Rabbi Jill Jacobs, writing on the group's popular jspot blog site, said this:
"As it happens, Jewish groups have been anything but silent on the immigration issue. As we've discussed here before, more than twenty Jewish groups (including Jewish Funds for Justice, HIAS, ADL, Progressive Jewish Alliance, and others) created a Jewish Task Force for Comprehensive Immigration Reform about a year and a half ago, and have used this body to issue letters and action alerts, put out educational material, and even create a poster."
She's right -- but the Jewish Week story did not argue otherwise.
The story made it clear Jewish groups were at the forefront of the push for immigration reform. But that wasn't the focus of the article; instead, it was on the reaction of Jewish groups -- or lack of reaction -- to the overt immigrant bashing by 2008 political candidates.
Only the Anti-Defamation League has challenged candidates to tamp down the anti-immigrant rhetoric, and the ADL didn't name names. Other groups have been conspicuous by their silence.
But Rabbi Jacobs was also right in that the story did not note that her group has sometimes criticized anti-immigration rhetoric in broad-brush terms, although it has not confronted candidates who have made the issue a staple of the 2008 campaigns.
The article never claimed Jewish groups weren't involved in the fight for comprehensive immigration reform, but only that they have been timid about criticizing the fanning of public rage about illegal immigration as a partisan tool in this year's campaigns.
Perhaps that distinction should have been made more explicit. And it would have been useful and interesting to explore the connection between the failure of this year's push for immigration reform and the anti-immigrant rhetoric that is getting more heated by the day, although that would have required a much longer story.
But did the Jewish Week story suggest Jewish groups weren't leaders in the long, frustrating fight for comprehensive immigration reform? We don't think so.
Political Insider: Safe Bets for the New Year / James Besser in Washington
You thought 2007 was a wild ride? Wait until 2008, which dawns in the middle of a wide-open presidential race and even more than the usual assortment of world crises.
There's nothing as risky as New Years predictions, but here are a handful of safe bets for the next twelve months.
- Presidential pundits and prognosticators will be proven wrong more than in most recent elections. Remember the "who's Huckabee" theme? The "Hillary has the nomination sewn up" idea? Remember the predictions Al Gore and Newt Gingrich would jump in?
The 2008 presidential contest is the most volatile and unpredictable in many years. The fight between three top Democratic contenders is narrowing as the primaries draw near; Republican voters seem deeply divided, with no clear favorite emerging.
Voters are in a sour, distrustful mood, and dramatic world events could explode in the middle of the campaigns. Don't bet the rent money on any outcome.
- Ron Paul will have a bigger impact than most pundits believe.
Sure, he won't win any primaries, but his blend of anti-war activism, fierce isolationism and anti-government libertarianism is proving surprisingly attractive to a new cohort of young voters. Paul has tapped the "Netroots like none of his GOP rivals; he has drawn surprising support from anti-war factions on the far left as well as far right.
A stronger-than-expected showing in some primaries, coupled to a GOP loss in November, could ignite a huge battle for control of the Republican Party, with Paul forces playing a growing role by calling on the party to return to its ideological roots.
- Jewish voters will vote overwhelmingly Democratic no matter who the nominees are.
But the vote could be significantly less overwhelming - say 70 percent Democratic instead of 80 - if former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani or Sen. John McCain is the nominee, and under some scenarios that could make a significant difference in November.
But either of those Republican candidates could cut into their Jewish totals if they continue veering to the right on domestic issues.
The Republicans will continue their "all Israel, all the time" strategy among Jewish voters; Democratic candidates will continue trying to quickly dispose of the Israel issue by touting their support and then moving on to domestic issues, where they have a big advantage.
- Despite protests from groups such as the Anti-Defamation League, religion will continue to be a major factor in this year's elections, for the simple reason that candidates in both parties believe appeals to faith work. Some pundits will predict a backlash from voters tired of the mixing of religion and politics - but the candidates won't agree.
--Christian Zionist influence will continue to grow and continue to generate controversy in both the Jewish and Christian spheres.
Groups like Christians United for Israel (CUFI) are raising boatloads of money; the idea that support for Israel is a Biblical requirement seems to be spreading as a core tenet of the evangelical movement.
If Israel and the Palestinians move toward the goal of Palestinian statehood by the end of the year, CUFI will become even more active as it unites with right-of-center Jewish groups to oppose an agreement.
At the same time, the top Christian Zionist leader, Pastor John Hagee, is increasingly embroiled in theological and social controversy. Many evangelicals believe his new book, "In Defense of Israel," abandons traditional evangelical teaching on the Christian Messiah. And Hagee is under mounting attack for what some say are his anti-Catholic views.
Meanwhile, some Jewish groups will continue to express quiet concern that the Christian Zionists are gaining a growing stake in the whole Zionist enterprise by virtue of their pro-Israel philanthropy.
- The debate over the power of the pro-Israel lobby will continue to churn in far-right and far-left circles and intellectual journals - and have almost no impact on the electoral process.
- Israel and the Palestinians won't succeed in creating a Palestinian state by the end of 2008. Both sides have weak, politically beset leaders; armies of terrorists are eager to derail the process with bombs and guns; the Bush administration seems deeply divided on how hard to push the process.
The old bromide is that peace won't come until all parties want it bad enough to take big chances; there are few indications that critical mass is near.
