Kidding on the Square, or, Getting a Pass on Being an Ass

Around these parts, Pat Boone is not well-known for his sense of humor. What he IS known for, however, is being an ass. However, despite his tough-guy, "I'm descended from Daniel Boone" persona, Pat frequently doesn't like to actually put his money where his mouth is and explicitly say garbage that could be attributed to, well, himself.

Case in point: his "article" this week, in which he pictures newly-minted President Obama visiting with some random "jihadist dictator", presumably Ahmedinajad. One of the most striking things is how much they seem to stick to the personal insult:

We jihadists have often referred to Jews and Americans – in fact, all non-jihadists – as 'pigs and monkeys.' No offense, just a little humor.

Pause. "Well, OK. I'll pass on that, too. I do appreciate your willingness to dialogue, without any preconditions, and I guess I'm prepared for little slurs like that."

"Oh, it's not a slur. No, we do see you and all like you – who don't realize that we are holy to Allah and commissioned by Him to convert the rest of the world to our view – as subhuman and not worthy of life. Unless you give up your ignorant and blasphemous notions of Jesus and a Hebrew God and bow to Allah as we know him. Perhaps you would like some corn cobs and table scraps?"

Ok, first of all, as much as I think Ahmedinajad and the jihadis are douchebags (and I do), you DO KNOW that Muslims believe Jesus was a Prophet and that Allah and the Hebrew God are the same, RIGHT? I'm not saying they're going to start their own Muslims United for Israel (though if they tinker with it a little, they could get some good acronyms), but damn, at least get the bare-bones theology right. Next you'll be having them rant about how they won't rest until all America bows down before Buddha.

Incidentally, I'm not sure if the corn cobs and table scraps are supposed to be a reference to pigs or blacks. Careful there, Patty.

The silly thing is that all this boils down to the fact that Iran, Hamas, Syria, etc., don't like us very much. Which, of course, we all knew. No one debates this point. The question is to what degree is any of this hatred, disgust, or just dislike in any way malleable, are there really no areas of commonality where anything can be worked out. THAT's the premise of Obama's argument, not that he's going to walk in front of Ahmedinajad's desk and bend over. The fact that Boone's imagined jihadists can't get past calling Obama a pig and monkey just demonstrate how shallow his understanding of the jihadists and Obama is. You can be opposed to almost everything the jihadists believe in while still understanding that their ideology is more complex than, "everyone else is a pig." What purpose does dumbing down our enemies serve?

The other thing is that Pat's pulled this sort of crap before:

Whose voice is it that we hear exclaiming, "Daddy, that Hillary lady looks like Bill Clinton in a pant suit!" And "Mommy, is that Obama or Osama? They sound sort of alike to me." And "Look, Daddy, that little kid Johnny Edwards is trying to be president of the United States!" Who's voice?

Why, it's the conservative media, with childlike clarity, actually telling it like it is, revealing the underbellies and warped political ploys of the liberal favorites! There's Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Reagan, Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham and a host of other articulate and informed talk-show hosts...Thank God for the other voices, the honest, childlike observations of the biased reality we voters are facing in this country.

...Thank God there are spokesmen and women in the land who can see as if through a child's eyes and help us separate reality from naked ambition.

I came across a term in an Al Franken book a number of years ago called "Kidding on the Square," meaning, "kidding, but not really." Presumably, this is what's going on in this article. And that's ok. But Pat trying to put this garbage in the mouths of Ahmadinajad is also illustrative of how little he thinks of the whole process of diplomacy, and of how much he underestimates Obama as well as the jihadists.

Diplomacy does not solve every problem, but part of any successful fight against the enemy, whether at the bargaining table or on the battlefield, is good intelligence. Reducing everything wrong in the jihadist psyche and ideology to a series of animal insults isn't just stupid, it's dangerous. And all so he can sneak in some more swipes at Obama. I can't help wondering if part of the reason for this waste of keystrokes isn't just that Pat couldn't resist the opportunity to make a "Obama is a monkey" joke without getting slammed for it.

The Blasphemy of Theodicy

The news this week that Ted Kennedy is suffering from a malignant brain tumor hit my family very hard. Not because we love Ted Kennedy so much, although my parents do seem to have some affection for him, and his politics do match our collective ones fairly closely. But rather because we celebrated a recent milestone of our own- the 5th anniversary of my mother's diagnosis and removal of a benign brain tumor of her own.

I was traipsing along the internet and found a post by Batya not-so-subtly suggesting that Ted Kennedy's (and Ariel Sharon's) illnesses were divine punishment. She asks,

Does G-d punish non-Jews in the same way as Jews?

I can only speak for myself, but this question exemplifies all the reasons I find theodicy utterly disgusting as well as personally infuriating. (To be fair to Batya, her post was by far one of the less obscene examples floating around.)

This was my reply to Batya:

Given that our politics and religious beliefs are so different, I'm not surprised that I disagree with your take on this.

However, the fact that my mother recently "celebrated" her 5th year of surviving a brain tumor gives me an intimate perspective on this sort of thing.

I have always rejected theodicy, while recognizing that this places me at odds with many people who need to attribute all suffering to God to make the world make sense, who need to make God a punisher as well as a healer. I understand that, but I cannot accept it. I could not accept it before. I certainly cannot after spending long evenings with my mother in the hospital, helping her in the years after her recovery, when she had forgotten the most rudimentary basics of her life, such as her times tables, or how to read.

My mother was never religious, and still seems confused or uncomfortable when she sees me doing things like baking challah, making kiddush, or hosting a seder. Repeatedly, however, the one question she does seem interested is, "Do you think I am being punished?" "Do you think I did something to deserve this?"

And as always, my answer is no. Just as there was no sin that justified the Holocaust, there was no crime that my mother committed that would have justified being cursed with a growth the size of an orange squeezing against her brain, nothing she could have done to deserve a series of seizures and internal bleeding that wiped out her ability to multi-task, engage in rapid memory recall, or any of the other activities she formerly excelled at. The fact that deep down, she thinks that maybe, just maybe, she considers her permanent disability something she earned makes me both furious and sick.

Keeping this in mind, while there are plenty of groups and politicians I find distasteful, I cannot support people imagining themselves in the role of God, trying to sort out why this punishment is appropriate for this person, or that group.

I do not consider myself a religious person. But I call this blasphemy. Just as I would if the "target" of the theodicy were someone I intensely disagreed with, such as Ronald Reagan or Mordechai Eliyahu. I do not believe that THEIR medical problems are divine retribution anymore than Sharon's, Kennedy's, or my mother's were. Furthermore, I find it hypocritical that some people are so quick to guess at what Sharon or Kennedy are being punished for while they seem a lot less eager to theorize what past "sins" might have landed the esteemed Rav in the hospital.

I believe that anyone who has lived with or cared for someone with a brain tumor, Alzheimer's, cancer, heart disease, or a myriad of other illnesses would be hard-pressed to find a theology that neatly lines up these heart-breaking episodes with a convenient or appropriate "sin." And frankly, I feel that any God who visits such punishments on average Joe schmoes (or even morally questionable politicians) while allowing some of the greatest murderers of our age to die in their sleep (Stalin and Pol Pot) or take their own lives (Hitler) is not worth believing in.

Fun with Republicans

It's always amusing to get my election pamphlet in the mail. I often wind up reading the pamphlet several times before the election. It's not so much that I find city politics so fascinating; rather, it's the entertainment factor in seeing decades-old political grudges being re-displayed in public. The last two elections have seen ballot measures explicitly targeting the mayor (last election) and a city supervisor (this election), who, not coincidentally, was the author of the previous ballot measure. Funny how that happens.

Invariably, the same groups and people wind up squaring off in the pamphlet's hallowed pages. Anything the San Francisco Democrats support, the Republicans oppose. If the Sierra Club likes it, the Citizens against Waste hate it. If the Mayor likes it, there are sure to be at least a few Supervisors that want it dead. And so on. (To be fair, at least some of these groups are shell games, which you can recognize when you see the same names repeating over and over.)

