dye hydrogen peroxide, can blow up a commercial airliner.
So why, I asked, are we still allowed to board airplanes at Ben-Gurion International Airport with bottles and tubes of liquid brought from home, while in Heathrow or JFK they confiscate our face cream and toothpaste?
“Oh, that’s simple,” he answered matter of factly. “We use racial profiling, they don’t.”

Only after the visit, rereading my notes, I noticed a curious detail in his answer. While the entire interview had been conducted in Hebrew, he had said those two words, “racial profiling,” in English.
To Israelis, the practice of picking people out based on racial stereotypes is so self-evident, there isn’t even a Hebrew term for it.In the ongoing international debate over airport security, which has followed the failed attempt by Nigerian student Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab to blow up a plane carrying himself and 289 others near Detroit, much attention has been paid to the methods used to screen passengers at airports.
And though some security experts and commentators, mainly conservative, have advocated adopting racial profiling, the general consensus in the West is that it is unthinkable to subject passengers with certain shades of pigmentation and names germane to a specific part of the world to more rigorous searches.
Some airlines have employed security companies, often run by Israelis, that use similar methods, but on a national level, few Western democracies are prepared to face the storm of criticism they can expect from liberal opinion-makers.
As a substitute, American and other security agencies have decided to pay special attention to citizens of various ‘suspect’ countries, but they are only a small part of the potential suspects. What about Muslim citizens of other countries who may have been radicalized, like the Fort Hood psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan? Neither the American administration nor its counterparts in other Western countries are willing to contemplate a system in which these citizens will be screened differently from their Christian, Jewish or atheist compatriots. In Israel though, there is no question whatsoever. It all happens quite openly. If you have a Hebrew name and ‘look Jewish,’ the security screening will be swift and painless. If your name is a bit less obviously Israeli, then there are some other key questions.
In my case, they ask how old I was when my family immigrated to Israel and where I served in the Israel Defense Forces, and after that it’s easy sailing.
A friend with a similarly foreign name told me that with her, they just hear the Hebrew names of her children and she’s okay.
In the case of Jewish tourists, it’s usually enough to supply some reliable details on your aunt living in Haifa. We all know why these questions are being asked and we all bear it with good humor.Let’s admit it, there is a general acceptance of the fact that non-Jewish, especially Muslim, passengers will get a working-over and have to arrive at the airport three hours earlier than the rest of us.
Of course, they could subject everyone to these inspections, but that would mean we couldn’t progress quickly and smoothly from check-in to duty-free, and of course since it would mean hiring hundreds more security agents, ticket prices would go up.
Many Israelis have no problems with this: Let the Muslims suffer for the sins of their brothers. But those of us who like to think of ourselves as liberal humanists find it too easy to ignore the sight of entire families having their luggage rummaged through in front of the entire terminal while we are waved through.
Nor do we ever seem to notice the small enclosure to the right of passport control when we return home, where the less fortunate have to wait for hours while they are being checked out. We are in too much of a rush to get through and grab our luggage off the conveyor belts.While governments and citizens of other democracies are dealing with the question of whether they are prepared to live with the chance that their principles and freedoms could lead to a bomber actually managing to activate their hidden device, in Israel that decision has been made for us long ago.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on In Israel, racial profiling doesn’t warrant debate or apologies

NYT: Donald Trump Jr. Faces Backlash After Comparing Syrian Refugees to Skittles That ‘Would Kill You’

All the comments in my Twitter feed praised him.

I guess it all comes down to the question of whose side are you on.

Donald Trump Jr and Sr are on the side of non-Muslims. The MSM are on the side of the Coalition of the Fringe, which includes Muslims.

This article is one-sided, only quoting critics of Jr’s tweet (with the exception of Mike Pence).

New York Times:

Donald Trump Jr. is facing intense backlash on social media after he posted a message on Twitter Monday night that compared Syrian refugees to a bowl of Skittles sprinkled with a few that “would kill you.”

Mr. Trump, a top adviser in his father’s presidential campaign, appeared to suggest that the nation was faced with a blind selection process in which a few potentially poisoned pieces would be lurking among the thousands of Syrians fleeing a brutal five-year-old civil war.

The post, shared widely on Twitter, drew swift condemnation and comparisons to white supremacist memes. Social media users shared images of bombing victims in the region, including Omran Daqneesh, the bloodstained, dust-coated boy who was shown sitting in an ambulance after an airstrike and who became a symbol of the suffering in Aleppo, Syria.

Posted in America | Comments Off on NYT: Donald Trump Jr. Faces Backlash After Comparing Syrian Refugees to Skittles That ‘Would Kill You’

What was wrong with Hillary Clinton’s eyes during Philly speech?

REPORT: During a speech in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on Monday, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton appeared to have something quite off about her appearance.

Hillary’s eyes appeared not in-sync with one another, as the left eye looked to be cock-eyed and displaced, especially as she looked towards the left.

A montage of Hillary’s eye-catching moments before a small group of Temple University students can be seen below in footage by The American Mirror.

Do you see Hillary’s cock-eyed moments?

Posted in Hillary Clinton | Comments Off on What was wrong with Hillary Clinton’s eyes during Philly speech?