- International efforts to block Iran's nuclear weapons quest will continue to erode.
U.S. intelligence officials have concluded Iran gave up its nuclear program several years ago; an administration that claims it's still a threat lacks international credibility. Neither the American electorate nor U.S. allies want yet another war.
Israel officials will leak more chatter about doing the military job themselves - but ultimately won't because of the huge risks and logistical difficulties. In the end, Israel will start talking more about deterrence once Iran does go nuclear - not because it wants to but because it has to.
- Iraq: violence will go up and down, political squabbling will continue in Washington without any real resolution - and the administration will look for some modest sign of progress so it can announce a troop drawdown before the November elections.
Route 17:Heschel And The League Of Extraordinary Gentlemen / Jonathan Mark in New York
For all the flurry of recent articles, in The Jewish Week, The New York Times, and elsewhere, celebrating what would have been the centennial of Abraham Joshua Heschel, and wondering where "the next Heschel" is, the problem is that to be the "next Heschel" one would have to have his chasidic training and sensibility. That's the kind of training that you can't get today in any of the mainstream seminaries. You're more likely to find it in Chabad seminaries but if you graduated there you might have to take a lifetime pulpit in Estonia.
At one December conference last month in Manhattan, various speakers, including representatives of Hebrew Union College and the Jewish Theological Seminary, all admitted that Heschel was never completely at home in those schools. He wasn't at home, they admitted, because the crux of their rabbinic training and approach is a rational, skeptical approach to text, whereas Heschel, with his old school European chasidic training, was more inclined to the poetic and the mystical.
It should be no surprise, then, that two of Heschel's friends at the University of Berlin, in the late 1920s, were not "rational" liberal or progressive Jews but Menachem Mendel Schneerson, future rebbe of Chabad-Lubavitch, and Joseph B. Soloveitchik, future centerpiece of the Yeshiva University rabbinic program, who studied with a Chabad teacher as a child. Both Schneerson and Soloveitchik were radical thinkers and, interestingly enough, neither Schneerson nor Soloveitchik was replaced within their movements anymore than Heschel was within his.
You can be sure that when these heavyweights were sitting at a Shabbos table, Heschel didn't crack a joke that they think is so funny at the Jewish Theological Seminary: "Hey, what's the closest religion to Judaism? Lubavitch, get it? Uh, Menachem, pass me some challah." Heschel's wit was better than that. Pity the fool at that Shabbos table. This was a league of extraordinary gentlemen.
The pivotal event in Heschel's life, at least for those infatuated with his activism, is, of course, his marching alongside Martin Luther King during the Civil Rights movement. This was the photo-op that just about every liberal rabbi would die for. But one of the things that attracted photojournalists to Heschel was his great beard, his prophetic demeanor. There were plenty of other Jews who marched with King but they didn't have beards, at least not a beard like his.
If you were a photographer covering Selma-to-Montgomery what white guy - and there were plenty of Jewish white guys who marched -- would you be taking a picture of? You don't think that King's people knew what they were doing when they put Heschel in the front row of the marchers? If Heschel didn't have that beautiful beard he'd be one more clean-shaven Upper West Side Jew among the dozens and dozens of clean-shaven Upper West Side Jews who went down south in those holy summers.
Much as we dislike judging by appearances, there's a reason why newspapers, when looking for a Rosh Hashanah photo, invariably choose a picture of Jews with beards by the river at Tashlich.
Those Jews look Jewish. Clean-shaven Jews with magnificent souls go to Tashlich just the same, but they don't make for the same photograph. Years ago, Jimmy Breslin did a memorable column on Tashlich and where did he go to do it? The Williamsburg Bridge. The people there looked Jewish and they talked Jewish. Jews from Williamsburg can go five sentences explaining any Jewish holiday without bringing up Darfur, illegal immigration or Global Warming.
These are topics worthy of discussion but there has to be more to religious Judaism than editorials in The Nation. Heschel understood that.
Heschel didn't just "pray with his feet." He prayed three times a day. Soloveitchik, Schneerson and Heschel envisioned Jewish leadership as something more than just waving a placard for the cause de jour.
Heschel had a serious Jewish background. These days, we have rabbinical candidates whose greatest pre-seminary exposure to Jewish life was a summer in Camp Ramah and a Debbie Friedman concert, delightful as that may be. You can be sure, back at the University of Berlin, that Heschel, Soloveitchik and Schneerson did more than play foosball, listen to the Klezmatics and imagine themselves as Bolsheviks. (Let's remember, back in the 1920s, tens of thousands of liberal Jews, the kind that now pine for a new Heschel, were convinced that there was no surer path to "social justice" than supporting Stalin).
Heschel didn't define social justice as everyone's cause but his own. Heschel, friend of the future Lubavitcher rebbe, would have marched in Crown Heights in 1991 when it was burning and crowds were yelling "Kill the Jews" just blocks from Schneerson's apartment - a time when most liberal Jews, who now yearn for Heschel, took the week off.
If suddenly thousands of rockets further ravaged Darfur, you can bet the black-Jewish alliance that yearns for Heschel would take to the streets. And while it's one thing not to care if someone kills a mean ol' West Bank settler, has anyone noticed that the self-described heirs to Heschel, with all their vaunted "alliances" and "dialogues," have not been able to get those alliances to show up for the non-settler, non-European, working class Jews of Sderot?