Anyway, my favorite part is reading the arguments from the city's Republican party. Not that I always disagree with them. In fact, these days, and this is a scary admission, I actually find myself agreeing with them on a few points, at least at the local level- a lot of the things on the ballot these days are stupid, self-serving and pointless, city management sucks, and I'm becoming increasingly suspicious and annoyed with all the politicians who talk a lot and don't seem to get anywhere (this, incidentally, also applies to the federal level). But the funny part is that, for whatever reason, the Republicans seem to have the most emotional, out of left right-field, just-plain-hysterical, arguments in the election pamphlet.

You want examples, of course. Here is one from a Republican opposing a 2005 proposition to ban military recruiters in public schools:

Unfortunately, our city and neighborhoods are saturated with American citizens and ungrateful non-citizens intent on sabotaging Democracy [sic] as defined in the U.S. Constitution.

It is apparent they are determined to re-write democracy ala anarchy style. It is interesting, however, that these traitors disguised as Americans are the first to invoke the rights protected by U.S. Constitution to dismantle our nation's security. Ironic!

Anarchy style? Is that like kosher style?


My favorites all come from the same guy, a fellow named Terrence Faulkner. Dr. Faulkner, who insists on being called a Dr. though he should technically just be called Esq., has a great love of hyperbole and a mild obsession with Abraham Lincoln. Join me, won't you, in a little retrospective?


Faulkner in 2007, writing against re-opening horse stables in Golden Gate Park:

Golden Gate Park was designed by a great American, supporter of Abraham Lincoln, writer and abolitionist Republican... Frederick Law Olmstead... Well-designed landscape, he argued, had a civilizing effect on human beings...Olmstead disliked European metropolitan parklands, often aristocratic racetracks. He would have hated Golden Gate Park's Horse Stables.

...John McLaren, who dominated Golden Gate Park until 1942, fought to keep the Park rural. He disliked the Horse Stables and the SF Board of Supervisors' frequent "gifting" of monuments, which he quickly surrounded with hedges. Many SF Park and Rec executives loathed the politically-imposed Park Stables, including the late General Manager Jack Spring (our family's nextdoor neighbor), and my father, Charles Faulkner.

So... Olmstead didn't like horse tracks, and previous park managers didn't like statues. And who would know better than Dr. F, since he lived next door to one. Brilliant.

Even better was Faulkner's response to a 2006 proposal for the city to pass a nonbinding resolution (sound familiar) to impeach Bush and Cheney. See if you can spot the point where Dr. F's brain takes a holiday:

Islamic Terrorists know weakness and appeasement when they see them. Bush is not the first wartime President to be insulted and mocked. Lincoln got worse, admits [historian] Shelby Foote: "The inadequate, inept... bumpkin Abraham Lincoln was called not only a fool but a coward."

Cartoonists had fun with Honest Abe during the Civil War. They drew "fugitive sketches of Lincoln with his hair on end, the elongated figure surrounded by squiggles to show how he quaked" as he ran from the threats of the (eventually successful) pro-Confederate assassins.

Take-away message: Dr. F likes Civil War histories, and will skew any discussion so it involves Abraham Lincoln. He must be a lot of fun at parties.

But wait, there's more! Dr. F actually wrote ANOTHER rebuttal to the same proposition. Just in case you weren't convinced by his first one.

On its merits, this impeachment resolution is unjustified. An impeachment resolution against Democrat James Buchanin [sic]- generally rated as our worst U.S. President (1857-1861) would have been more justified... far more.

Buchanin's mistakes helped bring about the American Civil War. His ardently pro-slavery Vice-President- John C. Breckenridge- later became a Confederate General. Next to Buchanin and Breckenridge, Bush and Cheney are innocent lambs.

The best part of Dr. F's totally off-topic rant about yet another President that lived and died over a century ago? The guy he's talking about- and presumably looked up to get the details of his years in office- spelled his name BUCHANAN. Though I do like the idea of retroactively impeaching dead Presidents many decades after the fact. (Sort of like a mock trial?)

So this brings us to this season's election pamphlet. I eagerly opened it and flipped until I spied Dr. F's latest and greatest. How could he top random references to the Civil War and recommendations to impeach dead politicians? As expected, the good Doctor Lawyer did not disappoint. For your consideration, enjoy these two bits of nuttiness against the city changing its charter to specify it really, really wants to get women and minorities on city boards and commissions, and collecting semi-annual reports to see how they're doing:

The Attic Highwayman Procrustes would have loved Prop D.

In Ancient Greek mythology there was a legendary highwayman of Attica named Procrustes. He tied his victims to an iron bed. Procrustes stretched or cut off the legs of his victims to make them conform to the length of the Procrustean Bed. The hero Theseus... slew Procrustes by attaching him to his own Procrustean Bed.

...Prop D would have the Commission on the Status of Women prepare regular reports on "bean counting" the ethnic, religious and sexual orientation of City board and commission appointees. At best, these reports would just be a waste of time and money. At worst, because of the influence of "bean counting", many inferior appointees might well be chosen to create artificial statsistical models that almost never occur in nature.

Vote against bean counting.

Wow. First, apparently the Doc has been reading Greek mythology lately. Second, what's with the "never occur in nature" line? What definition of nature is he using? It sounds like he's saying that blacks, asians, white people and gays almost never cluster together in "the wild." And I like that the newest version of poisoning the well involves classic villains of antiquity. It sure is a nice change from, "You know who you're like? Hitler."

Anyway, it gets better. Faulkner's second argument repeats most of the same stuff (snipped for, well, repetitiveness), but has a few more choice bits.

Endless reports and investigations don't promote "diversity"- that only costs money and promotes "tokenism"- the only answer is to make top quality appointments from all communities... Prop D is bad government and "tokenism" walking around the City of SF- insulting just about every community.

...Prop D just calls for endless "bean counting" and for individuals to be appointed without regard to their personal qualifications.

The ill-fated General Custer, if he were to come back from the dead, might meet a number of demographic categories: Would we want to put him in charge of a high-risk Police or Fire Dept unit? Think carefully about all those textbook military mistakes made at the Battle of the Little Big Horn.

Got that? A commitment to diversity (which I do think is silly) automatically leads to tokenism (wrong) which is disproved by the fact that it would require us to resurrect the ghosts of dead Indian Fighters to run the Fire Department. (Hilarious.) Incidentally, Shiksa Girlfriend wants to know exactly which under-represented demographics General Custer fulfills. Is it dead white men? The military? Long-haired hippies? We're just curious.

They really need to have more elections around here. Can't the SF Republicans just start a blog so I can be entertained by their rants all the time?

You're Kidding, Right?

I read this a few days ago and it made me want to blow something up:

The sale of cigarettes and other tobacco products at drug stores would be illegal in San Francisco if an ordinance introduced this week by Mayor Gavin Newsom wins approval.
The proposed law is designed to curb tobacco sales at stores where pharmacists work, but would not apply to big box businesses such as Costco or to grocery stores. The ordinance is just one of a series of measures supported by the mayor intended to promote healthy living among San Francisco residents, said Newsom spokeswoman Giselle Barry.

"The spirit of this is that pharmacies are places people go to get better," she said. "They shouldn't be selling products that cause cancer."

Clearly this woman hasn't stepped inside a Walgreens or Rite-Aid anytime soon. Drug stores are NOT where you to go get healthy; in many areas, they are a substitute convenience store. A quick perusal of one this morning showed, in addition to a pharmacy (which is only open about 2/3rds of the daily operating hours), toys, greeting cards, shampoo, toothbrushes, makeup, a photo-printer, small household electronics (anyone need a rice cooker?), and even a small grocery section- chips, candy, cookies, eggs, milk, soda, sandwiches, and so on. If the standard is now, "where you go to get better", they had better start pulling that beef jerky. Last I checked that stuff had no nutritional value whatsoever.

It gets better, I mean worse:

The legislation says that “through the sale of tobacco products, pharmacies convey tacit approval of the purchase and use of tobacco products.”

