A Blast From The Past

I used to work with Jon at KAHI radio in 1987. We used to share dirty jokes and the like.

He emails me today:

You must be the same Luke Ford who used to work at KAHI radio in Auburn.

I don’t know if you remember me but we used to work together. I’m sure you remember the time we sneaked off to that car dealership where you interviewed Vanna White.

I stumbled across your entry in wikipedia… Holy …. man, you’re famous!!

Well done!!!

I’ve got a pretty crazy story myself (I bailed on radio not long after we worked at KAHI) and went into the computer biz. It took me all over the world and I’m currently living near Boston.

Posted in Personal | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on A Blast From The Past

How Would God Vote?

Yori Yanover writes:

In the past three months I’ve begun to listen to right-wing radio, especially to Rush Limbaugh, mostly for the pain. Few things in our political culture are more rewarding nowadays than hearing Rush’s scrambling to build up a Republican candidate he basically despises, while at the same time trying to shoot down his sexy, imaginative, sure handed Democratic opponent who’s endowed with Reagan-strength Teflon. It’s desperate times for Republicans, the kind that bring about many desperate measures, including, naturally, enlisting God as the newest McCain surrogate.

David Klinghoffer’s How Would God Vote?: Why the Bible Commands You to Be a Conservative is truly desperate, in its willingness to distort and misrepresent Jewish tradition, in hope of keeping a Republican in the White House for four more years. It’s not the first effort to manhandle the Divine for political gain – Republicans and Democrats have done it with equal doses of cynicism. But it’s the first such work I’m aware of that promotes itself as the views of an Orthodox Jew and hence, of the Bible.

Frankly, I don’t recall being this offended in a long time by an author claiming to be an Orthodox Jew.

If I had to pull the most infuriating quote out of the work, it would have to be Klinghoffer’s response to the YU Cardozo School of Law’s Innocence Project which, between 1989 and 2000, saved 28 death row inmates from wrongful executions. This effort, according to Klinghoffer, illustrates how “even traditional [Jewish] denominations have buckled” under the popular—and “liberal”—anti-Capital Punishment trend.

It boggles the mind: the idea that Jewish students in an Orthodox university are working hard to free inmates who were about to be killed for no good reason, is presented by Klinghoffer as a kind of failure of nerves, YU’s succumbing to the pressures of public opinion!

Regardless of their political inclinations, I believe Jews should celebrate the Innocence Project and the great service it does to society and to our national reputation as people who love the law. But to declare, on top of it, that God, too, would be somehow disappointed by the Innocence Project, because God is a registered Republican – that was classical blasphemy, and not even the fun kind.

Add to that the fact that Klinhoffer serves up such a mish mash of Jewish and Protestant ideas, misrepresents Biblical, Talmudic and post-Talmudic text, taking advantage of the limited Jewish schooling of his target audience – and the result is even more obnoxious than Christopher Hitchens’ God Is Not Great, the other blithely dishonest book that pissed me off this year. For one thing, Hitchens wasn’t singling out Judaism for his hack job.

So when Larry Yudelson suggested the project I responded enthusiastically (although he’s still responsible for three quarters of the content). We divided up the Klinghoffer book between us, picked the dozen or so most outrageous chapters, and called him on his distortions, misrepresentations and fabrications, then inserted a few very good jokes (we thought) and stitched it together, the perfect Bar Mitzvah gift, just in time for the Democratic Convention.

Finally, if you’re a thinking Jew who is aware of our great prophets’ messages of social justice in the face of human frailty, do you really think God would ever possibly vote Republican? Why, even Pat Robertson is having second thoughts…

How Would God REALLY Vote?A Jewish Response to David Klinghoffer
by Larry Yudelson and Yori Yanover

Posted in David Klinghoffer, Yori Yanover | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on How Would God Vote?

Movie Producer Lynda Obst

I first encountered Lynda Obst in 1996 at the Borders book store on La Cienega Blvd near the Beverly Center.

I’d read her memoir Hello, He Lied and she came in to give a reading.

As any regular reader of mine knows, I’m emotionally unstable. I swing back and forth from a desperate desire to connect with others to a withering contempt for them whenever I feel the slightest resistance.

During question time, I asked Lynda if she thought Hollywood did more good than harm to the wider society.

She said it did more good and explained why.

I don’t remember the details but Lynda stuck in my head.

I felt like she was too nice.

I thought of myself as deeper.

She and her book came to symbolize something to me about Hollywood and insular communities. I was disappointed that she didn’t reveal anything damaging in her book, not about herself and not about others.

It was too nice. It was too superficial. It was going to take a manly man like Luke Ford to pull back the curtain on Hollywood, just as I did to the porn industry.

During the summer of 1996, I started on my own book on producers. I interviewed about a dozen that summer but life put off the project on hold until the fall of 2001, when I threw myself full-time into the task of interviewing nearly 200 producers (mainly of movies, but some TV guys as well) that became this 2004 self-published book (I don’t play nicely with others, ergo almost all my good work is self-published, either online or in book form).

Somewhere in my process, I faxed off an interview request to Lynda Obst’s office. I don’t remember the exact details of the response but I think it was something like she was on location and not available then.

We never connected.

Intermittently through my project, producers such as Jeff Wald told me, "You really need to talk to Lynda Obst."

"She won’t give me an interview," I replied.

(Lynda gives interviews to almost everybody and she has no recollection of ever receiving an interview request from me.)

As the years rolled by, I got my revenge on Lynda. For some reason, I enjoyed stringing together anecdotes and reviews that made her look bad. I felt like I was being a heroic truth-teller (my dominant self-image, yeah, I know you may think I’m a shmuck, but I think I’m a hero).

My profile rose to the top of Google results for her name.

A few weeks ago, it was gently pointed out to me that my work had not been fair to Lynda.

I arranged to meet her in person at Starbucks on Robertson and Pico Blvds at 5:30 pm, Aug. 4, 2008.

After a little chitchat, I asked her to go through my profile of her and correct any mistakes.

After we spent about 45 minutes doing that (Lynda noted a lot of mistakes!), I asked her some questions.