A Rabbi's World:Christmas in Israel… Who Knew? /Rabbi Gerald C. Skolnik
Having spent extensive and sustained amounts of time in Israel during my life, it doesn't take me long to get back into her unique and idiosyncratic rhythms.
For all of the transplanted Americans in Israel and particularly in Jerusalem, where I have been these past few days, there is little here that is like New York. Some Americans shy away from buses for security reasons. I, personally, was more than happy to take buses around the city, but trying to get on one in the center of town, even trying to get near one, requires a measure of intestinal fortitude that I just don't have. Some of those people should play forward for the Knicks… it could only help.
What has been particularly fascinating to me has been encountering anew the phenomenon of Christmas in Israel. I've been in Israel many times over the December break, and each and every time- this one very much included- I've been completely amazed at the absence of Christmas in the public consciousness.
There are certainly Christians here; the city is quite crowded, hotel rooms are at a premium, and there are many, many Jewish tourists as well. I read that Bethlehem was the most crowded this year that it's been for a decade.
But the public rhythm of Israeli life is not geared to the secular calendar. Electronic and print media are not saturated with ads about gifts; the music on the radio is the same as it always is; restaurants are open… life goes on. If you've ever been on the road on Christmas Eve or Christmas Day in America, you know what's it's like trying to find anything at all open. Not here. Today was Tuesday, 25 December, and it looked and smelled a lot like Monday, 24 December.
So it makes you think about what it means to feel at home even when you're in a country that is not, strictly speaking, your own.
You can't help but notice the absence of the relentless commercialism of the Christmas machine, and of the constant (at least lately) undertones concerning the relationship between being a "Christian leader" and one's fitness to be President of the United States. I feel at home in America, too- a country that, I often sense, is not really "my own," either in any absolutely secure sense.
Israel is no Eden, to be sure, and problems abound here that, as Tevye says, would cross a rabbi's eyes. Truth to tell, rabbis cause a lot of them. But I do feel at home here- especially at this time of year
Political Insider: Provocative Weekend Reading / James Besser in Washington
Most Jewish groups have remained silent about the recent House resolution - passed by an overwhelming margin - praising and defending Christmas and making it clear that Christianity is, if not the official religion of the nation at least the dominant one.
Not Sally Quinn, the longtime Washington Post writer. In Sunday's Post Quinn offers an angry critique of the resolution and what it signals about our representatives in Washington.
"This resolution was as anti-American as anything Congress has ever passed," Quinn writes. "It disenfranchised and marginalized millions and millions of men and women, reducing them to second-class citizens."
Quinn also describes the agonies of an unnamed Jewish House member who voted for the resolution - out of fear, not conviction. Most Jewish House members voted yes; only Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY) rejected it.
Just as provocative is Eric Alterman's piece in the current issue of The Nation.
Alterman looks at the recent American Jewish Committee survey of Jewish public opinion and asks this question: why do still-liberal Jews tolerate as communal spokespeople mostly conservative leaders whose values and views are radically different from the Jewish majority?
Alterman calls it an "unholy alliance between conservative-dominated professional Jewish organizations and neoconservative Jewish pundits, aided by pliant and frequently clueless mainstream media that empower these right-wingers to speak for a people with values diametrically opposed to theirs."
He has an answer: apathy.
Most Jews don't belong to Jewish organizations, don't pay attention to what they say and don't care much about what they do, he suggested, giving conservative big givers a chance to dominate the communal agenda.
So far, only one Jewish group has responded to The Nation blast: the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), which distributed the column without comment - apparently to tout its inclusion as one of the "most influential Jewish organizations."
Political Insider: Presidents Conference Weighs In on Jerusalem / James Besser in Washington
Leaders of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations voted overwhelmingly on Thursday to reaffirm Jerusalem's status as the "eternal, sovereign capital of Israel" - despite the argument by several members that the resolution would just undercut renewed Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.
Seymour Reich, president of the Israel Policy Forum who attended in his capacity as a former chair of the conference, said that the resolution merely reaffirms longstanding Conference policy - but that "to restate it at this point sends a bad message to Prime Minister Olmert and undermines the negotiations with the Palestinians."
Reich said the vote also "undermines the credibility of the Conference because it doesn't reflect the views of the American Jewish community, which -- while attached to Jerusalem -- is prepared to say everything is on the table."
But supporters pointed to a recent American Jewish Committee poll showing a growing majority of American Jews - 58 percent - now oppose compromise on Jerusalem.
The vote hints of a growing rift between an Israeli government committed to helping create a Palestinian state by the end of next year and an American community that includes an increasingly active coalition opposing any compromise on Jerusalem.
A supporter of the resolution said "the conference was just confirming what a majority of American Jews believe - that any compromise on Jerusalem would be a major disaster."
The Conference put off until next month a ZOA-sponsored resolution demanding that Fatah rescind anti-Israel sections of its constitution.
Applied early decision to Cornell University, College of Arts and Sciences. The decisions were to be released December 19th at 5:00 pm. I quote the website: “Admission letters for Early Decision applicants will be mailed today, Wednesday, December 19, 2007. Students will also be able to access their decisions online starting at 5:00 PM EST”. It is now 5:44 pm (yes, eastern standard time) and I still HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET ON THE WEBSITE!!!!! In the age of laptops, Blackberries, and iPhones, I guess I just took it for granted that I would be able to access my decision when it came out. But alas, I am sitting in my school, waiting, checking every minute to see if the website is accessible.