Yeah, they also tacitly approve of subtly making you feel ugly by selling you overpriced crap to cover your pimples, and of course eggs, which may or may not play havoc with your cholesterol. Run for the hills!

Public Health Department Director Mitch Katz, who would oversee the enforcement, said it is a “conflict of interest” for pharmacies to sell tobacco products. In some cases, he said, people go to the stores to buy medication to treat health complications brought on by smoking.

So the hell what? Should we ban stores from selling food "just in case" someone with a food addiction happens to walk through the doors?

Luckily, some people recognize this for the plain old foolishness that it is. Unfortunately, they're identified as smokers, so you've been pre-trained to dismiss anything they have to say.

Shamilla Jensen, who had purchased a pack of cigarettes from a Walgreens on Market Street, called the proposed law “silly.”
“Isn’t this a country that touts our freedom?” she said. “Why can’t someone be free to go to Walgreens and buy a pack of cigarettes or not buy a pack of cigarettes?”

Good point. We should really ban our troops from smoking while overseas. Not only is it contrary to their mission (stay alive), I'm pretty sure we're also obligated to "liberate" those poor Iraqis from their cultural addiction to tobacco. Let's start by destroying any hookah we can find. I'm sure that will build goodwill.

And just in case some of you think that this nuttiness is a purely West Coast phenomenon...

Others are on the same track. Bills are pending in New Hampshire, Illinois and Tennessee to bar pharmacies with walk-in clinics from selling tobacco, and a bill in New York would apply to all pharmacies, including those in big stores such as Wal-Mart.

"Pharmacies are places we go to get healthy," says Assemblyman Sam Hoyt, author of the New York proposal. "It just seems inappropriate that on the other hand, they sell something that kills."

Hey, they're even using the same talking points. How cute.

On the plus side, though, we get to hear funny alarmist talk from smoking advocates:

"We're seeing a real trend in which fewer and fewer stores want to be associated with the harm caused by cigarettes," says Matt Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. As fewer stores sell cigarettes, he says, "the cultural norm becomes not smoking."

That doesn't necessarily happen, says Gary Nolan, national spokesman for Citizens Freedom Alliance, a group that defends smokers rights and the free market.

Smokers won't stop but will be driven to a black market run by smugglers, he says.

I smell a new movie in the works- The Hardy Boys and (Cigarette) Smuggler's Cove.

Coming this summer.

Just plain silly

Of all the groups of people I wouldn't want pissed off at me, Greeks and Lesbians definitely top the list. So you can be sure that this will be a fight to the finish.

Campaigners on the Greek island of Lesbos are to go to court in an attempt to stop a gay rights organisation from using the term "lesbian".

The islanders say that if they are successful they may then start to fight the word lesbian internationally.

The issue boils down to who has the right to call themselves Lesbians.

Is it gay women, or the 100,000 people living on Greece's third biggest island - plus another 250,000 expatriates who originate from Lesbos?

Snicker. I can just picture a male BBC reporter inflecting that question- "Yes, who DOES have the right?"

The man spearheading the case, publisher Dimitris Lambrou, claims that international dominance of the word in its sexual context violates the human rights of the islanders, and disgraces them around the world.

No, Dimitri, human rights are things like a fair trial and not getting your hands chopped off because you voted for the wrong guy. Awkward moments when you proudly proclaim "I'm a Lesbian!" might be annoying, but that's about it.

He says it causes daily problems to the social life of Lesbos's inhabitants.

Really? Why? Presumably the islanders know what they mean when they use it.

In court papers, the plaintiffs allege that the Greek government is so embarrassed by the term Lesbian that it has been forced to rename the island after its capital, Mytilini.

This from the civilization that taught us all the joys of catamitism? What happened to you, Greece, you used to be cool.

Shoah Thoughts

I missed blogging about Yom HaShoah yesterday. But there are a few old posts that were decent:

As a jumping off point, there is Who is a Real Survivor, a series of reflections on Holocaust history and its divisive politics, which is sort of a microcosm of the various issues with Jewish collective memory in general.

Then there is In Loving Memory, the list of lists. Sixty-two relatives and counting. It is a list that never gets easier to read. But every once in a while, good news does happen, even if you were 100 years late in hearing about it.

And this leads me to a final thought: in a book by late Rabbi Arthur Hertzberg, he mentioned meeting with the previous Rebbe of Belz in Jerusalem years after the Holocaust. Hertzberg had been eagerly anticipating the meeting because his parents' families had been members of the Belz court and close to the Rebbe in Poland. Hertzberg wanted to learn more about them, but was disappointed:

"[The rebbe] talked willingly of [my] grandfather, remembering that... [he] had been his teacher when he was young, but he was totally silent when I mentioned my mother's father and her brothers, who had been his disciples until they were murdered during the war. I was upset. This strange behavior was later explained to me by his principal assistant: the rebbe had not once said any of the prescribed prayers (Yizkor, Kaddish) for his wife and children because those who had been killed by the Nazis for being Jews were of transcendent holiness; they were beyond our comprehension. Any words about them that we might utter were irrelevant and perhaps even a desecration of their memory."

I do not think that words about the Shoah or its victims are irrelevant. I think words are important. As a writer, I believe that language has transformative properties, that communication has incredibly significant potential. Writing about the Shoah, rather than sullying the Holocaust, can help us honor its heroes, mourn its losses, appreciate its lessons, and, hopefully, prevent its recurrence.

But I do believe in desecration. And I take it very seriously. As tolerant and understanding as I try to be, I too have my red lines, and I object strongly to the co-option of the Holocaust to score political or religious points. I object when left-wingers do it, when right-wingers do it, when Gentiles do it, and when Jews do it. It's cheap, it's demeaning, and it's degrading. To everyone involved.

The Holocaust should not be unapproachable. But I do wish it were untouchable. In my mind, NO ONE should be compared to the Nazis. Not because there aren't bad people in the world. But instead for two reasons. First, because the comparisons invariably come up short, which backfires on the person making the claim. And second, because the Nazis and the Shoah were an incredibly specific group of people and events. As much as I am glad people know about their crimes, I resent them becoming incorporated into the universal standard of evil for the past half-century. As that happens, the specificity of things the REAL Nazis ACTUALLY did becomes diminished.

No, the Bush Administration is NOT a bunch of Nazis. No, Planned Parenthood are NOT a bunch of Nazis. Neither Michael Moore nor Bill O'Reilly are Nazis. Louis Farakhan is not a Nazi, the Palestinians are not Nazis, Ariel Sharon was not a Nazi. Random military groups doing things you don't like aren't Nazis, politicians doing things you don't like aren't Nazis. People walking around wearing knee-high boots aren't Nazis, and, let's be honest, those idiot skinheads aren't Nazis, either.

The Nazis were a specific group in a specific time and place. For twelve years, they were a scourge on Europe and the world, who ravaged a continent and murdered my family for the crime of being who they were. Period. That's who the Nazis were. If you have someone you dislike, whom you hate, whom you even think qualifies as evil, fine. They are evil enough without you bringing the Nazis into it. If you dislike abortion, go ahead. You don't need to show the Auschwitz bodies side-by-side with fetuses to make your point. Intelligent Design proponents don't need to invoke the Nazis. PETA doesn't need to invoke the Nazis. Media demagogues have no right to throw around terms like "Goebells," "Nazi" and "Hitler" as if they mean nothing.

For the sake of basic decency, the media, and all of us, should stop. The Nazis are not our pet comparisons to use whenever we want. Some words still mean something. Some history still matters.

And I wish more people understood that.

Turning an old debate on its head

Being an occasional reader of the Jewish Leadership blog, I've come to expect a fair share of narishkeit from its hallowed pages. But this latest one is quite impressive. OU activist Rabbi Nachman Kahana has figured out how to finally win the great debate with Jewish heretics. Sort of.

For years I have taken the intellectual initiative to convince "stragglers behind the camp" of the truth of the Torah; of our being chosen by HaShem as His people and of our historic right and obligation to Eretz Yisrael etc.

And? What has your success rate been?