Luke: “What are the advantages and disadvantages of being a woman in your position?”

Lynda: “The advantages are that we’re naturally nurturing and we’re naturally multi-tasking. We naturally oversee many things at the same time. Women are taught to cook and watch over their children and look out for their husband at the same time. Women can change tasks quickly. They can get out of a defensive posture quickly. They can take care of a whole crew.

“The disadvantages are less now than they used to be (more market-based than corporate think). The disadvantages are more for female studio heads. Female producers are appreciated. You can make your own time. You don’t have to make five meetings a day like a studio head does. You can fight for a picture. Women like to fight for things other than themselves. It’s not quite as corporate. Being a producer is more natural than being a female studio head.

“You can make the pictures you want to make, which you can’t do as a studio head.

“As a studio head, there’s always a fear that the woman is going to be softer in her choices than a man, that she’ll choose with her heart rather than her head. As a female producer, you’re allowed to make choices from your heart. You’re allowed to make passion pictures. You can say, ‘I love that actor!’ You can make a passion argument.

“The disadvantages? Women don’t play team sports, right? So they get knocked, they get hurt. They take it personally. They get sore. They don’t know how to come back after getting knocked off their feet.

“These are things men learn from being in the fray, from playing team sports like rugby, football… Women have to learn how to get up and smile. That wasn’t an enemy, it was another player on the field. It’s attrition that kills women. That’s not a feminine feel. Then you have to do that and look good on a date.”

Luke: “Is life harder on women?”

Lynda: “I think so. Yes.”

Luke: “How?”

Lynda: “It’s hard if you want it all, if you want a career, and a husband, and a family. It’s hard to find a husband who will share every aspect of parenthood with you. Women carry a great burden over motherhood.

“If you don’t marry young, the good guys tend to be gone. The pickings are thin afterwards, but not for men. The world really celebrates the successful man, the unmarried man, but it doesn’t celebrate successful women who are not married.

“Men are acculturated both for marriage and for success. So there are no hard choices for men to make, I mean there are hard choices, but there are no Sophie choices for men.

“The life of a woman carrying the man’s burdens without a man is not impossible, it can be done, but it’s a hard one. They have no reinforcement for it, from their families, from the culture. But there are rewards for it. It is rewarding for the culture to tell you what they find interesting. That meeting was fun. A lot of men don’t get that back.”

Luke: “Were you able to have it all?”

Lynda: “Not without great sacrifice.”

Luke: “What have you sacrificed?”

Lynda: “A great portion of my love life.”

Luke: “Have you had to sacrifice work to be a good mother?”

Lynda: “Yes, of course, but people understand. You know exactly when that is and there’s no hesitation. I’ll tell my assistant, ‘I’m leaving right now and I’m going home and I’ll be back and you can tell everybody this is when you can expect me.’”

Luke: “Were their repercussions?”

Lynda: “Only in the beginning of my career before all these great mothers and great fathers [in the movie industry]. I was a young mother. When I went to PTA meetings at the Center for Early Education, I’d sneak out of my office to go there. I could’ve gotten in trouble then with my office. They didn’t approve of it at all, whereas now you can take a whole day off. It’s nothing. You can take your kids to the office. None of that existed when I was first raising Oly. I had to sneak around. I had no reinforcement. The moms at school were not nice to me because all the dads at school were friends of mine from work. That’s something I’d like to do a television show about.”

Luke: “Did Oly pay a price for your work?”

Lynda: “The proof is in the pudding in that Oly and I are best friends, but clearly the marriage suffered and that had consequences on Oly. He would tell you that I wasn’t there for his T-ball games. We’ve had many debates about this because he does not remember 850 zillion things that I did with him every single Saturday and Sunday. There were certainly things that a full-time mother could do that I couldn’t do. That’s what I mean, you have to sacrifice.

“I didn’t go out. I gave up a good portion of my social life in my thirties so I could be home during the week with Oly for dinner. I didn’t introduce him to any of my boyfriends. I got engaged once. That was the only person he met.

“I did the best I could. You figure it out as you go.”

Luke: “What have been your high points and low points as a producer?”

Lynda: “The high point that I always refer to is the Venice Film Festival for Fisher King. We won the People’s Choice Awards. It was one of my happiest moments. We were all in love with the film. We walked all together. It was the way the movie got a standing ovation and we were all so happy to be there. It was the culmination of an incredibly happy movie experience. It was the prototype of what I was trying to explain, the thing I had always hoped to do, to make a great movie within the studio system while protecting the director and the writer so they got every word they wanted, every shot they wanted, the performances they wanted. It felt like the apex of the point of the philosophy of our production company. Debra [Hill] and I were so happy together. We were holding on to each other. We bought each other rings. It was just glorious.

“I felt like I understood the direction of my future career.”

“The low point? I hit a low point every month. That’s the movie business. I could give you five low points, but…”

Luke: “More high points.”

Lynda laughs. “Going to the Golden Globes with Nora for Sleepless In Seattle because she was my best friend. Location scouting and and discovering local restaurants with her."

“Every movie high point is the first day of production. I love shooting. I’m not about the deal. I’m about rolling. I love laying out my clothes the night before the first day of production. I love the first shot. I love he first time you go out on scout and you imagine the scene and you imagine the locations for the movie you’re creating. The first time Sandy [Bullock] and I went out on Hope Floats and found a town that laid out exactly the way the script was written on Hope Floats. The hospital was around the corner from the cul de sac. Sandy and I got out and went, ‘Ohmigod, the rehabilitation center is right around the corner from the elementary school.’

“When little movie magic moments like that happen… On Fisher King, when we had a magic moment shooting the dumpling scene when the grips were able to jerry-rig the dolly on bungee cords. It was the last day and we’d had rain and we couldn’t go any place else and suddenly there was a way of shooting the scene… It was the most magical shot I’d ever seen.

“For me, it’s not the jangly moments of opening a movie like How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days for $26.5 million… I love the exhilarating movie-making moments. When something is laid out the way you wrote it and you can shoot the whole movie in one town and you never have to move.