Still nothing.
Although I am the only student from my school to apply to the College of Arts and Sciences, six other classmates of mine applied early decision to other colleges at Cornell. This has made today a very important day in my school, after all more than a tenth of the class (we are 67 strong) has made the decision to apply early to the school on a hill in Ithaca.
This past week was, as they say in college basketball, “Judgment Week.” Yale, Penn, Columbia, Brown, WashU in St. Louis, and other elite colleges all made their decisions for early applicants in the past eight days. Many of my friends have received great news, while others have been less fortunate. My friends are smart. And my smart friends got deferred, and even rejected. This is NOT a biased opinion. They’re so smart! Maybe I’m biased. Nevertheless, what I have learned from this journey is that the college process is painfully fickle.
I’m still waiting. It’s 5:59 pm. One hour of misery.
Sometime late last night, I arrived in Israel for a two-week visit. My son and daughter-in-law are studying in Jerusalem for the year, and my aging mother, sister and her family live in Rehovot. The somewhat slower pace of December afforded me the chance to pay them a visit.
In general, I try to get to Israel as often as I can. I'm usually able, one way or the other, to be here twice a year. I have found through the decades that, as a rabbi whose responsibility it is to interpret Israel and her ongoing story to my congregants, it is absolutely essential for me to "touch base" in Israel on a regular basis. I need to breathe its air, speak to its citizens, walk its streets, and remind myself in real time of why it is that Israel matters so much to me.
When I find myself agreeing with an editorial in The New York Times, I know I've been away from Israel for too long.
This trip, however, is purely personal, and I have been more than a little amused by some people's inability to comprehend that. There are certainly enough "business" issues that can and do bring me to Israel, and even when nothing is particularly pressing, there is still, as I just mentioned, always a professional rationale for visiting here. But when people ask me "what brings you to Israel" and I answer that I'm here to visit my family, they seem oddly reluctant to believe me.
Most people who have children in Israel as well as parents and siblings would want to visit them, I would think. But somehow, it seems a bit of a leap to grasp that a rabbi like me is, at the end of the day, a father, a son and a sibling. I love nothing more that shedding the trappings of my work identity to immerse myself in those other roles. I've heard that some of my colleagues miss the attributions of honor and respect that come from publicly wearing the title, but I readily admit that I don't. I think I'm at my happiest- no, I know I'm at my happiest- when I'm just me, with my family around me. I wish I could get them all in the same place at the same time- that's gotten to be an almost impossible task- but I'll take what I can get!
So I guess you could say that I'm here on the business of family… and happily so!
Jewish leaders are mostly steering clear of the controversy over former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee's new campaign ad in Iowa. The ad is a kind of video Christmas card in which the former pastor commiserates with TV viewers sick of political ads and instead just talks about Christmas and its importance as the "celebration of the birth of Christ."
Huckabee appears in front of a bookcase that gives the appearance of a cross, which has led some church-state groups to cry foul over what they say is a crudely sectarian appeal aimed at evangelical voters in several key caucus and primary states.
One Jewish leader isn't keeping quiet; Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said that the campaign ad is "just one more step in the wrong direction - crossing the church state line with a thud."
Is the bookcase actually a cross?
"It is a cross, whether it's a bookcase or not," he said. "My bookcase doesn't shine light like that. In essence this is a Christmas message from a presidential candidate, meant to tell Christian voters that he believes in Christ and in Christmas. It's about as far as you can go in crossing the line."
Now Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), the Republican/libertarian/longshot GOP contender, is wading in; Paul told Fox News that the ad "reminds me of what Sinclair Lewis once said. He says, 'when fascism comes to this country, it will be wrapped in the flag carrying a cross. Now, I don't know whether that's a fair assessment or not, but you wonder about using a cross like he is the only Christian or implying that subtly."
A prominent Catholic group also protested the overtly religious appeal in a campaign ad.
The Huckabee Christmas controversy comes a few days after the White House unveiled an official Christmas card with a Jewish Bible passage - which prompted criticism from media superstar Barbara Walters, who worried that atheists were being excluded.
But some Christian leaders were also upset, saying that the card once again failed to mention the word "Christmas," and that the only visible religious symbol was a Christmas tree in the background.
A Palestinian To Root For / Gary Rosenblatt in New York
The Palestinian Authority received $7.4 billion in pledges this week from 87 countries and international organizations meeting in Paris. Is that good news or bad news for Israel?
The Israeli government is pleased, and anyone hoping for an ultimate two-state solution with Israel existing next to a viable Palestinian state has to be rooting for the success of one Palestinian leader in particular, Prime Minister Salam Fayyad.
An economist with a Ph D. from the University of Texas who worked for eight years for the World Bank in Washington, D.C., Fayyad presented a recovery plan at the Paris meeting this week for a Palestinian state based on economic recovery and security reform.
Pro-Israel Mideast experts say they could not hope for a better Palestinian leader, one who cares more about building up a Palestinian state than destroying the Jewish one.
"He's been heroic," says David Makovsky of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, who noted that Fayyad's anti-corruption efforts include closing more than 100 Hamas charities and dissolving groups that gave money to the families of suicide bombers.