But, as I view things today, I am convinced that in this upside down world in which we live, even this activity is distorted.

Distorted, eh? That doesn't sound very good.

It is not for us to convince Jews of the truth in our heritage, quite the opposite, the onus of proof is upon the "break away" to justify his rejection of 3500 years of Halachic Judaism and the 175 generations of unbroken conviction that HaShem revealed Himself at Mount Sinai and there He gave us His Torah.

Wait a minute. For several decades you've been beating your head against a wall trying to convince wayward Jews why they're wrong. Now you do a 180 and say that they need to rationalize their lives to random Orthodox folks? On what grounds? And how about the fact that you're already skewing the debate by assuming that "Halachic" Judaism is static, unchanging, and the same now as it was at Sinai, assuming there was a Sinai in the first place?

It is not I who has to prove that God created the world, it is the break away who has to explain the origin of all existence.

Um, actually, since you're the missionary, yeah, you sort of do. Wow, I sure am happy the Mormons haven't thought of this strategy. "You have three seconds to rationalize why you're not a Mormon, otherwise, you're getting baptized right now, mister!" Look, Rabbi, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, much less lead you off the derech (though there are certainly plenty of arguments and sources that could help). The assumption here that non-Orthos are all tacit participants in some great Disputation (apparently by virtue of randomly encountering you on the street) is quite odd.

The break away is the one who has to prove that the ham sandwich and the marriage to a gentile is true, whereas Avraham, Moshe, King David, the Bet Hamikdash are fiction.

No, they don't, because they aren't making an ARGUMENT about a ham sandwich! Are you kidding me? Maybe people that were raised keeping kosher and then decide to stop need a coherent reason, but people that are merely continuing in the same path they always have? Again- what is the argument for them to NOT do so?

That the teachings of his professor of philosophy 101 can stand over the TaNach, Mishna, Gemara, Shulchan Aruch, tens of thousands of talmidei chachamim [talmud students] who have dedicated their lives to the study of Torah, and the many millions of Jews who have stood steadfastly in their beliefs.

Whereas science and philosophy professors, of course, are just in it for the money and prestige. The rabbi actually has a point here in that one should try to learn more about a belief before dismissing it, but there are a few issues here:

A- Why should we assume, by simple accident of birth, that Judaism, specifically Orthodox Judaism, is the One Truth?

B- There are a heck of a lot of beliefs in the world, religious and otherwise. It'll take a while for all us honest seekers to make our way through all that paper, especially if we have to start by learning Talmud.

C- This would be a whole lot more convincing if your average Orthodox curriculum included a smattering of secular subjects, including higher science and non-Jewish philosophy, if only to give them some easy strawmen to compare to the clearly-established Truth. Having failed to do even that, how can we possibly give any credence to the Rabbi's suggestion that the reason secular Jews don't flock back to the faith in droves is because they're too lazy to do the homework?

There's more, you lucky dogs. The rabbi is trying to use his same topsy-turvy argumentation method to convince Jews to immigrate to Israel.

The truth is that we do not have to convince them. It is they who have to justify their remaining in the galut [Exile], when the hand of HaShem is shown daily here in Eretz Yisrael and the dangers in galut loom ever greater with each passing day.

Again, no they don't. It is YOU who want to encourage them to change the status-quo. It is YOU who wants to precipitate a change in THEIR lives, not vice-versa. Switching the goalposts and telling non-Orthos it is now their responsibility to justify their lives and decisions to you is not only nonsensical, it's also confirmation that you can't convince people with your arguments.

For the record, a lot of us DO have reasons for our decisions. We DO have arguments for why we aren't Orthodox or moving to Israel. And if you'd ask, we might even share them with you. But this kind of condescending message from a would-be (or perhaps "former"?) outreach rabbi doesn't deserve any substantive response. You can't prove a negative. The burden of proof is on the person making the claims. You claim Divine Communication, the existence of God, the unbroken chain of Tradition, and, oh yeah, a literal, entirely historical view of the Tanach.

With all those answers, Rabbi, YOU'RE the one that should be making your case to us. If you can't it's your own failing, not ours. Though if this article is any indication, maybe that's a sign that you should look for a new job.

Finally, Christians and Atheists find something to agree on

Namely, those darn Jews.

Apparently was an Orthodox Jew last Wednesday who made the mistake of praying on a United Airlines flight. The NY Times has the complete story:

The passenger, a bearded Orthodox Jewish man wearing a black hat and a long black coat, went to the back of a United Airlines jet with a small prayer book and started praying, according to a witness who was aboard. Two flight attendants tried to get his attention, but he ignored them, according to the witness, Ori Brafman, who was sitting a few rows away.

The flight attendants returned with a third attendant, who also failed to get the passenger to return to his seat on Flight 9, which was scheduled to leave for San Francisco at 9:15 p.m.

Two friends traveling with the man explained to the attendants that once the prayer is started, it must be finished without interruption, Mr. Brafman said. The man returned to his seat after he finished the prayer, which lasted about two and a half minutes, Mr. Brafman said, but the attendants had called a customer service agent.

“He was sitting in his seat, and said, ‘I don’t know what to do,’ to his friends,” Mr. Brafman said. “He had an oy vey moment.”

The agent ejected the man from the plane. There were no raised voices during the incident, and no other passengers complained, Mr. Brafman added.

So here's the thing. I don't exactly remember what my reaction to a similar situation a few years ago was, but it probably wasn't super-sympathetic. It's sad to see some of the comments on the old Ynet article:

"The Hassidim here in Montreal are gentle and prayerful, but they are lacking in any sort of social grace when it comes to interacting with the general population. Maybe B'nai Brith could spend its time sensitizing the Hasidic community to the level of paranoia on airplanes at present and recommend informing the flight crew in advance that they are going to be behaving in an unorthodox manner."

"I can understand passengers freaking out- jews are so hated and maybe they thought he knew something, plus the hasidic dress is so starnge looking-like the arabs dress."

"no weirdos on planes: You need to just chill on planes these days: no hats or loud prayers or calls to God or Allah. "

"Praying like that does not belong on a plane; do it in private. Why the whole world has to see that you are so devout. Some consideration can be shown to fellow human beings, who do NOT want to be confronted with this. That people, not familiar with this way of praying freak out is understandable. "

"Whether it's Christianity, Judaism, or Islam it should all be practiced in private places, not public."

And one could make the case that the Air Canada case was even less justified than the United one, because the man was just sitting in his seat, as opposed to United, where the man was standing up in the back of the plane. (Interestingly enough, the same story on a non-Jewish news site seemed to have more people arguing for the man's civil liberties.)

However what really irks me about the United thing are all the comments to the news story. The worst ones were on ABC:

"I pray too, but this is reducing it to showmanship, a parody of faith."

"f you don't follow safety instructions, you should not be able to fly, that doesn't change because of someone's personal religious preference - they should have carried him off while praying, why wait? It's pretty simple. He can pray, but not when it inconveniences or puts the safety of others at risk -- he was an inconsiderate, selfish, pious, arrogant person. I wish they had arrested him and put him in jail overnight."

"I for one am glad that Prayer Boy got booted off the flight. He could and should have finished his prayers BEFORE boarding the aircraft, thus not subjecting his fellow passengers to being delayed while he got his religious freak on. People need to start realizing that the airlines are not Burger King - you don't always get it "your way". "

" Jesus condemned this showy display when praying and he was a Jew (Read Matt. 6:5-7)...Think about it."

"When you pray, you're just talking to yourself. How much longer are people going to delude themselves into thinking that they have magical abilities to communicate telepathically with invisible and non-existent sky-fairies?"

" He must have been "clinging" to his religion. I suppose at least he wasn't also "clinging" to his gun... There is that."

"I wish people would stop paying respect to the completely irrational, and often dangerous, superstitions of religious individuals..."

"Why did he have to be standing in the back, why didn't he start in time to be finished when he needed to be in his seat. I respect anyone's choice of faith, but no one should think their faith and rituals are more important than the other 100-200 people on board."