“Or you’re shooting The Fisher King, and you’re shooting a series of lights and you think it is going to be a disaster but it turns out better than you could’ve imagined. There were so many magical moments on The Fisher King. When Terry [Gilliam] looked down on the scene at the wall and said, ‘What if all these people started dancing at once?’ It had been a singing scene. And then all of a sudden we realized, we can’t afford it but we have to afford it. And Debra figured it out.

“Power highs, the high of $30 million openings, can’t compete with that. Those highs come with schadenfreude, unless you’re Chuck Roven this week. Those highs come with this weird twist. They leave you incredibly jingly. Laura Ziskin and I were talking about this after she got the Spiderman record. After you come to the top of the mountain, there’s going to be a bigger mountain.

“It’s not calm happiness. It’s a jangly high. Everybody is being nice to you, even though you know they don’t like you. Just what I wrote in my book, don’t get addicted to the high numbers, don’t get addicted to the low numbers. Just move on.
“But those things that happen on set, they’re like the highs you get from love. They don’t have the jangly effect.”

Luke: “What’s your typical role on a movie?”

Lynda: “I do everything (sometimes). I make up the idea, often. I get the script to a director. I package it. I make the actor deals with the legal department. I get a feel for what the budget allows. I help the director crew-up. I help find the locations. I produce the movie on set and then go all the way through to marketing. I’m worst at post-production because of the calendar and computers…”

Luke: “Which of your movies were passion projects?”

Lynda: “They were all passion projects. They all take a long time to get made. I made up a whole bunch of them such as One Fine Day when I started thinking I’ll never meet a man unless I crash into one on my way to dropping Oly at school. I guess Bad Girls was just an assignment from a studio. Certainly Fisher King and Contact were the most profound passion projects. I loved This Is My Life, Nora’s directing debut. Adventures in Babysitting I adored. I loved How To Lose A Guy and Hope Floats. The Siege was my father’s favorite movie. I loved making a movie my father liked and presaged 9/11 and the whole Orthodox community could relate to. I pulled that out of the New York Times after the first Trade Center bombing in 1993 when we saw there were terror cells in Brooklyn.

“I work on my movies for an average of ten years. I don’t write any of them off.”

Luke: “Which of your movies were you there for the origin of the idea?”

Lynda: “I worked on the ideas for The Sixties, The Siege, Hope Floats, Contact, One Fine Day, This is My Life, Flashdance, Interstellar (I wrote the story), How To Lose It All. Fisher King, I found the book. Someone Like You, I found the book. This is my Life, I got the book. Contact, I developed the novel with Carl Sagan and his wife, and then I developed the script.”

Luke: “Would you like to direct?”

Lynda: “I would but first I’d have to get myself out of all the material I’m in right now. I don’t have an auteur’s burning desire to direct.”

Luke: “Do producers get typecast too? Do you get tagged as the chick flick girl?”

Lynda: “A lot of people forget The Siege and Contact and the other movies I’ve made. There’s a market for romantic comedies and those movies can be made for a reasonable amount of money ($30 million) and there are two quadrants that like to go to them (young women and old women) and I make them uncynically while a lot of people churn them out, stick Mark Ruffalo in them, and say, ‘Oh look, the last three worked. Why not do it?’

“Mine take a long time. I don’t condescend to the genre. When the genre’s done right, the actors will come.

“If you can get three quadrants, you can have a hit. If you just think formula, nobody wants to see them and nobody wants to be in them. To me that’s something in the zeitgeist. I remain a journalist in that way.”

Luke: “Which of your movies would you call a creative success?”

Lynda: “How to Lose a Guy, The Siege, Hope Floats, Contact, One Fine Day, Sleepless in Seattle, Fisher King, Adventures in Babysitting, Flashdance. The Sixties, but that was TV.”

Luke: “What does it take for you to fall in love with a script?”

Lynda: “To be moved by it, to laugh or cry. I’m not dark. I’m not consumed by dark things. I would not have recognized The Usual Suspects or True Romance. I love Batman but I’m not going to make dark movies. I’m not a vampire girl. I’m not going to make horror movies. I could recognize a good thriller. I’m not going to recognize The Matrix. I have to recognize something in my wheelhouse. It has to be hilarious. It has to have pathos. It has to be something I know I can cast. It has to be fresh. I have to be riveted, galvanized, moved. I have to be taken by the gut. I so rarely find that, so that’s why I find ideas in the culture and hire great writers to write that, or find books. I remember reading The Fisher King and bursting into tears at the staircase scene. I have the most spectacular script about autism right now. I’m going to try to get it made.”

Luke: “Good luck.”

Lynda: “Exactly. It’s like Rainman. It’s a buddy comedy. That’s what I said about The Fisher King. Don’t worry. It’s a buddy comedy.”

Luke: “You have so much energy right now. How much are you like this?”

Lynda: “Until I pass out. That’s probably why I get migraines too.”

Luke: “How did you feel when Buzz magazine named you one of the top ten bullies in Hollywood?”

Lynda: “Terrible. Amazed. It made me aware that I must’ve yelled at too many assistans and it made me aware not to be tough on any employee. I certainly didn’t think it defined me and I was sad I was on the list. But it made me conscious and anything that makes me conscious is ultimately good.”

I relate to Lynda a quote I got about her from a fellow producer: “She makes Attilla the Hun look humane. I can’t think of a more despised female producer by those who work with her. Mention Lynda’s name and you get a chorus of boos at Paramount.”

Lynda: “There are reasons why blind quotes are frowned upon in journalism. This thing about Paramount is insane. You can’t work at a studio for eight years for five administrations, from my best friend Sherry Lansing and my best friend Donald Deline and have this insane quote… I have a Steven Spielberg Interstellar project there that he’s directing.

“It’s just the most hostile thing I’ve heard. It’s absurd and it discredits most of the page, and to allow it under your byline,  you’re better than that. Few producers stayed as long as I did at Paramount. Every studio I’ve worked for I’ve stayed eight years. I left there with great relations with Brad Westin and Brad Grey and all the newest execs. When you’ve survived as long as I have, you get jealous people willing to say anything blind.”