Indeed, some Israeli officials worry that Fayyad could be eliminated by Palestinian militants angered over his actions.
Where does Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas fit into this equation? Experts say he may have positive intentions but he has not shown a hands-on willingness to confront Fatah factions opposed to reform the way that Fayyad has.
Makovsky notes that "the countries that could contribute the most" to the Palestinians - the Gulf States - "have done the least." That includes Saudi Arabia, which has not fulfilled major pledges in recent years. It promised this week to give $500 million to the Palestinians over the next three years. We shall see.
Makovsky thinks the Bush administration's goal of solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by the end of 2008 is unrealistic, and he believes the focus should be on the details - easing roadblocks, allowing more trade between the Palestinian territory and Israel, etc. - rather than grand peace agreements.
Skeptics on both sides need to see "positive changes on the ground," he says. That means more security for Israel and more freedom of movement among the Palestinians.
"Even if they [the Israelis and Palestinians] can't score a touchdown, let them move the ball to the 50-yard line and leave the rest [for the next administration], and that would be quite an accomplishment."
Lieberman's McCain Endorsement: Well, DUH / James Besser in Washington
The interesting thing about Sen. Joe Lieberman's endorsement of Sen. John McCain's 2008 presidential bid is that almost nobody in Washington was surprised - despite the fact Lieberman was a Democrat until 2006.
Political observers here say a number of factors made the endorsement predictable, starting with the veteran senator's fury at a Democratic leadership that mostly supported his rival in 2006, after Lieberman lost the party primary in his bid for a fourth term in the Senate. Lieberman, Democratic sources say, feels betrayed by a party he served as 2000 Vice Presidential nominee.
Another factor is his long term friendship with McCain - until this year a GOP maverick who, since his presidential campaign started, has tried to cast himself in a more conservative Republican mold.
And there's the war in Iraq; both men remain unapologetic supporters of President Bush's decision to make that the primary front in the war on terrorism after the September 11 attacks.
It's not just political; people close to the senator say he genuinely believes the Iraq war can and must be won.
There is also widespread speculation in Washington that Lieberman's hopes for higher office have not been quenched. By endorsing a Republican even before the Democrats select a nominee, he may be positioning himself for a cabinet position if the GOP holds on to the White House - or, as political scientist Larry Sabato said in a Jewish Week story this morning, for nomination to a "fusion" ticket with McCain or another Republican.
Could Lieberman be the first man to run for vice president under two different party banners?
It will be interesting to see how the McCain endorsement affects Lieberman's standing with Jewish voters.
His groundbreaking 2000 vice presidential nomination as a Democrat stands as a landmark in Jewish politics.
But Jewish voters were more opposed to the Iraq invasion than almost any other group in 2003, and that opposition has only increased as the war has dragged on.
And, as the recently released American Jewish Committee Survey of Jewish Public Opinion shows, Jewish voters are even more solidly in the Democratic camp as the 2008 campaigns move into high gear.
Lieberman's endorsement may boost McCain with Jewish Republicans - a group that is seen as leaning strongly toward former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani.
Lieberman has been a champion in the critical area of Jewish political fundraising; his endorsement could help the cash-starved McCain campaign remain competitive.
But with the continuing Democratic identification and strong opposition to the Iraq war among Jewish voters, the impact is likely to be far less in the overall Jewish electorate.
What about a McCain-Lieberman ticket?
Lieberman was said to be deeply disappointed by the paltry Jewish support he received in his unsuccessful bid for the 2004 Democratic presidential nomination. It may be that nomination to a ticket led by McCain would have only a small impact on a Jewish electorate that shows every sign of turning in a strong Democratic performance next year.
Hoops for the Heschel Heat / Eli Grossman in Teaneck, NJ
I play varsity basketball for the Heschel Heat (we are currently undefeated). Our team is a member of the Metropolitan Yeshiva High School Basketball League (MYSHBL, for short). MYSHBL has twenty two teams, twenty one of which are Yeshivot. My school, the Abraham Joshua Heschel School, is the lone non-yeshiva team in the league.
This league is more than basketball, in fact-for some-it is the most important thing in their school life. I love my team. I love my coaches. As a senior, I am truly enjoying my final year (potentially) of organized basketball.
At the beginning of the year, my coach, the illustrious Adam Melzer, organized a pre-season basketball tournament in memory of Freddy Hirsch, a Jew murdered by the Nazis. This tournament brought together eight different teams for various games during the week, a Shabbat in Teaneck, and a pair of weekend games.
In my three years in the Yeshiva league, my opponents have always been faceless-in the interest of alliteration-frummies. I have known nothing about them as people, anything about how they are off the court.
The Shabbat in Teaneck showed me that even though Heschel is alone in being a non-Yeshiva, the kids across the Yeshiva league are eerily homogenous. We all love basketball and we all love Judaism, even if we express it in different ways: HANC could be seen singing z'mirot loudly during lunch, Heschel thought deeply and challenged the standards in Shabbat-afternoon discussion groups, and a Frisch player layned from the Torah. The tournament was a huge success, even though Heschel came in second place, losing a close one to HANC.
This league is populated by Jewish basketball players. Now I don't want to belittle the talents of the likes of Max Feldstein, Gavriel Feld, Eddie Gindi, or Steven Ritholtz-the premier players of our league, but I'll always have this thought in the back of my mind telling me that this is a second tier league. But, in fact, it doesn't matter. MYHSBL is not meant to be a top league with Division I recruits. It's supposed to be a unifying force-a force that unites Jewish teens with a common love for the sport.