"Wow, this God guy is tough. He demands that you ignore flight attendant instructions. He requires that you inconvenience all those around you. And he'll smite you down if you pray from your seat."

"ALL RELIGIONS State that we should love and/or respect our fellow Man. This shows blatant disrespect for the other people on the plane. This has nothing to do with anyones respect for a straingers religion as much as It has to do with a Religious Zealot Who (as through-out history) has let their EGO control what they think the word of God is. ( Remember the 1st commandment???: " I am the lord your God. You shall have no other Gods before Me." This means; Don't think your self as a God. Keep your EGO Minimal."

"Religion and stupidity walk hand in hand. This story is just another ridiculous manifestation of both. Religion and stupidity are the reasons we have to take off our shoes while boarding the plane and can’t bring a bottle of water."

"He was praying to the tooth fairy!! When are supposedly intelligent people(?) going to realize the mass delusion in which they place themselves. Our planet is not likely to survive unless we rid ourselves of such insanity. There is not one iota, one shred of evidence to support such preposterous notions. For the sake of my grandchildren and those who come after them, please wake up."

"Pretty much the last person I'm going to want to see on a plane is someone that is acting like a religious zealot. The terrorists on 9/11 were deeply religious too, in their minds. I'm glad they kicked this buffoon off."

"I can't understand some thing. If he was supposed to pray at this time, Why didn't he plan another time to fly? I've never meat someone who can read scriptures but could tell time. ( This does not look too good for the Jewish Faith)."

"Would all of you who are defending this jerk be doing so if he was a practicing member of a Santaria church and sacrificing a live chicken on the plane? Its getting so that anybody can do anything in the name of religion and its supposed to be ok. When did the 21st century become the 10th century? "

"Orthodox jews..think that they can do this when ever they want (I am jewish by the way)...I recall one of them cutting the line at the airport and made up some story that he has a heart problem..just to not wait in line with the rest of us."

"Any type of religious extremism on a plane is very unsettling. Don't forget the 9/11 hijackers brought along their religious books on the plane as well. I'm not saying you can't pray on a plane, but doing so standing up and ignoring instructions indicates a lack of mindfulness of the world around you, and this is something that has caused many people do to crazy things."

"this guy is a classic jerk, imposing his ideas on all the passengers...it really gives the orthodox jews a bad name..and they deserve it ..ps i am jewish...and am tired to see orthodox jews give the communities they live in problems by not following common sense rules."

"When you pray, you should do do in private. This is what the Bible commands (Matt 6:5). I KNOW what you are going to say. He is Jewish. Even though Jews do not recognize (I chose that word very carefully) Jesus of Nazareth as the Christ, does this mean that they should ignore anything and everything He taught ?"

"Isnt it typical that terrorists pray prior to committing their acts? Thus, he should have been fully aware that his behavior was suspect & warranted his removal."

"How did they know he was a real Orthodox Jew and and not a terrorist disguised as one? If he had blown up the plane everyone would have said" Why didn't they throw him off?""

"Do your freak'n praying at home or your place of worship, don't inconvenience other for your ignorance. If you need to pray on an airplane, make sure you are in your seat. How stupid can these people get. I agree with the flight attendants 100% to throw this idiot off the plane."

"If this bozo is given two minutes then the fair thing would be everyone on the plane gets two minutes. Let's see 2 minutes x 100 people.... fair is fair right?"

"If we let one religious twit do this we have to let them all do it. You think the Hasidic Jew was distracting wait till the Wiccan wants to light candles."

"Why didn't this nut case pray prior to getting on the airplane. This guy just wanted his 2 minutes of fame and he got it!"

"religion, and it's extremists, is what brought the 4 planes down on September 11, 2001. There can be zero tolerance with religion-all religions are the same-when it comes down to protecting me, airlines, and what's left of our sad state of government. To defend this person's urge to act inappropriate in public, on a plane no less, is ludicrous."

It gets better. There's also USA Today:

"It doesn't matter if the praying was done by a Christian, Jew, Muslim or Hindu, there are too many examples of terrorist praying and then blowing up wherever they are. Rules are rules and should pertain to everyone."

"Why did he feel compelled to do what he did at that very moment? What a dork. There's a time and place for everything. He was on an aircraft for cripes sake!... He became suspect when he did not respond to flight attendents. He could have been doing that as a farewell before a bomb went off. Hey, it's okay to be anal and nervous now at days. ...too many freaks out there."

"If he is orthodox why he flying and not riding a horse?"

"What a moronic comment!! Because they "explained the ritual". that makes everything just oh-so-right????? If my friends explained that I was pleasuring myself in the back seat because it was a stress reliever before a flight, should I also be allowed to remain on the plane??"

"What an a-hole. They shouldn't have put him on another flight. Let him pray all the way to California on a Greyhound bus."

"What a whack-job! This man needs to be "grounded" for the remainder of his time here on earth, and the FAA needs to place him on the "international flight ban" list."

"I am so sick of people hiding behind "religion" to act like jerks and weirdos. This guy knew what he was doing was going to cause problems."

""And when you pray, you are not to be as the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners, in order to be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees in secret will repay you."- Jesus (Matthew 5:5-6)"

"Yes, there is nothing more PHONY than people praying in public. In the real world that "2 minutes" would likely be more than ten minutes and the whole flight schedule would be in a holding pattern - all for one narcissistic fool."

"I honestly think some people pray in public just to be seen praying, why I don't know. i wouldn't doubt if he did this just to see if he would get a reaction, now my gut tells me to watch and wait for the lawsuit...."

"let him stay home if he wants to pray. Prayer is a private matter and should be kept to yourself. Maybe some of these nut cases will learn to shut up and sit down in the future."

"Don't schedule your flight if you have to pray at that time. Easy enough for your cult religion."

"His ritual of Judaism could have waited until the next time he attended Synagogue. Keep it out of the airplane..."

And Gothamist, which started things off on the right tone by including a little editorial of its own- "Kids, this is why you ‘Just Say No’ to prayer.":

"why did he start praying outside his seat? i've sat next to plenty of Orthodox men on flights and they usually just say their prayers right in their seat. this guy was an idiot."

"Orthodox Jews only listen to their God. They don't care what some stickin stewardess says. Serves him right."

"When many suffer for one it's wrong. If the guy wanted to pray let him, as long as others don't have to hear his shit or be delayed or in any other way be involved in his mumbo jumbo crap. He should be banned from all UA flights and take a cab along with that bitch Naomi Campbell next time he wants to go from point A to point B."

"i know many flight attendants (long story) and they all agree that orthodox and hasidic jews are the rudest, most pushy passengers on any given flight. you might construe this as anti-semitism, but you'd be wrong."

As for myself, I think the man made a mistake, both in his timing, in choosing to stand rather than sit, and in not explaining to the attendants either before-hand or during his prayer. And I think the airline also overreacted, particularly given that by the time the agent came to deal with him, the man had already finished and was back in his seat (something a lot of people seem to be overlooking). But a lot these comments are just hateful, ignorant, or both. Conflating an Orthodox guy davening maariv with the 9/11 terrorists is a particularly good one. There's plenty of fault to go around here, but the comments are by far the worst part. He's an idiot, whack-job, zealot, twit, nutcase, a-hole, inconsiderate, arrogant, a faker, or gunning for a lawsuit. He should be jailed or banned from flying. Wow. And how lovely that sandwiched between all that hostility from atheists are a few nuggets of Christian readers who take the opportunity to remind us all just how NOT CRAZY Jesus was, you know, just saying.

One interesting thing is that in every comment cluster, a few people invariably say, "If he was a Muslim no one would have cared," usually followed by someone saying, "If he was a Muslim he'd be dead."

Matzoh Shortage all over the US

My posts on the Great Matzoh Drought are getting tons of traffic at Oy Bay. And people are also passing along their own info. Namely, that a bunch of other places are missing their matzoh, too. They're even begging for it on Craigslist.


This all makes me feel bad, particularly since I don't even like matzoh.

Refreshing news from Israel

Tired of hearing nothing out of Israel but Jews fighting (among other things) with each other? About Palestinians clashing in the streets? About Jews fighting with other people that claim they're Jews?

