The YCT Rabbinics Student Whose Wife Didn’t Cover Her Hair, Her Knees And A Whole Lot More

Posted on November 13, 2008 by Luke Ford

Mark writes on Hirhurim about Modern Orthodoxy (MO):

I’ve encountered numerous people who claim that they’re MO and while sometimes they share similarities, many times they’re worlds apart. For example, I recently encountered a young man and his wife in a park where I took my children. He and I struck up a nice conversation while the kids played and he told me how he’s studying to become a rabbi at YCT (Yeshivat Chovevei Torah). He sounded earnest, sincere, and as well-meaning as anyone I’ve ever spoken to. Yet, it was impossible not to notice that his wife does not cover her hair, knees, and a whole lot more. It was also rather obvious that he wasn’t wearing tzitzis at the time. He identified himself as a firm believed in MO.
At a Kiruv seminar, I met a group of students from YU (Yeshiva University). I was in awe of their hasmadah – any moment that they weren’t assisting the seminar they were in the beis medrash. Their dikduk in mitzvos was clearly evident in everything they did. All of them intend to become professionals and fit under the rubric of MO.
At another seminar I met some YU students who were far less impressive. Their language was far too colorful, their interactions with the females was highly suspect, and I finally had to ask some of them to leave when they spent the night in the room of two female students [I’ve never had that problem with the Lakewood or NI bochurim.]
One of the biggest supporters of the Kollel I attended is a staunch YI (Young Israel) member and very vocal proponent of MO.
A certain YI that I know well is full of members whom the rabbi told me he wouldn’t trust to eat in their homes [and this is not known as a far-left or kiruv oriented YI] and he’s a YU talmid.
I could go on and on but you get the picture. MO is a big umbrella – much of it is kiruv oriented – and so many of its proponents have different definitions that I no longer can speak of a monolithic MO [the same may be true for Chareidism and Chassidism but that’s for another day.]
No question, there are some derachim that claim to be MO that I view as safek traif [I imagine you do too for some]. There are some, that I have no problem with even if I choose another derech in life.
So if I have a talmid who chooses to pursue a professional lifestyle, I have no issue with that even if he never spends a day in Kollel. For some, that’s the healthiest path to take. For others, whom I feel still need more time in yeshiva or who have a bright future in Torah, I’d be disappointed if they chose to enter a profession. If chassidus is their thing, I rarely will try to stop it unless I feel that it’s being used as a cop-out from becoming a more halachic Jew. It all depends on the person.
The reason I don’t encourage my students initially to explore the MO lifestyle is quite frankly because I fear for the wide range of people they’ll meet because it is the wide umbrella that it is. I prefer instead to show them one derech and then let them make adjustments as necessary rather than exposing them to a multitude of derachim which rarely helps them find clarity in what I veiw as a major life transition.
Have students of mine attended more MO style yeshivos? You bet. Sometimes it’s worked out and sometimes not. As I’ve said all along, it all depends.

Posted in Modern Orthodox, Orthodoxy, YCT, Yeshiva University, Young Israel | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The YCT Rabbinics Student Whose Wife Didn’t Cover Her Hair, Her Knees And A Whole Lot More

Is Blogging Good For The Jews?

Posted on November 13, 2008 by Luke Ford

ISSAC COHEN WRITES TO HIRHURIM:

If there ever was a time/place for Jewish leaders to implement Mussar practices it is here… on the web. At a minimum, I’d suggest:

1) Time outs for comments that cross certain lines
2) No anonymity.
3) All users need to register with name, photo, etc.

Mussar teachers have provided us with ideas and tools that would bode well for (spiritually) healthy virtual communities to take root.

My suspicion is that most sites – from Aish to Gil’s – will shy away from such measure in fear of losing numbers.

FKM WRITES: "I noticed that R’ Gil left television and cinema out of list of examples of "neutral technology" and "neutral media".
Perhaps he realizes as others have pointed out above that some technologies are inherently less neutral and much easier to abuse than others."

RABBI GIL REPLIES: "TV, movies and video are an excellent example of media that can be used for good or bad. Just ask Rabbi Wein or the people at VeggieTales."