Poll: Americans Reject Iran Intelligence Estimate / James Besser in Washington
An interesting poll released this week suggests that a majority of Americans don’t believe the recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran.
That estimate, a sharp reversal from earlier assessments, set off shock waves in Israel, where officials disputed the finding that Iran gave up its nuclear weapons program in 2003.
Apparently a majority of Americans agree with leaders in Jerusalem; according to a survey by The Israel Project, 51 percent of those questioned say they “strongly” disbelieve the U.S. assessment that Iran has ended work on nuclear weapons.
Asked about British intelligence estimates that claims Iran is continuing its weapons program, 67 percent said they “strongly” or “somewhat” believe that assessment over U.S. estimates.
And 75 percent of respondents say they have heard “a great deal” or “some” about the NIE report – which is more than the 69 percent who could name the Vice President of the United States in a Pew Center poll earlier this year. 69 percent said Iran should be prevented from further nuclear research.
While the report suggested Americans were paying attention when the government announced the recent Iran report, it indicates less awareness of the recent Annapolis peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.
Asked if they have heard, seen or read anything about the conference, 28 percent said “nothing at all” and 33 percent said “just a little.”
And 55 percent said an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement would have “not much of an impact” on terrorism around the world.
The Israel Project, which continues to push for stronger sanctions and divestment aimed at Iran, trumpeted the public’s skepticism about the Iran intelligence report.
“The public views Iran as a threat and even after the NIE, they strongly support intensifying sanctions and diplomatic measures,” said Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, founder and president of the group. "This is good news as there is still time to use the power of the purse for peace.”
Longevity in a Taxing Profession / Rabbi Gerald C. Skolnik
The Jewish Theological Seminary awards Doctor of Divinity degrees honoris causa ro Rabbinical Assembly members who have been "in the field" for at least twenty-five years, and I, among others, was privileged to be awarded such a degree yesterday.
Among my colleagues, the joke was that the DD stands for "didn't die," and we were being recognized for our longevity in a notoriously taxing profession. Like others, I'm sure, I was prepared to be underwhelmed by the event. But, I am obliged to admit, I found it extraordinarily touching.
As I move well into my twenty-seventh year in the pulpit, I find that one of the not-so-wonderful long-term effects of my work is that it's gotten progressively harder for me to feel appreciated and understood.
Don't get me wrong. I am blessed with congregants and friends who are wonderfully reinforcing and supportive. In no way do I lack for people who say the most wonderful things to me about my work.
But after so long in the rabbinate, I find that, while criticism still stings, praise all too easily rolls off my back. That which I and most rabbis tend to crave the most- a deeper understanding of the nature of our work, and what it takes to be the strong one for so many who are hurting- is the most elusive. It's taken me a long time to reach this insight about myself and my work, and it's not something I'm particularly happy about.
A friend and colleague who spoke yesterday representing all of us somehow managed to penetrate that inner core of need, most probably because he feels it too, as do all of us who are long-term rabbis. He spoke of what it means to be the person to whom everyone turns in their worst moments, to be on 24/7, to live constantly with the knowledge that, particularly in this age of cellphones and dataphones, you're never really away or "off," no matter where you are.
I listened to him express his appreciation for the honor bestowed by the Seminary on all of us, and I realized- I felt truly honored in a way that only a colleague who "gets it" could make me feel. And I have to say that it felt awfully good…
Congress Saves Christmas, Christianity / James Besser in Washington
It’s nice to know that Congress is taking care of the nation’s really important business.
On Tuesday the House, which can’t seem to get it together to pass key appropriations bills to fund the federal government or figure out what to do about Iraq, did find the time to pass a resolution “recognizing the importance of Christmas and the Christian faith.”
The measure was sponsored by Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), known mostly for his vehement and often controversial opposition to illegal immigrants and his claim that Christianity is under assault in America.
The measure includes more than a hint of sectarian triumphalism; it begins by noting that “there are approximately 225,000,000 Christians in the United States, making Christianity the religion of over three-fourths of the American population…there are approximately 2,000,000,000 Christians throughout the world, making Christianity the largest religion in the world and the religion of about one-third of the world population.”
It goes on to acknowledge “the role played by Christians and Christianity in the founding of the United States and in the formation of the western civilization” and to reject “bigotry and persecution directed against Christians, both in the United States and worldwide.”
King told Fox News that he proposed the resolution because of the “secularists in the country who are trying to eradicate Christ from Christmas.”
The measure passed by a 372-9 vote, with ten members voting “present” and 40 not voting at all. Among the no voters: Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY).
“While Christianity is among the very important religions in the world, it should not take a resolution of Congress to make it so,” Ackerman told the Jewish Week. “Nor should Congress spend its time questionably violating the spirit of the separation of church and state.”
Lest we think Congress is biased, the House passed a resolution earlier in the year recognizing Islam as “one of the great religions of the world” and acknowledging Ramadan.
But the resolution on Christianity alone delved into issues of theology, stating that “Christians identify themselves as those who believe in the salvation from sin offered to them through the sacrifice of their savior, Jesus Christ, the Son of God, and who, out of gratitude for the gift of salvation, commit themselves to living their lives in accordance with the teachings of the Holy Bible.”