Then you're in luck:

Israeli police had to break up a fist fight that erupted between Greek and Armenian Orthodox clergymen at one of Christianity's holiest sites.

The scuffles broke out at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem on Orthodox Palm Sunday.

Brawls are not uncommon at the church, which is uneasily shared by various Christian denominations.

In this case, witnesses say an Armenian priest forcibly ejected a Greek priest from an area near the tomb of Jesus.

They say the attacker felt the Greek priest had spent too long at the tomb.

When police arrived to break up the fight, some were reportedly beaten back by worshippers using palm fronds.

Awesome. I love how they aren't even different denominations of Christians. I guess their Orthodox can't get along with each other, either.

Hat-tip: Keli Ata.

Stupidity comes full-circle

Q: What's the worst thing that can happen to a terrorist organization?

A: Having someone ignore you. Or even worse, stealing your credit. Or in this case, assigning it to someone else.

It's time for another imagined conversation:

Zawahiri: Hey, Mahmoud. Gotta talk to you about something.

Ahmadinejad: What's up, Ayman? How's the big BL?

Zawahiri: He's fine. We've got the cave set up pretty nice.

Ahmadinejad: Well tell him I say hi, and if he wants to drop by Tehran anytime, we'll be sure to stone him for being a Sunni infidel .

Zawahiri: Will do. So look, about this rumor you've been spreading for seven years that the Jews did 9/11...

Ahmadinejad: Isn't it awesome? I really hate Jews.

Zawahiri: Oh, definitely. And us too, don't get us wrong.

Ahmadinejad: I mean, they're just so schem-y.

Zawahiri: And weird looking.

Ahmadinejad: Those giant noses of their really piss me off.

Zawahiri: And their stupid beards. And glasses. And those silly hats. And did you ever notice how they're always pointing their fingers at you? Sooo annoying.

Ahmadinejad: Then we're agreed. The Jew libel shall continue. No amount of blogging will save their image.

Zawahiri: Well, here's the thing, though. We put a lot of effort into that thing, and to just give all the credit to the Jews is kind of, well, asshole-ish of you.

Ahmadinejad: I don't understand what the big deal is. You killed a bunch of Americans, we blamed the Jews for it, a bunch of wackos on the Internet took it and ran with it. Triple-word-score, brother!

Zawahiri: Yeah, well, we still feel you guys should set the record straight.

Ahmadinejad: Look, why are you being so Jewish about this? Just share the wealth, what's the problem.

Zawahiri: We're not being Jews, YOU'RE being Jews! Taking something that didn't even belong to you in the first place and handing it out to someone else. You're being a real Jew, you know that?

Ahmadinejad: No one calls me a Jew and gets away with it, you Sunni bastard. Why don't you go elect a Caliph or something?

Zawahiri: What are you going to do about it, you Shia dingus? Shoot a nuke you don't have at us? Or are you be too busy looking for your hidden Imam?

Ahmadinejad: No, even better. I'm going to write a letter to George Bush... and blame it all on Jerry Falwell.

Zawahiri: Nooooo!

Ahmadinejad: Have fun watching THAT on Al-Jazeera, "Rabbi."

*Click*

And... scene.

Fallibility of Politicians

Sultan Knish has a post up in which he accuses liberals of treating their politicians like infallible idols. Not at all like conservatives and say, this guy.

Particularly charming were his comments on Al Gore:

a political hack who went crazy after losing the election and decided that he's the environmental messiah

As opposed, of course, to our present Commander in Chief, a political ignoramus who went crazy after "winning" the election and decided he's the messiah, period (or maybe just Pope, it's hard to tell).

For the record: I know full well Gore and Obama are fallible. I also know I have no interest in electing McCain, particularly as he shifts ever rightward to convince evangelicals and war/immigration hawks to forget his "maverick" past. The new McCain will not fight against the conservative pet issues that I oppose, and will appoint judges that take the country in a direction I feel is misguided.

At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter how slimy or pseudo-Muslim you say Obama is. I'm not interested in shoring up the Republicans for another eight years. So I will vote for the other candidate (Clinton or Obama), fully aware that they are probably not even a fraction of what their spin doctors say they are (ditto for McCain). But simply because our pet issues coincide more. I can't speak for other Dems, but I get irked with the Wright stuff (and the closet Muslim stuff, and all the other bull-crap) because it's poisoning the well, it's dirty politics, and because, more than anything, they're all so obviously acts of false outrage and clutching at straws. Most Obama-bitching has more to do with politics as usual than any real principles of transparency or truth, or concern about "extremism".

The reality is conservatives don't want ANY Dem anywhere near the White House, they were panicked that nothing seemed to stick to Obama, and now that they can smear him as a would-be terrorist who spends his free time burning (instead of wearing) miniature American flags while French-kissing Farakhan, they're going to keep it up until November. The right can bleat away all it wants but it shouldn't expect us to keep paying attention while they scream the same old conspiracy theories for the next five months.

More from the peanut gallery at Political Mavens:

Are you really comfortable with Michelle Obama not being proud of America as an adult? She felt no pride as an American when she heard how Todd Beamer said “Let’s Roll” when trying to overcome the terrorists on the plane that went down in Shankesville, Pennsylvania?

I'm not sure I feel "pride" at that. More than anything I feel sorry for the people who were on the plane and their families. I suppose I'm "happy" that they were able to make the most of a bad situation. But pride? Not specifically.

No pride, when the Berlin Wall came down, freeing hundreds of millions of people, because of Ronald Reagan’s tough policies towards Socialism? Is “no pride in America” what you want in a First Lady?

Socialism and Communism aren't the same thing. Am I supposed to feel pride that you don't know what you're talking about? And no, I could give EIGHT THOUSAND CRAPS about the First Lady. She has no official function whatsoever. As long as she isn't getting driving drunk, making a sex tape on the internet, or helping Bin Laden tunnel under the White House, my standards for her (or him, hi Bill) are pretty low.

Can you overlook the “post-racial” Obama’s revealing “typical white people” slip? Imagine if John McCain had said “typical black person” in an interview: The race would’ve been over.

No it wouldn't, because the spin doctors would have immediately jumped in and accused Obama of hypocrisy for bringing up race, and then wrapped it up in an anti-PC veneer. And speaking of spin, what about the fact that people are still carping on about Obama's Jackass Reverend while ignoring McCain's shameful about face on Jerry Falwell and embrace of John Hagee? How's that for a double-standard? I can't figure out if that's a racial thing or a liberal/conservative thing, or just a giant honking blind spot, but it's been driving me batty for months.

Can you overlook the candidate’s personal trashing of his living grandmother, as a way to deflect attention from his association with Reverend Wright? If he would throw overboard the woman who sacrificed all to raise him and give him a good life, why should we think he’d be loyal to America? He can’t even bring himself to wear a small pin with an American flag on it!

"Trashing" your relatives: bad. American flag pins: utterly irrelevant.

Read my lips: I DON'T CARE about American flag pins. They have NOTHING to do with ANYTHING. These are all distractions. The right is so desperate to keep a liberal out of the White House they will bring up anything they can think of. How have we gotten to the point of quibbling over LAPEL PINS?

Can you overlook the clearly elitist sentiments that small town America is a bunch of gun and G-d-loving nuts? Oops, scratch that: most on the left already do think that.

Yes, I do think there's some truth to it, just like I thought there was truth to Kerry's comment last year. I think Obama was stupid for saying it in public, certainly in such an un-nuanced way (I think you could rephrase it in a way that didn't sound condescending). And I also recognize that there's an elitism present in the sentiment. But I still think there's a grain of truth there. And incidentally, small-town, or "heartland" America is just as elitist about cities, and particularly about California and San Francisco, so my heart is hardly bleeding over it.