GARNEL WRITES:

Before blogs, the same people who are writing negative opinions about Judaism and Torah were still voicing their opinions, only they were limited to whoever their social circle was. With the advent of the internet, their social circle then rapidly expanded, allowing them to connect to all the others who were discontented with Torah Judaism.

So why is that important?

Because until the internet, most Jewish leaders (eg. the PR guy at the Agudah) could be dismissive of this discontent. These people could individually be written off as isolated cranks with no influence and therefore no need to pay attention to them. The myths that 99.% of Orthodox Jews were happy, that there was no spousal abuse, child abuse or drug abuse in the frum community, could be perpetuated with near impunity.

Now, because of the internet, these things can’t.

Look at Agriprocessors. In the pre-internet era, there is no way any one or two people could have started the campaign to bring the company to account for its sins. Their concerns would have been dismissed as those of the aforementioned isolated cranks.

Look at the attention various forms of abuse are getting, finally. Previously isolated and scared people are finding help and comfort.

TOBY KATZ WRITES:

Pictures?! There should definitely not be pictures of women on nice blogs!

For two reasons:
1. it’s a breach of tznius to look at pictures of women — that’s why in wedding pictures in Hamodea and Yated, you will find the chassan with his father in law, the chassan with his rosh yeshiva, the chassan with the caterer — but never never never the chassan with his kallah!

2. [more serious] One of the charms of the internet — and of books and magazines, too, for that matter — is the way you can communicate mind to mind, unmediated by the distractions of outward appearance. A too-beautiful woman or (for different reasons) an ugly old crone may not be taken seriously in conversation but on the ‘net it’s your thoughts and your words that count, nothing else.

Posted in Blogging | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Is Blogging Good For The Jews?

The Age of the Earth

Posted on November 13, 2008 by Luke Ford

Rabbi Aviner writes:

While there is still a difference between the dating of the world between the Torah – 5769 years – and scientists – 15 million years (this conclusion is reached through radioactivity in rocks, salts in oceans, etc…), this is not a difficult, since our Rabbis explain that Hashem built worlds and destroyed them before the ultimate creation of THIS world (Bereshit 3:6-9).

Maran (our revered teacher) Ha-Rav Kook therefore wrote: "And regarding the counting of the years of creation in relation to geological calculations in our time – it is a well-known teaching that there were already many epochs before the counting of our era. It is well-known among the early mystics and in Midrash Rabbah that He (Hashem) built worlds and destroyed them" (Igrot Re’eiyah vol. 1, p. 105). Our world is 5769 years old, but 15 million years already preceded in other worlds (see the commentary of the Tiferet Yisrael on the Mishnah at the end of Seder Nezikin in "Or Ha-Chama" who explains this at length). This means that the different strata found in the world are remnants of the destroyed worlds.

The Torah says: "It was night, and it was day" (Bereshit 1:20). Bereshit Rabbah (3) explains that "it was" comes to teach us that there was an order of time before our world. Thus, Hashem built worlds and destroyed them. "And the land was unformed and void" (Bereshit 1:2). "What does ‘was’ mean? It (the world) already was, i.e. already existed (Sefer Ha-Bahir).

Regarding the basic issue, we are not necessarily for or against the Big Bang Theory. The point of the Torah is not to deal with physics. We respect scientists, and there is even a blessing for great scientists (Blessed is Hashem…who gave of His wisdom to flesh and blood), but the Torah is not a science book. Science describes the reality of what was and what is, and the Torah describes what reality should be (Maharal, Netivot Olam, Netiv Ha-Torah, 14). What is written at the beginning of the Torah is a secret and not simple, as Maran Ha-Rav Kook wrote: "And the Torah is certainly closed regarding the act of Creation and speaks in hints and parables, since everyone knows that the act of Creation is included in the secrets of the Torah" (Igrot Re’eiyah ibid.).

Posted in Orthodoxy | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on The Age of the Earth

Is There A Jewish Political Tradition?