Congressional sources say there were more than a few House members who weren’t comfortable with language that might be more suitable in a church than in the Capitol – but were nervous about being tarred “anti-Christian” or – even worse in this holiday season -- “anti-Christmas.”
Policy Associate, Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA)
Last week’s decision not to include the hate crimes provisions in the Defense Authorization Conference Report was disappointing at best.The Jewish Council for Public Affairs has advocated for this legislation for a decade.Despite this setback, we are committed to move this bipartisan piece of legislation through Congress, onto the President’s desk and into the US Code.
In May, the House of Representatives approved the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act (LLEHCPA).Last September, the Senate added these same provisions as an amendment to the Defense Authorization bill.This marked the first time that both chambers of Congress approved this legislation in the same session.A broad coalition of 210 civil rights, religious, civic and law enforcement organizations advocated for the smooth passage of the hate crimes bill.
Unfortunately, politics can derail good public policy.Conservatives vowed to vote against the Defense Authorization bill because it contained the hate crimes provisions.Liberals opposed the bill arguing against the Iraq War.Advocates faced the daunting task of building a centrist coalition strong enough to overcome partisanship and large enough to muster a majority.
Unfortunately the House Leadership decided it was too risky to include the LLEHCPA in the Defense Authorization bill. They feared the defense bill would be defeated on the House floor—a political cost unbearable.Senators Edward Kennedy and Carl Levin insisted the Senate’s hate crimes amendment be retained.
The passage of the LLEHCPA is essential to protect the rights of all Americans to live freely and safely.Bias crimes are an anathema to the founding principles of United States and to Jewish values.We must do what we can to prevent these crimes that victimize and paralyze entire communities at a time.Just as importantly, we must ensure justice is justly pursued. We should expand federal law to protect victims of gender, gender-identity, sexual orientation and disability motivated violence in addition to that motivated by race, ethnicity, religion and national origin—more effectively reflecting our national diversity in our law.We must provide resources to local authorities to effectively identify and prosecute hate crimes.And lastly, we must give the federal government stop-gap authority to investigate and prosecute hate crimes when local authorities are unable or unwilling to do so effectively.
Last week, the House Leadership stripped the hate crimes provisions out of the Defense Authorization Conference Report.Ten years after the brutal killing of Mathew Sheppard, seventeen years after the Crown Heights Riots, a year and a half after the attack on David Ritcheson, and six months after his suicide, we still haven’t protected all Americans from violent hate and ensured the vigorous pursuit of justice.Hopefully that will change in 2008.
AJC Blasts 'Waterboarding' / James Besser in Washington
As the controversy over destroyed CIA tapes of prisoner interrogations rages in Washington, leaders of the American Jewish Committee have stepped into the controversy over “waterboarding,” an interrogation technique the group says is essentially the same as tortures used during the Spanish Inquisition.
On Monday the AJC board of governors approved a statement that waterboarding “is unquestionably torture” and is “clearly illegal” under international law.
The group reiterated its longstanding support for “tough, anti-terror measures,” but added that it is “unequivocally opposed to the use of torture by interrogators representing our nation.”
AJC leaders said they are disturbed by a national discussion “which suggests that there is some question as to whether waterboarding is legal and whether it constitutes torture.”
In fact, the statement goes on, waterboarding meets all the “required tests” for torture.
“The use of officially sanctioned torture techniques corrupts our intelligence services, removes our military from the moral high ground, materially damages our nation’s standing in the world and exposes our military to similar treatment when captured.”
The Jewish Council for Public Affairs and the Reform movement have also spoken out against the use of torture in the war on terrorism; Rabbis for Human Rights-North America has mounted a major campaign on the issue.
Taking Aim at Huckabee / James Besser in Washington
You can tell former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is rising like a rocket in the polls: Democratic strategists who once largely ignored him as a nonentity in the 2008 presidential race, are frantically digging for political ammunition to use against him.
The latest example: Democratic operatives are calling Jewish reporters to make sure everybody knows that Huckabee’s “Secure America Plan,” a nine-point strategy for “immigration enforcement and border security,” could impact thousands of Americans with dual Israel citizenship.
Huckabee’s plan, which includes building a fence along the border with Mexico and rejecting policies “that promote or tolerate amnesty,” includes a call to “discourage dual citizenship.”
He also wants “civil and/or criminal penalties on Americans who illegitimately use their dual status – eg, using a foreign passport, voting in elections in both a foreign country and the U.S.”
Does that mean the thousands of American Jews who enjoy dual U.S.-Israeli citizenship?Huckabee campaign headquarters in Arkansas isn’t talking; spokespeople for the candidate did not respond to a reporter’s questions.
On Monday the group wrote on its blog that “by staking out this position, Huckabee rejects the 1967 Supreme Court ruling in Afroyim v. Rusk which explicitly stated that a citizen of the US did not lose their citizenship by voting in an Israeli election. Congress ratified the Supreme Court ruling in 1978.”
No wonder Democrats are turning their attention to the former Baptist minister; in a CNN poll released on Monday, Huckabee is now in a “virtual tie” with frontrunner Rudy Giuliani, garnering 22 percent of Republican voters nationally.