So yes, I can overlook a whole bunch of things. And NOT because I love Obama so much. Months ago, yes, I thought he was "super-inspiring," and he might still have a chance to reassert that image. But at this point, it simply is a matter of political expediency. If the Republicans can do it, so I can I. Am I irked by Obama's political mistakes? Certainly. Am I mad that he is less squeaky-clean than originally represented. Yes. Is all this enough to make me support John McCain? Hell no. Do I think Obama is actually a closet-anything? Absolutely not. Do I think he will bend over if America is attacked again? No. At this point, any of the candidates (including McCain, because of his past image) will have to work pretty hard to shore up credibility vis-a-vis terrorism. So no, I'm not worried.

And, incidentally, I don't think we're getting out of Iraq anytime soon, and I don't think we'll fix the Palestinian problem anytime soon. But there's a difference between accepting these as livable status-quo scenarios and seeing them as problems to be addressed and worked through. Eight years of Bush only occasionally poking the Israelis and Palestinians doesn't seem to have accomplished much. Continuing in Iraq with little concept of an end-goal or how to achieve- and leave- a stable country behind is just stupid. Accepting from day one that we will be there for 100 years is madness. These are just a few positions that I have which dovetail closer with the Democrats than the Republicans. And I haven't even started talking about wedge issues like healthcare, economy, "social values", and the like. Obama is not Bin Laden, Stalin, Hitler, or any of the other strawmen you keep tossing up. Neither, for that matter, is Hillary. Incidentally, I don't think McCain is such a terrible person, either. But a McCain Presidency will assist people like this wacko in asserting their agenda:

What would our demands be?

1. We demand an end to abortion – now.
   
   
2. We demand Planned Parenthood be defunded and pay back all tax money received where they have violated state statutory rape reporting laws.
   
   
3. We demand marriage between a man and a woman remain the only recognized, protected and subsidized union. All counterfeit unions will not to be legally recognized.
   
   
4. Freedom of religion will be practiced unhindered in every facet of America including public schools, the workplace, media, Internet and the public square.
   
   
5. Freedom of speech will not be relegated to "zones" but rather practiced in every corner of society including schools, the workplace, media, and the public square.
   
   
6. Judges who usurp their authority will be automatically removed from office.
   
   
7. Executive officers and legislatures shall not obey illegal court decisions but rather remove the judges who made them.
   
   
8. We demand that any school who puts a minor in harm's way in violation of all 50 state laws by promoting dangerous behavior, including homosexuality and abortion, will automatically lose its public funding.
   
   
9. Creationism will be taught in public schools as an alternative theory.
   
   
10. The government school monopoly will be broken with tax vouchers for parents to choose their child's education including homeschooling.

1. 
   

Needless to say, I'm not buying. Specifically regarding points 1-3, 8-9, and, given past history, I'm strongly suspicious of 4-7. 10 I don't know enough about to have an opinion.

On international issues, I like to think that I'm slightly more fair-minded than your stereotypical "lefty." I don't necessarily agree with a lot of conservative positions, but I at least try to understand them. On domestic issues, I'm pretty far-left. With these two political orientations, the Dems would have to be really, really, bad for me to support any Republican. Because the reality is that I wouldn't be electing McCain, I would be electing his party, who, particularly in the past several decades, has come to represent quite a lot of things I strongly oppose. Had McCain stuck to his "moderate" path from 2000, things might be different. But he's a different guy now, and there's no reason to think he would defect back to moderate-ness if elected on the backs of right-wingers. So he's made my choice for me.

Back to Sultan's original point: Obama doesn't have to be infallible. Not by a long shot. He isn't a Republican and he isn't worshiping at THEIR altar of Guns, God, Gays, and 100 years in Iraq. That will be enough for me.

One Last Passover Post

First, a link to a most excellent Ahad Ha'am quote, courtesy of Dov Bear. This is particularly amusing given the fact that Ha'am was an apikoros of the old school, a rebellious son from a religious family. Also, I like the Wikipedia article on him:

Ahad Ha'am traveled frequently to Palestine and published reports about the progress of Jewish settlement there. They were generally glum.

An early malcontent blogger!

Also, here is my version of the Exodus story, snipped from the Haggadah I wrote for my upcoming seder. Enjoy!

The Story of the Exodus

Once there was a famine in the land of Canaan. The Hebrews’ cattle had no grass to eat.

Cow #1: I’m starving. Moo.

Cow #2: I’m so hungry I could eat a horse.

Cow #1: I should eat you for that.

The Hebrews weren’t doing too well, either.

Asher: Hey, Dad, I’m hungry!

Naftali: Daaaad! We’re out of dates…and oil…and grain… and everything else!

Jacob: Kids, stop whining! Your brother Joseph is a big shot in Egypt. And, I hear they have food. Let’s go visit him for a while.

Jacob’s Kids: Yay!

Jacob: Now I hope you all used the bathroom, because we aren’t stopping until we get there.

In Egypt:

Joseph: Dad?! What a surprise! Of course I’ll be glad to help out the family…Who wants dinner?

Generations passed and the Hebrews remained in Egypt. A new king came to power who mistrusted the strangers in his country.

Pharaoh: These Hebrews are a threat to our way of life. Let’s enslave them and use them to build things.

Hebrew: Lame!

Egyptian laborer: Hey, they’re taking our jobs!

Despite the harsh conditions of slavery, the Hebrews continued to grow in numbers. Fearing a slave rebellion, the Pharaoh ordered that the royal midwives to kill any male Hebrew infants at birth.

Pharaoh: Look here midwives, you get to be the front line for population control. I’m counting on you to keep the numbers down.

Shifrah and Puah: We hear and obey, oh great Pharaoh.

But they did not.

Pharaoh: Hey, why are there so many baby boys? I told you to take care of that.

Shifrah: By the time we get there…

Puah: They’ve squirted the little guys out.

Shifrah: And then it’s back to work at the pyramids. They’re really a remarkable people, sir.

The Pharaoh was annoyed.

Pharaoh: All Hebrew boys get dumped in the river from now on, got it?

One couple, named Amram and Yocheved, followed the decree to the letter.

Yocheved: I was skeptical, but this basket really is watertight.

Amram: God willing, it will survive the journey down the river.

Yocheved: Don’t rock the boat, son.

Amram: We’ll see.

The baby’s sister Miriam kept an eye on the basket as it drifted downstream.

Pharaoh’s daughter: Hey! What’s in that thing? It could be valuable. A baby! Aww, you’re so cute and pathetic.

Miriam: Hey Princess!

Pharaoh’s daughter: Yes?

Miriam: You won’t be able to nurse that kid; it’ll ruin your figure. Besides, he’s a Hebrew. They need special food, like goldfish. I’ll go find you a Hebrew nurse.

Pharaoh's daughter: Ok!

Miriam: These Egyptians aren’t too bright.

Yocheved: Yeah, we should remember this.

The Pharaoh's daughter raised the baby as her own son, naming him Moshe, or Moses, because she “drew him from water.”

Pharaoh’s daughter: My second choice was Smelly Butt.

Moses grew up as a member of the royal family. One day Moses saw an overseer abusing a slave.

Overseer: Lazy swine. Taste my whip.

Slave: Ow.

Moses: Not cool.

Moses killed the Egyptian and buried him in the sand.

Moses: Enjoy your sand-wich! Ha-Ha-Ha!

Slave: Ow.

The next day, Moses saw two Hebrews fighting. One of them hit the other.

Moses: Hey, quit it.

Slave: Who are you to judge us? Will you kill me like you did the Egyptian?

Moses: Crap.

With the slaves talking about Moses’ homicidal freak-out, word eventually got back to Pharaoh.

Pharaoh: Die, killer.

Moses: I think a strategic retreat is in order.

Moses ran away to the land of Midian.

Moses: I’m tired and thirsty and hungry and bored. Hey, a well. Hooray! One of my many problems is solved!

While Moses was enjoying the well’s cool water, some girls approached.

Girls: Get away from our well, weirdo.

Moses: Sorry.

Suddenly some shepherds tried to chase them away.

Shepherd: No girls allowed. This water is reserved for important creatures, like goats.

Moses: Back off!

Girls: Our hero!

Moses: You’re well-come.