Posted on November 13, 2008 by Luke Ford

Lawrence Kaplan writes to Hirhurim: "Ruth Bevan’s article "Is there a Jewish Poliitical Tradition?" is exceptionally thin. To cite Tevye from "Fiddler on the Roof" as proof of a Jewish anti-political tradition is embarrassing. At least she might have referred to Gershon Weiler’s book "Jewish Theoocracy", which is available in English, even if she were unaware of the many critiques of wielers thesis. And what of the impressive and growing literature supporting the idea of an ongoing Jewish political tradition? To take the best known, is not Prof. Bev aware of the works of Daniel Elazar, and the multi-volume anthology still in progress, "The Jewish Polical Tradition," edited by Michael Walzer, et al, of which two volumes have already appeared?"

Other comments: "Rabbi Genack’s Clintonphilia has always been downright embarrassing. This interview only confirms that."

JJ writes:

Re. the interview with R. Genack, does anyone else find it crazy that the interviewer is speaking to him in the third person ("Would Rav Genack like to share his perspective . . . ")

They did it with R. Reichman. It used to be that only gedolei Yisrael were spoken to in third person. Is it now the case that you have to speak to every rav this way?

Ari Lamm writes: "I’ve conducted every single interview I’ve done for KHM in that fashion. As far as I know, they’ve all been published that way as well. That’s how I was taught to speak."

Moshe writes: "It was never the case that "only gedolim" are addressed in the 3rd person. Anyone who ever went to yeshiva is aware that all rebeim are to be addressed that way."

TALMID WRITES: "Rav Schachter once said in shiur that in yiddish or hebrew it is respectful to refer to somebody in third person. In English it sounds silly and he didn’t think it was necessary. I recall one guy in the shiur who constantly referred to Rav Schachter in third person, but instead of saying "What does Rebbe think?" he would say "What does the Rav think?", to which Rav Schachter would invariably respond "I don’t know, I never asked the Rav about that"."

Yissachar writes:

[Marc] Shapiro’s new book is a waste of money – if not of paper and ink. Did anyone ever doubt that Rambam ignores Talmudic superstitions? Or that he advances his own taamei mitzvot at the expense of those of the Talmud? His work may appear thorough, but it could be duplicated by any first-year yeshiva student with a lot of time on his hands. Shapiro made the great achievement of basically forcing any future writer who makes these obvious observations to give him a footnote.

Re the section on Rambam’s mistakes the review is very misleading. There is next to nothing in the way of analysis of Rambam’s difficult halakhot or even contradictions within the Mishneh Torah, which is what I was expecting when I ordered the book. Instead there are thirty pages of Rambam’s misquotes and erroneous citations, work which hardly displays amazing knowledge as the reviewer exclaims, but is more likely the product of one afternoon going over R’ Kapach’s footnotes to the Perush HaMishnah and the Frankel notes in the margin of the Mishneh Torah. It’s hard to see the purpose of this section unless it’s the same as the previous paragraph.

The letters from R’ Kapach included in the book made me laugh. R’ Kapach answered every letter he received, including those from high-school students. There are thousands of his letters floating around so it’s no great zchus to have one in your possession, and the meaningful ones were published long ago. The first letter published by Shapiro is four sentences long and the other two are one sentence apiece. Neither contain anything worth knowing that has not been published already.

I’ll finish by saying that I’m a great fan of Shapiro’s work, especially the biography of the Sridei Esh and the Limits as well as his posts on the Seforim blog, but this book gets a big thumbs down. What I would like to see written is a book not about Rambam but about RAMBAM SCHOLARSHIP: General trends in academia, what motivates these scholars, how they realize their ambitions, etc.

ANON WRITES: "My children were taught, in a MO school, that Lincoln committed a grave sin by freeing the slaves since Noah had cursed them to be perpetual slaves, and his assassination was therefore justified."

Y. ARON WRITES: "The MO school rebbe who taught that blacks were cursed by Noah to be eternal slaves and that Lincoln’s assassination was therefore justified should be reported to the principal. He needs to be seriously warned to keep his racial views to himself. It matters not that some Medieval commenters held similar views about blacks. Noah’s curse of Canaan is irrelevant to Blacks, and the world has progressed much since the times of those commentaries. Even the Mormons who accepted such ideas as dogma, have since, apparently, recanted."

Posted in Hirhurim | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Is There A Jewish Political Tradition?

What Can We Learn From Christians?