“I was never Celia Brady [the non deplume of a notorious Hollywood gossip columnist for Spy magazine]. On my granddaughter’s life. I know a lot of people thought that. I had no reason to be. I started writing at that time under my own name. I would never have had time to write under my own name and then for some arbitrary reason to start (under an assumed name) revealing friends of mine doing naughty things. I never wrote under an assumed name. Whenever I write, I write under my name. That’s how I developed this way of writing to not indict people I liked while describing practices I despised. There was nobody I disliked enough in this town to reveal as Celia Brady. I was working too hard to learn my job at that time to have this sideline while I was raising a four year old. I don’t have that kind of angst. I don’t have that kind of edge. I never did. I don’t believe it was a Hollywood person. I believe it was a journalist. I had to come to LA from The Times as a journalist and so few people here knew any journalists.

“When I do journalism, I do journalism. I write for HuffPo. I’ve written for Harpers. I had a column in New York magazine. I wrote a book. I have a book contract with Simon & Schuster. I had no reason to do that kind of alt-journalism. I came from the New York Times. The first thing I did here was to write for Harold Hayes and New West magazine. He taught me how to write. He taught me how to be a journalist. Why I would go from that to be Celia Brady and diss my friends? That kind of schadenfreude that I inspired when I came to town as a person who was learning her job and a former journalist and a kind of sociologist. A sociologist is not a secret gossip. I’ve never been a secret gossip. When I gossip, it’s with a small group of friends. I really care about the people I care about.”

“So every single aspect of what was written up to this point was written with so much unbelievable contempt that it shocked me.”

“The kind of behavior you describe isn’t tolerated. The town is too small. The work is too hard, the job is too hard, there are too many people to collaborate with. There are too many personalities. So if what you describe were true, I couldn’t have survived this long. I couldn’t have been at Paramount that long [eight years]. I couldn’t have been at Fox for six years. I couldn’t have made movies with so many different personalities. My job is to blend those personalities and come up with a compromise that works for the filmmakers and the studios.”

In my initial profile of Lynda, I wrote that she was a doctoral candidate in Psychology.

Lynda: “It was Philosophy. I know absolutely nothing about psychology, particularly male psychology. I know a lot about female psychology, which is why I’ve done so many chick flicks, but I’m really lousy with male psychology except when I’m helping my girlfriends but I’m terrible with my own.

“I studied the Philosophy of Science at Columbia and that’s the streak that you see in the science pictures I do.”

“I did have the time of my life at The [New York] Times. The only not great story I was ever involved with is the one that you remarked upon [the Feb. 28, 1978 "Hollywood’s Wall Street Connection” by unreliable freelancer Lucian K. Truscott IV]. I also won magazine awards. I did a bunch of philosophy covers. I did Carl Sagan on the cover. I did Tim Ferris on the cover. Many of the roots of the movies that I did were on the covers of those magazines, the roots of Contact and Interstellar. I did do the first females in Hollywood cover and I did do the first mogul story. I did not put Mike Medavoy on the cover because of [the publicity firm] Rogers & Cowan as is commonly said. The Photo Editor of the New York Times chose Mike Medavoy to be on the cover because the picture came out the best because he was in front of a Rolls Royce. It bled out the best. I had no choice whatsoever in the cover. Magazine editors never have the choice of the cover of an article, that’s another myth. I was way too far down the totem pole to pick the cover. That’s a decision between the Editor and the Photo Editor.

“That’s the kind of nonsense that’s trailed me for years, that I would at the New York Times take a call from Warren Cowan. Honestly.

“There were things about that story that were great. There were things about that story by Lucian Truscott that I wish he would’ve checked out much better. That came from me being green (the story was finished by the editor, Ed Klein). That was not the story in the Times that I was most proud of, but I was one of 15 cover stories I had in two years. If I had my druthers, I probably would’ve…but I got pregnant. It turned out to be the greatest thing that ever happened to me. My husband decided I had to move.

“The saddest thing about the David McClintick book is that it says that [the David Begelman story by Lucian Truscott] that’s was why I left the paper. That’s not why I left the paper. I took a pregnancy leave. I came back when the [newspaper] strike was over. It was great that my maternity leave coincided with the strike.

“David got a job with Simon & Schuster [in Los Angeles] and I either had to move with David or stay. I had a baby. I moved.

“Peter Guber offered me a job. I ended up developing stories that became Flashdance, Clue, Contact, and taking care of my baby.

“David [McClintick] was lovely. He later wrote a wonderful review of my book. We later became friends.”

Luke: “Why did you not mention the [David Begelman] episode in your book?”

Lynda: “It was a Hollywood memoir. It really began when I came out to Hollywood. I wasn’t that personal about my private life. I got married, I got divorced. Few details. It was a memoir about surviving in Hollywood with some degree of integrity in tact.”

I ask Lynda if she’s ever fallen in love with one of her directors. She says no.

Luke: What was your role with “Contact”?

Lynda: “I developed the novel with Carl (and his wife Ann Druyan) when he moved out here. I told him to start writing a novel because I would make it into a movie. We all developed the novel. We did the treatment together. He sold it to Simon & Schuster.

“Warner Brothers had me develop the script for Contact. I work-shopped it with director George Miller and Carl and with various scientists and theologians. We did hours of workshops over three years. George Miller left the project and (director) Robert Zemeckis made a movie close to that script.”

“Carl and I knew each other [since around 1975]. He met his wife Annie on the same night as I met him and Nora Ephron at a dinner party at our mutual friend.”

Posted in Lynda Obst | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Movie Producer Lynda Obst

Netflix Rocks

I have the three DVDs at once $17 a month subscription.

It also gives me unlimited access to instant downloads from Netflix’s 12,000 plus title library through the ROKU player ($100) that I installed last night.

I was having some trouble with the installation, so I called customer service last night. I got through to live help within a minute and had the thing working in another minute.

Posted in Hollywood, Internet | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Netflix Rocks

Larry Yudelson, Yori Yanover Elevate The Conversation

Here’s the press release (at the end of this post, I argue to Larry that he misrepresents Klinghoffer’s positions):

We are delighted to invite you, your family and any friends you wish to bring to the 4th annual Ben Yehuda Press Labor Day BBQ and Literary Hootenanny.