Girls: Ow.

The girls told their father Jethro all about the mysterious stranger.

Jethro: And he didn’t even ask for anything in return?

Girls: No, he was a perfect gentleman.

Jethro: Sounds suspicious.

Jethro offered Moses his daughter Tzipporah.

Moses (happy): Thanks, Dad!

Tzipporah (less happy): …Thanks… Dad.

While tending his flock, Moses saw a cool pyrotechnic show in the form of a bush.

Moses: Cool, it doesn’t burn up.

Bush: But that’s not all! If you act right now you’ll get the chance to REDEEM YOUR PEOPLE!

Moses: Doesn’t burn up and talks, eh? This is one heck of a bush.

Bush: Actually, I’m God manifested in a bush.

Moses: Whatever you say, O mighty Bush.

Bush: Look, Moe, you really need to help your people.

Moses: But I have things really good here. I have a kid now, and Tzipporah’s got the tent set up just the way I like it.

Bush: I have heard my people’s cries, and have come to deliver them from the Egyptians. And you’re going to help. You need to go talk to the Pharaoh.

Moses: Why me? The Hebrews won’t follow me.

Bush: Tell them God sent you. The God of their fathers, and that He said He’s going to get them out of this. And if the Pharaoh does not release you, I will deal with him, and then he will let you go.

Moses: Why don’t you just do that and leave me out of it?

Bush: What’s that in your hand?

Moses: My walking-stick.

Bush: Really? Put it on the ground.

The stick turned into a serpent.

Moses: Holy crap! A talking wizard-demon bush!

Bush: Pick it up, stupid.

Moses picked it up, and the stick changed back.

Bush: Tell them of this sign, and they will believe.

Moses: First, don’t do that again. Second, I’m a really bad public speaker. I’m really not the one you want to lead a popular liberation movement.

Bush: You’re starting to annoy me. Your brother Aaron was head of the local Hebrew Slave Debating Society. Use him.

Moses: Brother? Since when?

Aaron: Since five seconds ago. Hi there.

Bush: Put your words in his mouth and he’ll do the rest.

Moses: That doesn’t seem very honest.

Bush: Hey, this is politics, everybody does it.

Moses: What about the people that wanted to kill me?

Bush: Don’t worry, they’re all dead. There’s a new Pharaoh in charge now.

Moses: Right, because we all remember how good things got the last time that happened.

Moses returned to Egypt, where he and Aaron spoke to the elders of the people.

Aaron: Um… Moses says… sorry, God says… that we’re getting out of here. Spread the word, guys.

Moses: And you’re the good speaker?

Aaron: It’s a charisma thing.

The brothers went to the new Pharaoh to explain why he should let the Hebrews go.

Aaron: And if you look at chart F, you can see that if you’d divert your workforce from building huge triangles back to farming, your economy actually wouldn’t suffer that much.

Moses: So what do you think?

Pharaoh: Um… how about… no?

Moses: But, look, we’ve got a creepy staff-snake thing! Show him, Aaron!

Pharaoh: Not impressed. My court magicians can do that.

Aaron: But my staff-snake just ate theirs.

Pharaoh: That just makes your snake a bully.

Moses: You’ll be sorry.

There followed Ten Plagues:

The river turned into blood.

Pharaoh: Red is my favorite color.

The land was overrun by frogs.

Pharaoh: I find the ribbit sound soothing.

Everyone got lice.

Pharaoh: I’m already bald.

A swarm of flies and wild beasts attacked the Egyptians.

Pharaoh: No two ways about it, this one sucks. But still, no.

A disease exterminated the Egyptians’ livestock.

Pharaoh: Yum… grain.

Boils appeared on everyone’s skin.

Pharaoh: Hold my appointments for a while.

Fiery hail flew down from the sky.

Pharaoh: Eep. I hope that’s a comet.

Locusts ate the Egyptians’ crops.

Pharaoh: I sense my options are becoming limited.

Darkness covered the land.

Pharaoh: At least no one can see how miserable we are.

Several times the Pharaoh agreed to let the Hebrews go so Moses would stop the plagues, but then he always broke his word.

Moses: What kind of maniac thinks it’s a good idea to jerk around people that can whip up fiery hail?

The last plague was the death of the firstborn, which would affect both men and beast. The Hebrews spread lamb’s blood over their homes so the Angel of Death would pass by their homes and leave their kids alone.

Moses: He’s got to give in now.

God: Oh, he’d like to, but I’m hardening his heart.

Moses: What? Why? I thought the point was for us to get out of here.

God: I like to show off. This way everyone will get to see all the cool ideas I planned.

Moses: You’re kind of nuts.

The Pharaoh, yet again, said no.

Pharaoh: Joke’s on you, stupid! All of our livestock are already dead.

Moses: I hope your son thinks it’s funny.

The Pharaoh finally gave in, and let the Hebrews go.

Pharaoh: Your God sucks, and so do you. I never want to see any of you people again. Get out of my sight.

Moses: Consider us gone.

The Hebrews packed in a hurry. They were so worried the Pharaoh would change his mind again that they didn’t leave time for their bread to rise. That is why we eat matzah on Passover.

All future Jews: Thanks a lot.

The Hebrews were not the only ones to leave Egypt. A “mixed multitude” went with them.

Moses: Plenty of room on the freedom train!

Mixed multitude: This cracker is awful. What is this, a brick?

Miriam: No, you’re thinking of haroset, but more on that later.

Even the Pharaoh’s daughter came with them, changing her title (bat-Pharaoh), for the name Batya (daughter of God).

Yocheved: This could get awkward.

Sure enough, the Pharaoh changed his mind and chased after the Hebrews with his army of six hundred chariots, catching up with them at the Sea of Reeds.

Hebrew #1: Thanks a lot, Moses.

Hebrew #2: Why take us out of Egypt just to get us killed?

Hebrew #3: First Matzah, now this!

Moses: Don’t worry. God will fight for us. This is the last you will see of any of these Egyptians. Hey, God! Little help?

God: No problem, I’ve got this.

Moses: You’ll part the sea?

God: Even better. I’ll part the sea, then harden Pharaoh’s heart again so they chase after you and all die.

Moses: What? No, I mean, we don’t need you to do that. Just help us escape.

God: I told you, I’ll take care of this. The Egyptians will know that I am God.

God told Moses to lift his staff. He did, and the sea parted.

Moses: If you turn into a snake right now, I’m quitting.

The Hebrews raced across the sea-bed and made it to the other side. Then the Egyptians came after them.

Pharaoh: Let’s go after them for some reason! Charrge!

Then God told Moses to lift his staff again. He did, and the waters returned. The Egyptians were gone.

Moses: …

The Hebrews celebrated their freedom and danced and sang.

Miriam: God is my strength and song, and He is become my salvation…God is a man of war, God is His name. Pharaoh's chariots and his host has He cast into the sea, and his chosen captains are sunk in the Red Sea… You did blow with Your wind, the sea covered them; they sank as lead in the mighty waters. Who is like You, O God, among the mighty? Who is like You, glorious in holiness, fearful in praises, doing wonders? ...You in Your love have led the people that You have redeemed; You have guided them in Your strength to Your holy place… God shall reign for ever and ever. (Exodus 15:11-18)

While the Hebrews danced, the angels in Heaven wished to join them. But God denied their request.

God: These, too, are my creatures drowning in the sea! And you would celebrate this? What’s wrong with you?

* * *

The Rabbis taught that it is wrong to celebrate the death of anyone, even your enemy. “Rejoice not when your enemy falls, and let not your heart be glad when he stumbles.” (Proverbs 24:17) That is why we are commanded to remove one drop of wine for each plague. We cannot celebrate “with a full cup” when our freedom came through the suffering of others. We might also consider that there is a fast the day before Passover known as the Fast of the Firstborn. There is a tradition that says the firstborn Hebrews fasted before the Exodus because they were still not convinced they were holy enough to merit saving. Perhaps the fast also serves to remind us of the various things we still, and may always, need to atone for.

I hope everyone has a wonderful Pesach.