Posted on November 13, 2008 by Luke Ford

I’m not sure. Judaism is a very different religion. Orthodox Judaism in particular is a highly demanding way of life. Sure, groups such as the Happy Minyan and Aish HaTorah can make the medicine of fundamental Jewish life go down easier, but in the end only people willing to work hard and constantly deny themselves can make it as Orthodox Jews.

It’s nice when you are welcomed at shul and it’s nice when there’s lots of singing at shul and it’s nice when you are invited to a lovely home for a meal, but in the end leading a Jewish life is every bit as demanding as training for a marathon.

Going to shul will never be as fun and easy as church because Judaism is focused on this life while Christianity stresses individual salvation to the next life. Shul will never be as "spiritual" as pagan religions such as Christianity which focus on cannibalistic-type rites such as eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the god who descended to earth to save you eternally.

Sociologist Steven Cohen says 90% of Orthodox Jews were born into Orthodoxy. The ba’al teshuva movement is vastly over-stated.

Rabbi Gil Student writes:

I didn’t find all the answers in this book but I did see many interesting practices. Here are a few of them:

  • Welcoming newcomers: Many churches enthusiatically welcome newcomers, including many individuals who were truly welcoming and were happy to give tours and help newcomers follow the services. Many synagogues already do this but there is much room for improvement. However, I’ve never heard of synagogues giving free multimedia welcome packages (brochures, CDs). Some of that is Shabbos restrictions but maybe we can find a way to get a newcomer’s name and then find his address and after Shabbos send him a welcome package (or, even better, personally deliver it).

  • Slick packaging: Videos, DVDs, brochures, gift shops full of religious trinkets. Do we not do this because we lack the scale to produce material economically? Is it Shabbos restrictions? Or are Jews just too cheap to buy things at a synagogue gift shop?

  • Lively singing: This exists in some synagogues, but not many. It’s not like we don’t have contemporary Jewish music that we can use (although the book doesn’t mention it). You don’t even need a microphone or band for good singing. But most synagogues have very little music and what there is, is always the same tune from 50-75 years ago (think "Etz chaim hi").

  • Alternative lifestyles: There are church services for bikers, for wrestling fans and for many other types of people. Jewish services are all the same and do no utilize hobbies or other interests to bring people in. The author describes a Christian wrestling service he attended at which, in between matches, prayers were said and preachers spoke to the crowd. Jews don’t do that.

These are only a few of the lessons the author learned from his year of attending church (and visiting a monastery, and interviewing the head of the Black Hebrew movement, and much more). Can and should we incorporate them into the synagogue? Before we answer that we need to ask whether the experience of religious entertainment is real. Does it draw crowds because it is entertaining or because it is religion in a more appealing form? Is it watered down religion or a contemporary translation of old school religion?

Steg writes to hirhurim: "My rav has tried studying Rick Warren’s books to learn from his methods, and hasn’t given up yet, but has come to recognize the huge challenges involved. One major problem is that Orthodox Jewish prayer services are halakhically defined. There are certain things we need to do, and certain ways they need to be done. You can’t tailor the service or worship experience to the congregants the way that many Protestant services can. Another problem is language — while technically, there is much that could be done in the vernacular, no Orthodox shul is going to dare go there for fear of stigmatization. Hebrew is a major barrier for a newcomer to an Orthodox shul. Who wants to hang around for 2 or more hours on a Saturday morning while everyone mumbles in a strange language around you? In order to feel comfortable in an Orthodox service, newcomers need an immense amount of patience and buy-in, and to really "get it", an inordinate amount of preparation. That’s just not going to happen most of the time."

Beck writes: "There is a feedback mechanism that keeps shuls small: as the population grows, it becomes more likely that at least one member will decide he can’t stand the rabbi, or cantor, or kugel at kiddush, or whatever, and will start a breakaway minyan. Churches, from what I can see, don’t do that."

Michael Sedley writes:

While on Shlichut in a major North American city, a large Orthodox shul near our house made several attempts to attract new members, some of them mentioned in your post, but the effect was (at least to me) totally off-putting.