The date is Monday, September 1st. Food (glatt kosher) will be served beginning at 1pm. We are inviting our authors to speak and perform starting around 2pm. For the first time, we plan to open the readings up to the audience once our authors have had a go! We hope to see you on Labor Day, rain or shine!

Our address is 430 Kensington Road, Teaneck, NJ 07666. Our number is: (201) 833-5145.

Please let us know if you plan to attend, and if you are willing to perform your work.

FEATURED BOOKS & AUTHORS

* Larry Yudelson and Yori Yanover: will read/debate from their book: How Would God Really Vote: A Jewish Rebuttal to David Klinghoffer’s Conservative Polemic. Just in time for the November elections! In his book, How would God Vote?: Why the Bible Commands you to be a Conservative, Klinghoffer claims to lay out a traditional Jewish theology to embrace conservative values like a ban on divorce, restrictions on birth control, and the idea that smoking is good for you. We hope we have succeeded in conveying a sense that Torah (understood broadly to include rabbinic commentary) is not a conservative manifest. (Since Mr. Klinghoffer, who lives in Seattle, cannot be here to state his opinions, his part in the debate will be played by a sock puppet reading from his book.)

* Yori Yanover, editor of Grand Street News, will read selections from the long awaited, newly published: The Cabalist’s Daughter: A Novel of Practical Messianic Redemption — She’s the clone of the late, great Cabalist of Brooklyn. She’s gorgeous, and she’s here to save the world. The question is, will her friends, an ancient Rabbi mystic, a spec-op policeman and an African warrior witch be able to keep her in one piece until she does?

 * Sharon Rosenzweig and Aaron Freeman will discuss their upcoming THE COMIC TORAH: REIMAGINING THE VERY GOOD BOOK, it’s the Torah — the take is a comic look, the format is a comic book, from the minds of Chicago artist, Sharon Rosenzweig and stand up comic, Aaron Freeman.

* Louis Rieser will read from The Hillel Narratives: What do Talmudic Tales of the First Rabbi Teach us about our Faith?, a work of which Jacob Neusner said, "A fresh and engaging reading of the rabbinic biography. Louis Rieser has reopened the rabbinic stories and made them interesting again."

* Roslyn Bresnick-Perry, award-winning storyteller, will tell some tales from her upcoming book, I Loved My Mother on Saturdays, a collection of heartwarming stories that stretch from life in the shtetl, to the Bronx, to Florida.

* Isidore Century will read from his book, Poems From the Coffee House of Jewish Dreamers. Mr. Century writes about rediscovering his past through small awakenings: forgiveness, redemption, kindness and justice. There is also a poem for each weekly Torah Portion.

* Rabbi David Ornstein, will discuss his delightful children’s book to be published by Ben Yehuda Press, Four Bright Lights: A Hanukkah Tale of the Underground Railroad.

* Rabbi DovBer Pinson, scholar, author, thinker, and spiritual teacher, will read from his Fall 2008 title, 32 Paths: A Concise Guide to Awakening through Kabbalah.

* Adam Simms, translator of Rober Badinter’s Free and Equal: Emancipating France’s Jews, 1789-1791. Published in France in 1989, and now translated for the first time into English, Free and Equal recounts the interplay of the French Revolution and the emancipation of France’s Jews. The author, Robert Badinter, was France’s Minister of Justice and head of its Constitutional Court. He is currently a member of the French Senate, and lives in Paris. Adam Simms is a writer, editor and translator. He has served on the staff of the American Jewish Committee and United Israel Appeal, among others.

* Robert Jacobson will be reading from A Song of Social Significance, his mother Dorothy Epstein‘s memoir of her childhood in an immigrant household and her career organizing the labor movement.

LUKE FORD SAYS: David Klinghoffer does not advocate banning divorce nor restricting access to birth control. David never says smoking is good for you.

Larry responds:

Klinghoffer flirts with the Christian notion of banning divorce, but would settle for repealing no-fault divorce; he preferred the system where spouses perjured themselves in New York State court. Those wacky conservatives, always pining for the good old days!

He also says that he favors the empowerment of women, and that birth control harms the empowerment of women. Now, he may have applied one of his weasel-worded disclaimers that that particular point wasn’t politically conceivable; but as we spell out in detail, in Israel bible-based bureacrats are already pretty ingenious at worming their way into women’s private areas. I have great faith in the transformative powers of conservative politics.

As to smoking: he claims 1) it enhances cognition and 2) its side effects, cancer and emphesyma, while harmful for the body, are definitely good for the soul–at least according to the Catholic theologian named Norman he quotes in his health care chapter.

Readers, of course, will have to judge for themselves. That’s why there are Amazon links for both of the books at http://benyehudapress.com/catalog/HowWouldGodREALLYVote/index.html

Posted in David Klinghoffer, Larry Yudelson, Yori Yanover | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Larry Yudelson, Yori Yanover Elevate The Conversation

Since when is rodent infestation kosher?

Ellia Kassoff (CEO of Strategic Software Resources, Inc.) emails:

It’s upsetting that we can’t have decent clean, kosher at decent prices and great service.

By the way, have you noticed that Chick-n-Chow has had a “B” rating from the health department for three years now and according to them they don’t want to fix it. And yet.. it’s still considered kosher and certified? How? I asked my Rabbi and he agreed. They stopped buying food there.

Be sure to read the health violations on the health department website. They score has been getting worse and worse…once again, kosher places don’t care.

Since when is rodent infestation kosher?

By the way, I called the kosher certifier last year and asked why they still consider it kosher when the health department says it’s unhealthy. They told me I was the first to complain and they would, “look into it”..

So, my question.. how can it still be kosher?