They did send a "welcome package" but it consisted of an Artscroll book which was of almost no interest to me and just showed me that they are not responsible with the money that they want me to pay them. If they had taken any interest as to who i was and what type of sefer I may actually open they may have had a better chance.

When I decided not to renew our membership they sent a letter saying that I would forfit the right to be buried in their cemetry – given that they should have known that I live in Eretz Yisrael, and a burial plot in Chutz L’Artertz was not something that would attract me to their membership.

A much better way to attract (and keep) members is a story I read a while ago in the JP –

A non-religious Jewish woman moved to Alaska and before the High Holidays she left messages at the only 2 congregations in the phone book, a Reform Temple and a Beit Chabad.

The Reform Temple mailed her a colorful "welcome package" explaining how much membership would cost and what she would get for her membership.

The Rav of the Chabad House called her and invited her for Friday Night Dinner.
Guess which one she became affiliated with (clue – it wasn’t the Reform Temple).

Shabbos and personal connections is the way that we should be attracting new members, not gift shops and multi-media packages.

Larry writes:

I’m surprised that no one has mentioned a service length of 2-3 hours compared to the generally shorter length of services churches.

Also, I remember the first time I went to a UU church I was astonished by the fact that the service was a framework which varied from week to week, as opposed to our shabbat morning services which are 90% identical every week.

I like services at C shuls more than I do those at O, and a major reason is the congregational singing. I also appreciate the fact that everyone is literally on the same page, as opposed to the cacophony of your typical O shul.

Anon writes: "One way to dramatically raise interest is for rabbis to prepare sermons (or divrei Torah) that are truly relevant to the real-life issues that people face, presented with the degree of intellectual sophistication that people are used to in their professional lives, and are grounded in the authentic sources of Torah. That would require a radical revamping of the way rabbis are trained."

Tzvee writes: "i think it is too much to expect that the average new york area orthodox shul move from an atmosphere of smart-alecky cynicism, clubby snobbishness and downright unfriendliness to one of welcoming and openness. so I suggest that you forget about this idea…."

Posted in Christianity, Jews | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on What Can We Learn From Christians?

Where Will The Gays Riot Next?

Posted on November 12, 2008 by Luke Ford

Joe emails:

If you want to know where and when the gays will riot next, this is a great website:

http://www.sfgate.com/webdb/prop8/

It shows who gave money in support (or in opposition) of prop 8. If I were on the list, I would prepare to see my house teepeed with lavender and pastel sanitary tissue.

Will the gays boycott Sundace? Defamer.com reports:

After a week of attention-getting protests against Proposition 8, gay activists and allies are ready for their next big target — and some, like blogger John Aravosis, are suggesting a boycott of the Sundance Film Festival. Sure, the Prop, 8-pushing Mormon Church has no direct ties to Sundance, but the Park City fest could be affected by a growing movement to boycott not just Mormon-owned enterprises but the entire, caffeine-fearing state of Utah in general.

Back before your associate editor took up blogging and adopted the royal "we" at Defamer, I held a regular gig as The Advocate’s film critic and attended several Sundances working the gay beat (not as hustler-ish as it sounds!). Though the film festival has a deservedly gay-friendly rep, it’s gone through some pretty sparse queer years as of late. At the 2007 festival, the gay slate had so little on it that the centerpiece was a Chad Allen movie. If Sundance was boycotted by gay filmmakers and queer-themed films, the lineup wouldn’t change that much.

The NJG:  Here’s The Gay’s next target
 The NJG:  http://www.datalounge.com/cgi-bin/iowa/forum/thread/gossip/7192205/page-1.html The NJG:  Gays going after Joe Lieberman
 The NJG:  http://www.americablog.com/2008/11/how-harry-reid-is-about-to-kill-our-60.html The NJG:  gays now going after a catholic family
 The NJG:  http://www.datalounge.com/cgi-bin/iowa/forum/thread/gossip/7176248/page-1.html The NJG:  Look at this on datalounge
 The NJG:  from THE GAYS again
 The NJG:  "Well R86, when their suppliers are notified of the Leatherby’s actions, perhaps they will decide to no longer provide the materials they need to keep their business running.

And the Catholics better watch their backs. They’re the next bunch of bigots we’ll be going after.