They don’t seem to care about fixing these problems and no other person would walk into a place with a “B” rating, why should a Jew? Because they don’t care…

Here are the violations on Chick n Chow:

 

   

 

    001

 

    HOLDING OF PHF – MULTIPLE SERVINGS (MAJOR)

 

   

 

    022

 

    IMPROPERLY COVERED / LABELED / ELEVATED

 

   

 

    023

 

    READY TO EAT FOOD – EXPOSED TO POSSIBLE CONTAMINATION

 

   

 

    050

 

    UNAPPROVED TYPE / IMPROPER USE / IMPROPER INSTALLATION

 

   

 

    055

 

    NOT CLEAN

 

   

 

    063

 

    HOOD – NOT CLEAN / DISREPAIR / MISSING FILTER(S)

 

   

 

    064

 

    VENTILATION – EQUIPMENT USE

 

   

 

    067

 

    TOILETS / TOILET ROOM: DISREPAIR / INADEQUATE # / NOT CLEAN / SEL

 

   

 

    070

 

    REFUSE / CONTAINERS

 

   

Posted in Kashrut, Pico/Robertson | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Since when is rodent infestation kosher?

Desmond Ford: Reformist Theologian, Gospel Revivalist

My dad’s biography is out.

From Amazon.com: “The first definitive biography of Desmond Ford, written by a recognized Adventist scholar, heavily researched and footnoted with information and photographs never before released to the public.”

From goodnewsunlimited.org.au: As a history of ideas, this is an exceptional biography of Desmond Ford.  Dr Hook is a competent historian who has struggled for decades to understand complex issues, which he treats in a fast-paced, scintillating style. While Dr Ford is mentioned in every chapter, the book is also a panorama depicting the development of Adventist thought.

Here is part of my dad’s Wikipedia entry:

Dr. Desmond "Des" Ford (born Queensland, Australia, 1929) is an Australian theologian and biblical scholar known for his dynamic and grace-centred preaching. Within the Seventh-day Adventist Church he dominated theological changes in Australia and New Zealand during the 60s and 70s.[1] He was controversially dismissed from ministry in the Adventist church in 1980 following his critique of the investigative judgment doctrine. He has since worked through the non-denominational evangelical ministry Good News Unlimited.

Early life

Ford was born in Queensland, Australia in 1929.[2][3] Though an avid reader and bright student, he left school early because of Australia’s involvement in World War II.[3] He started working at Associated Newspapers in Sydney at the age of 14.[3] He developed an interest in the creation-evolution controversy at this time.[3]

Although originally an Anglican, Ford converted to the Seventh-day Adventist Church after reading the Ellen G. White publication The Great Controversy in his late teens.[4]

[edit] Study and early ministry

He graduated from the Adventist-operated Avondale College in 1950 with a ministerial diploma, and went to work under the successful evangelist George Burnside in Newcastle.[5] He worked as a pastor in various churches and as an evangelist for about 7 years in Australia,[3][6] before the South Pacific Division called him back to Avondale to complete his ministry course.[6][5] While there, he earned the respect of many people. He completed a BA in 1958,[2] and went on to complete a Master’s degree in systematic theology at Andrews University in 1959.[3] Ford subsequently received a PhD in the rhetoric of Paul’s letters from Michigan State University in 1961.[3] In the same year he became head of the Religion Department at Avondale College, where he would remain until 1977.[7] He was a member of the Biblical Research Committee in Australia and the United States.[3]. During his more than 16 years as head of the department, many students admired his dynamic teaching,[citation needed] and became a "leading theologian"[8] of the church.

He completed his second PhD in 1972 from the University of Manchester, while still teaching at Avondale.[2] His supervisor was the renowned Protestant theologian F. F. Bruce, and his field of study was New Testament studies, specifically eschatology (end times).[7][3] Ford entitled his thesis, The Abomination of Desolation in Biblical Eschatology.[9] His main expertise has been biblical apocalyptic literature (such as Daniel, Revelation and Ezekiel) and eschatology.[3]

[edit] Tension over theology

See also: Historic Adventism and Progressive Adventism

Ford was a primary opponent (along with Hans K. LaRondelle) of the perfectionism taught by fellow Australian Robert Brinsmead.[10] According to Anglican Geoffrey Paxton, during the 1960s scholars such as Ford and Edward Heppenstall embedded the concept of original sin into Adventist theology.[8] Paxton also wrote that Des "showed a praiseworthy consistency in Reformation theology during a period of change"[8] in that he "strongly repudiated perfectionism as being contrary to the gospel",[8] and held to the Protestant views of justification and the sinlessness of Jesus‘ human nature (see: Christology).[8]

Under Ford’s influence, Brinsmead ultimately rejected perfectionism.[2] Around 1970, there was a major controversy amongst Australian Adventists over whether "righteousness by faith" included both justification and sanctification.[2] This had been sparked by Brinsmead, and Ford became caught up in it.[2] Tensions over Ford and the theology teaching at Avondale more generally led to a meeting of Australian church leaders on February 3–4, 1976 to hear accusations by a group of "Concerned Brethren". Ford’s understanding of righteousness by faith was the main issue,[11] while the report mentions "the Sanctuary, the Age of the Earth and Inspiration."[12] In April a group of church leaders and theologians including Ford met in Palmdale, California to discuss the meaning of righteousness by faith.[13] Ford was the "center of attention", and the resulting document known as the "Palmdale statement"DjVu.[14]

[edit] United States, and increasing tensions with church leadership

In response to criticisms of his theology, in 1977 the church moved him to the United States, where he taught Religion at Pacific Union College for three years.[15][7][3] The classes he taught included public speaking, homiletics, evangelism, life and teachings of Christ, the Pauline epistles, Christian apologetics, Daniel and Revelation, the major and minor prophets of the Old Testament, introduction to theology, and biblical theology.[3]

In October 1979 Ford was invited to address a chapter meeting of the Association of Adventist Forums (now Adventist Forums) held at the College, on the topic of Hebrews 9 and its implications for the Adventist investigative judgment teaching.[3] The talk was titled, "The Investigative Judgment: Theological Milestone or Historical Necessity?" The talk criticized some aspects of the traditional understanding, and though promised immunity, Ford was summoned to the General Conference headquarters in Washington, D.C.[3] He was given six months to write up his views. Late in 1979, he stopped lecturing and moved to Takoma Park, Maryland.[7] Ford produced the 991-page manuscript, Daniel 8:14, the Day of Atonement, and the Investigative Judgment (later summarized in an article for Spectrum magazine).[16] (Another source says he produced a 900-page manuscript called Daniel 8:14, the Investigative Judgment, and the Kingdom of God).[3]

[edit] Expulsion from teaching and ministry

In August 1980, a group of Adventist theologians and administrators convened at Glacier View Ranch in Colorado to examine Ford’s views. According to Time, he "made the case that White’s ‘sanctuary‘ explication of 1844 no longer stood up in the light of the Bible, and that ‘investigative judgment’ undercut the whole basis of Protestantism: belief in salvation by God’s grace apart from good works."[17] The culmination of this event was Ford controversially losing his employment with the denomination (defrocked)[17] as a minister and theology professor.[7] After counsel from the General Conference, the Australasian Division withdrew "Ford’s ministerial credentials, noting that this does not annul his ordination…"[18] Later reports indicate Ford retained membership in the church – at least at first.

His expulsion from the church was covered in Newsweek,[citation needed] TIME[17] and Christianity Today.[19]

[edit] Aftermath

Ford ultimately formed his own non-denominational gospel ministry Good News Unlimited. It also led to the founding of the "dissident bimonthly" Evangelica, which was based in Napa, California.[17] The ministry published a magazine of the same name, Good News Unlimited. The ministry is based in Auburn, California (as of around 2000, at least).[7]

The church soon forced the resignation of many clergy, reported as 120 clergy and teachers by 1982, according to Time magazine.[17] Peter Ballis, professor of sociology at Monash University and a former Adventist himself, counted 182 pastors in Australia and New Zealand who left between 1980 and 1988, equivalent to "an astonishing 40 percent of the total ministerial workforce" in those countries.[20] He called it "the most rapid and massive exit of Adventist pastors in the movement’s 150-year history"[21] (although he cautions that the fallout may have involved more than one factor). He estimates 12,000 lay people left during the 1980s.[citation needed] It is further speculated that a significant number of current ministers privately agree with Ford but refrain from speaking publicly on the issue for fear of losing their employment.[22] Many in the Adventist church feel that the events of 1980 represent a major milestone in the theological development of the church, and that the effects of this controversy continue to be felt today.[23]

In 1981, Lewis Walton published Omega, largely a criticism of Ford.[24]

According to Adventist Today, many Adventists have adopted his "advanced position" concerning the investigative judgment.[7] However many Adventist theologians have written against his arguments criticizing the investigative judgment.[25]

Time described him as "a prominent Australian theologian",[17] and Adventist Today as "an accomplished Adventist theologian and scholar".[7]

[edit] Recent history

Raymond Cottrell wrote in 1996 that Ford "is still a member of the church, and his personal lifestyle is distinctly Adventist."[26]

A tribute from Ford was included in the memorial service of respected evangelical Walter Martin, who died in 1989.[27] Martin had much to do with improved relations between the Adventist church with evangelicals. (See Walter Martin and Questions on Doctrine)

Ford returned to Australia in 2000, and has officially retired.[28] Ford voluntarily dropped his membership from the Pacific Union College Church in 2001. He now lives in Queensland,[citation needed] is still engaged in preaching, and is welcomed within Adventist communities as an attendee. Against the will of Adventist leadership, Ford has even spoken in some Adventist churches since his dismissal, including those in the Sydney suburbs of Castle Hill, Kellyville and Cherrybrook;[12] as well as Charlestown church in Newcastle. According to one of his websites, Ford speaks twice a month in the Glass House Mountains area, just north of Brisbane, Queensland.[29]

In 2001, Avondale College Church appointed the "Membership and Relational Issues Committee" to deal with theological and relational tensions within the Adventist church, particularly the tension surrounding Ford. Chaired by Arthur Patrick, it produced the report, "Mapping the Past and Sketching the Future" in January 2002. While intended as only an internal document, some copies were more widely circulated, receiving a mixed response.[30][31] The Adventist church leadership decided to keep the ban on Ford speaking in churches.

Ford has three children – Elènne,[32] Paul, and Luke – the last of whom controversially converted to Judaism.

Ford’s work on apocalyptic has been quoted by F. F. Bruce, G. R. Beasley-Murray and other scholars, and also in such reference works as The New Unger‘s Bible Dictionary and Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible.

[edit] Present beliefs

According to one of his websites, Ford’s interests include religion, history, current affairs, biography, science, and health.[3] He has always been an avid reader.[3]

Ford still supports the Sabbath.[33] He published The Forgotten Day defending the Sabbath, as a result of his study following Robert Brinsmead‘s writings against it.[34] Another former Adventist Dale Ratzlaff wrote a critical book Sabbath in Crisis (now Sabbath in Christ), which Ford responded to in a book review, to which Ratzlaff responded in turn.

According to Adventist Today in an interview with Ford in summer 1999,

"Almost two decades have passed since Dr. Ford took his courageous stand for the Gospel. Since that time, it has become obvious that Dr. Ford’s teachings have led many Christians to a better understanding of personal salvation and the Scripture. In fact, many within the Seventh-day Adventist church have adopted his view of the Gospel and his advanced position on the Investigative Judgment. Although it has been almost two decades since Dr. Ford has been exiled from the Denomination, he is still a Seventh-day Adventist who personally supports a vegetarian lifestyle as well as such fundamental doctrines as the seventh day Sabbath, Second Coming, Judgment, state-of-the-dead, new earth, etc."[7]

Ford is a vegetarian and has been a vocal advocate of healthy living and preventative medicine.[35]

He maintains that Ellen White did have the spiritual gift of prophecy, stating in 1980, "…I found Christ through the writings of Ellen G. White and since she has influenced me more than any other writer since John the Apostle…"[16] A self-described bibliophile (lover of books), he has described White’s book The Desire of Ages as the most "beautiful" book he has ever read.[36](see: inspiration of Ellen White).