Posted in Homosexuality | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Where Will The Gays Riot Next?

Orthodox In-Fighting

Posted on November 12, 2008 by Luke Ford

Joe emails:

The infighting among Orthodox shuls in L.A. is really an embarrassment.

Young Israel of North Beverly Hills is a total train wreck and a textbook example of what happens when ego is mixed with money and control issues.

Shaarey Zedek in the Valley is splintering faster than a corked bat, and none of the breakaways seem to even care what they are doing to the place that started Valley Orthodoxy.

At the beach, Pacific Jewish Center, which itself has two breakaways which are on life support, is down to hiring a part time Rabbi because the Shul cannot afford a full time rabbi.

Pico Robertson seems to be flourishing now, but who knows what happens when some constituency at BJ is pissed off about who becomes the new Rabbi. Otherwise, the iron hand of muskin and weil and the rising jewish population seem to be keeping Pico Robertson from internecine warfare.

Orthodox Jews have to stop fighting with each other.

There is a lot more at stake than whether a Rabbi wears a hat and whether woman are allowed to have executive positions on the board. Orthodoxy should be about expanding its reach and power – the real enemy of the Jews, as the Orthodox would all agree, is the distance of younger jews outside the fold from Judaism.

It is the reason that Obama won an even greater share of the vote than Kerry. Just as Obama regards Israel as just another country, and would not stake a nickel of his political capital in its defense, disaffected jews view Israel as an issue whose importance is somewhere below the Supreme Court’s view on medical marijuana, and are unwilling to use their vote to assist Israel.

I would question the Orthodox jew who walks away from his shul to support another shul, leaving two weaker parts. In Orthodoxy, the sum of the parts is greater than the whole.

I think there should be some type of communal shabbat in which all the breakaway shuls rejoin the main shul they broke off from and see the energy it creates.

Posted in Orthodoxy | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Orthodox In-Fighting

Gay Activists Target Supporters Of Prop 8

Posted on November 12, 2008 by Luke Ford

This time the Mormon manager (Marjorie Christoffersen) of a restaurant (El Coyote) gets blasted.

This approach is sure to win friends and influence people to the gay side.

Gay activist Micah reports:

Marjorie walked out with (her two daughters?) on arm and spoke visibly shaken and full of remorse from a prepared statement. This prepared statement was IDENTICAL to the email she send out and that is posted in the comments of the previous posting…which REALLY didn’t make people happy.

At all.

She asked for forgiveness for being SO emotional and said that "El Coyote is as diverse as it’s clientele. Customers are considered part of the family and I responded to the call of the Mormon Church to donate [towards the ban on same sex marriage]."

As she continued to speak it seemed even MORE clear that she was distancing herself from El Coyote.

Marjorie began talking about how much her Aunt had done to support gays and the plight of the GLBT Community since opening the restaurant and asked that "[she] personally take responsability for [the] blame and anger" because she said she was aware of the boycott and pending protest slated for Thursday (tomorrow 11/13) night outside the front restaurant.

She continued: "It saddens me that my faith keeps you away from The Coyote. I can not and WILL NOT change my lifelong commitment to the Mormon Church. I can not and will not change my commitment to you."

At which point she opened the floor to questions.

At which point, she shouldn’t have.

A gentleman by the same of Sam, who said he was an ex-member of the Mormon Church, asked if she was willing to donate to NO on 8.

She started crying.

A representative of the restaurant stepped in and stated that El Coyote was going to donate to Lambda Legal and the Gay and Lesbian Center and Sam said, I asked HER what SHE was going to do.

Marjorie said: "I will not."

At which point the place went insane.

One of the (daughters?) started yelling at everyone telling them (and I quote) "The church just tells you when to donate, it doesn’t tell you how to vote. It very, very rarely tells you how to vote."

Posted in Homosexuality | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Gay Activists Target Supporters Of Prop 8

San Francisco Vs. New York

Posted on November 12, 2008 by Luke Ford

ChaimAmalek:  SF is lovely, except for the people.
ChaimAmalek:  Very different in NY vs SF
NJG:  not really
NJG:  same crappy neighborhoods, no washer dryers, no dishwashers, illegals everywhere
ChaimAmalek:  NY may be politically liberal in the old sense, but in terms of personal conduct and what is expected and tolerated, it is very very conservative
ChaimAmalek:  At least Manhattan is
ChaimAmalek:  The streets of NY are clean
NJG:  heck you COULD afford a home in Buffalo
ChaimAmalek:  what would I do in Buffalo?
ChaimAmalek:  It is a ruin
NJG:  same that you’re doing where you are now
ChaimAmalek:  full of the unemployed and darkies

Posted in Chaim Amalek | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on San Francisco Vs. New York

Will Barack Obama Be Good For Israel?

Posted on November 12, 2008 by Luke Ford

Brad A. Greenberg writes:

It’s fitting that Omri Ceren is just a dissertation away from having a doctorate in communication. The author of Mere Rhetoric—a blog popular with Republican Jews that deals mainly with American foreign policy, Israel and anti-Semitism in the Muslim world—Ceren is a many of many words.

Throughout the campaign Ceren blogged with concern about the prospect of Barack Obama winning, and as Obama earned a seemingly insurmountable lead during the final weeks of October, Ceren became a bit more of a prophet of doom then usual. The day before the election he churned out an epic post titled “70 Percent Of American Jews Ready To Say “We Didn’t Know” When Obama Detonates US-Israel Alliance (Plus: They Most Definitely Know).”

In the end, Obama actually received 78 percent of the Jewish vote. It turned out Ceren had undershot.

Though he comes from a very different place on the political spectrum than Philip Weiss, Ceren bases his feelings about Obama’s plans from Israelf on the same premises. For Ceren they cause fear, for Weiss excitement. Coincidentally, I disagree with both of them and think Obama won’t be all carrot and no stick with rogue nations and will stay the course, for lack of a better expression, on U.S.-Israel relations.

Over the weekend I e-mailed Ceren a handful of questions about Obama, the president-elect’s fans in unfriendly Muslim countries and the path to peace. His responses are after the jump; like I said, he’s never at a loss for words:

On the eve of the election, you wrote “70 Percent Of American Jews Ready To Say ‘We Didn’t Know’ When Obama Detonates US-Israel Alliance (Plus: They Most Definitely Know).” In the end, Obama got 78 percent of the Jewish vote. What happens now?

 

The fundamental lesson of this election – predicted almost to the decimal point by cutting-edge social scientific research that came out at the end of October – is that American Jews are voting Democratic for reasons other than sound argument and good policy. That’s not exactly how the North American Jewish Data Bank described it in the study. They made it an issue of party identification: Jewish Democrats “respond to their identities… [and] their long-held, multi-generation attachment to the liberal camp in America, and to the Democratic Party.” But it’s the same thing.

The NAJDB took everything that pollsters know how to measure. Political views. Values and interests, Major socio-demographic variables. Everything. They crunched the numbers. They looked at the results. Then they concluded that the only way to explain how American Jews vote is by admitting that they’re Democrats mostly because they’re always been Democrats. They even went so far as to subtly mock American Jews for the way that they pretend to be “driven” by “rational and… carefully considered values.” Political considerations are largely just excuses that Jewish Democrats give themselves for voting how they were always going to vote. So those Jews emailing me that they were going to vote Republican until McCain picked Palin: either the world’s most comprehensive study of Jewish American voting patterns is flatly wrong or those people are lying.

Now: the consequences of this hard fact differ depending on who you are. If you’re someone who wants to swing American Jews over to the Republican side, I don’t know. You can’t reason people out of what they haven’t been reasoned into. The people who latched on to Bob Wexler’s transparent anti-Palin smears are just particularly pathetic examples of a broader demographic reality: American Jews will latch on to even the dumbest excuse to vote Democratic. I study rhetoric, argument, and communication – but I don’t know how you fix that.

But all these activist groups face the same problem that partisan Republicans do: finding a way to approach Jewish Democrats. This is a political community that, as of the last election, both refuses to change their political preferences and refuses to debate and justify those preferences in public forums. I wouldn’t be surprised if you begin to see activist groups giving up on the Jewish community and shifting their resources elsewhere.

Posted in Blogging, Israel, Jews | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Will Barack Obama Be Good For Israel?