Ford has expounded what he describes as the "apotelesmatic principle" – that there can be multiple fulfillments of prophecy, crudely speaking.[16]

He no longer supports the year-day principle of prophetic interpretation, although he had supported it earlier in his commentary on Daniel.[37]

See the Statement of Belief from Ford’s recent (updated since 2000) website. See also the recent articles "Genesis and Science" and "The Theological Dilemma: Relationship between Law and Grace".

In 2008, Milton Hook released a biography of Ford, Desmond Ford: Reformist Theologian, Gospel Revivalist, published by Adventist Today.

[edit] Publications

Ford has written over twenty books and numerous articles.[28] See also Books on the Good News Unlimited website.

  • Unlocking God’s Treasury, 1964
  • Answers on the Way, 1977
  • Daniel, 1978 (does not fully reflect his current views)
  • The Abomination of Desolation in Biblical Eschatology, 1979
  • Physicians of the Soul, God’s Prophets Through the Ages, (Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing Association, 1980) ISBN 0-8127-0262-X. Includes Ford’s views on Ellen G. White as a prophetess. It also traces Ford’s childhood encounters with Adventists and the influence of Ellen G. White’s books on helping him find Christ and becoming an Adventist.
  • Daniel 8:14, the Day of Atonement, and the Investigative Judgment (Casselberry, Fl: Euangelion, 1980), now available online
  • The Forgotten Day, 1981, about the Sabbath
  • Crisis: A Commentary on the Book of Revelation, Volumes 1–3, 1982
  • The Advent Crisis of Spiritual Identity, 1982
  • Coping Successfully With Stress, 1984
  • Will There be Another Holocaust?, 1984
  • How to Survive Personal Tragedy, 1984
  • Jesus and the Latter Days, 1984
  • Good News for Adventists, 1985
  • A Kaleidoscope of Diamonds, 2 Vols, 1986
  • Worth More Than a Million (Auburn, CA: Desmond Ford Publications, 1987)
  • Daniel and The Coming King, 1996
  • Right With God, Right Now (Newcastle, CA: Desmond Ford Publications, 1999), a commentary on Romans
  • The End of Terrorism, 2004
  • Eating Right for Type 2 Diabetes, 2004
  • God’s Odds: How to Win the Wager, 2006
  • In the Heart of Daniel: An Exposition of Daniel 9:24–27, 2007
  • Jesus Only: What Christ’s Living and Dying Mean for You, 2008
  • For the Sake of the Gospel: Throw out the bathwater, but keep the Baby, 2008

Also:

  • Inside Story
  • Why Believe? Source Book
Posted in Desmond Ford | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Desmond Ford: Reformist Theologian, Gospel Revivalist

Joan Hyler Making Progress

The Hollywood talent manager and producer was hit by a car on PCH ten days ago.

From carepages.com:

Only good news.

When Joan arrived at UCLA she had a bleed/bruise/subdural hematoma next to the brain. Yesterday’s C-T scan reveals no further bleeding and indicates that the existing fluid is appropriately on path to being reabsorbed and thus dissapated. As a result the doctors feel confident enough to remove the monitoring device from Joan’s head. One less wire.

The MRI revealed that Joan’s spine is in good shape and, pending the results of some small additional tests, the doctors plan on removing the support collar from Joan’s neck and chest. One less device.

Joan’s lungs have made great progess. After the accident there had been a great deal of fluid pooling in the lowest areas of the lungs. That fluid has been successfully drained and as a result the doctors have removed one of Joan’s chest tubes, and will imminently be removing the other. Two less tubes.

In the same manner, the doctors are no longer concerned about the pooling of fluid in Joan’s abdomen. All of the internal bleeding has apparently been caught and the abdomen has been drained.

Joan responded to one of the Neuro residents by opening her eyes, appearing to see him, recognizing his commands, and answering appropriately. She won’t do this for me.

The humerus surgery is still planned for Friday. The surgeries to her legs where they inserted a rod/pin/nail and where they repaired her ankle were complicated and involved additional procedures which the doctors will re-examine on Tuesday. The break to the pelvis and to the clavicle require no surgical intervention.

Joan remains on a ventilator, but she has made sufficiently good progress that the staff is adjusting the device so that Joan will be breathing along with the ventilator, preparing her lungs for the shortly anticipated removal of the breathing apparatus.

I know this is a lot of detail to absorb, and that this update refers to a number of injuries that had not been previously referenced. The point, however, is that in each of these areas Joan has made good, strong progress.

Posted in Joan Hyler | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Joan Hyler Making Progress

A Lonely Space

So I was feeling quite alone Friday night as I strode home from shul.

I ran into four 18-year old Israeli girls who’d just arrived two days ago and were looking for their Shabbat dinner hosts.

I didn’t know where the hosts lived but I knew I could find people who did. So I led the girls down Pico Blvd.

On the way, I ran into three people I’d just davened with.

They were amazed.

"Do you practice astral projection?" one asked.

Only later did I realize they’d been talking about me and then suddenly I’d materialized out of the dark like their worst nightmare.

Why not talk with me as well? I’m not so bad.

Maybe I am.

I made my bed. Now I must lie in it.

I found the girls their home.

Now where’s mine?

I feel like there are all these great conversations going on around me and I’m excluded.

Posted in Personal | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on A Lonely Space

Stopping By 613 Mitzvah Store On A Sunny Sunday Afternoon

Modern Orthodoxy is in decline, even in Pico-Robertson.

I walked the length and breadth of Pico Bvd this afternoon and could not find an RCA version of the Artscroll Siddur (prayer book).

I had to order one.

I bought some holy books from 613 Mitzvah Store (I bought my tefillin there in 2001 after R. Muskin stripped me of the pair he gave me earlier that year) and when I went to sign for my credit card bill, I was handed a pen that was about two feet long.

Why was the store using such a pen? Because when they offered their customers a regular pen, too often the customers kept it instead of returning it.

I hate that.

I often carry a pen around because I’m a world-class journalist and my eagle-eye is always looking for scoops to record.

And most of the time when I lend someone a pen, I have to ask for it back.

I have to be the bad guy.

Posted in Personal | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Stopping By 613 Mitzvah Store On A Sunny Sunday Afternoon