Some Democrats are worried; Huckabee’s startling rise in the polls, his clever and effective TV advertising and a personality that has been tagged by the media as affable could pose a significant obstacle to what analysts were predicting would be a great election year for the party.
But Jewish Democrats are convinced that Huckabee, with his controversial views on AIDS victims, his onetime call to “take this nation back for Christ” and his opinions on issues like evolution, would all but guarantee a record Jewish turnout for the Democratic nominee next November if he gets the GOP nod.
Being a Rabbi in the Real World / Rabbi Gerald C. Skolnik
It says in my byline that I “teach at JTS.”That’s true, but it doesn’t say that what I teach is the required Senior Seminar in Leadership and Professional Skills for all graduating rabbinical and cantorial students.The seminar meets for two hours twice a week, fall and spring- a serious investment of time.People are always asking me what is involved in this seminar, and I usually answer by saying “the things that I would want a rabbi/cantor to know at least a little about before he/she is let loose on the Jewish community.”
In addition to sessions devoted to leadership styles and understanding the nature of rabbinic power, and opportunities for the students themselves to determine at least some of the agenda and address the anxieties they are feeling as they are about to graduate, we also look (time permitting!) at an eclectic array of issues including substance abuse, domestic violence, the structure of contemporary spiritual communities, social action, interfaith relations (and interfaith families), grief and grief management, and a very wide-ranging category which we refer to in shorthand as “boundary issues.” You get the idea.It’s a course in the real world.
The revelations of the past few years about sexual improprieties in the Catholic Church, particularly as they relate to pedophilia, are tragic enough standing on their own.
But the issue of impropriety is not just about gay priests and pedophilia.More broadly, it’s about the enormous transferential power wielded by clergy of all faiths, and the terrifying ease with which is can be abused. All clergy have to deal with boundaries.
I tell my students that I have yet to meet a congregation looking to hire a rabbi that isn’t interested is a “young, charismatic person who can capture the attention and imagination of all age groups in the synagogue.”Fair enough, if ageist.
But the flip side of charm and charisma is the ever-present danger of flirting (and I use the word advisedly) with those slippery lines of authority and power, and allowing the office and title to desecrate Gods name instead of sanctify it.Rabbis teach and counsel teens craving attention and affection, and adults of all ages who may, in their own ways, be experiencing the exact same cravings.
These days, there are real and difficult boundary questions to be addressed: do you leave your office door open or closed when you do counseling?Do you casually kiss people (either sex) at Kiddush?Do you think it’s OK to “give a hug” to a kid on crisis, or a woman going through a divorce?What are appropriate venues for counseling sessions? I could easily rattle off five or ten more such questions without any effort whatsoever.
The rabbinate isn’t only about Halacha these days….
Designed To Break Your Heart/ Jonathan Mark in New York
Imagine if your favorite major league team stopped playing every summer day, but just once a week, and then played only in a field adjacent to the empty stadium, to a “crowd” of maybe 20 or 30 people. If the old big ballpark, left for dead, is then turned into a museum, what would you feel on that museum’s opening day when a docent points out the empty grandstand?
I love shuls as much as I love ballparks, so the good people at the Museum at Eldridge Street will forgive me for being less than thrilled at their spectacular $20 million transformation of a grand shul cathedral into a nonsectarian museum, where docents point out the empty pews.
If you want to daven, in a building where there were once more than 20 services a week, well, there’s a small room way off to the side and downstairs that’s used on Shabbat only, and only by a handful of people. The rabbi left a while ago.
None of this is the fault of the Eldridge renovation or the people that nursed the project for so many years. They took a drafty, leaking barn of a space, with more pigeons than people, and turned it into something fine. The fault, if any, belongs to the old congregants who ran the shul into the ground in the first place. And let’s not fall for the talk that there was a demographic inevitability to a shul’s failure on the Lower East Side. On the contrary, a good congregation is an anchor for demographic stability in even the “worst” of changing neighborhoods, such as Crown Heights and Williamsburg in the 1960s and ‘70s.
The Bialystoker Synagogue, over on Willett Street, off Grand Street, in the same Lower East Side neighborhood, is doing beautifully. In a building many decades older than the Eldridge Street shul, Bialystoker is full of congregants, has daily services, employs a rabbi, runs a Hebrew school, and has a spectacular interior – perhaps the finest shul space in New York – without spending $20 million in charity dollars and public funds, as did Eldridge Street. Tourists – and philanthopists—looking for a shul interior to marvel at (and help out) would be best advised to first go to the Bialystoker.
The Chasam Sopher shul, over on Clinton Street in the same neighborhood, has undergone a beautiful renovation of its own, with private money, and is a living, breathing entity. The buildings of the Bialystoker and the Chasam Sopher, dating back to the dawn of the Lower East Side, are every bit as historic as Eldridge Street, except they’re alive – people arguing and celebrating, dancing, singing, davening, and arguing some more about some article in the Jewish papers, or some character in Jewish politics, just like Jewish folks did on the Lower East Side in the old days.
In Cracow there’s a worthy Jewish museum of Polish Jewish life in the shell of what used to be known as the “Old Synagogue.” It was once full of Jews and now it’s full of exhibits.
Eldridge Street was once full of Jews and now it’s full of exhibits, a little bit of Cracow right here in New York City.
I loved his soulful music and I loved Shlomo Carlebach as a friend (he was everyone’s friend), but when I go to “Carlebach minyans” they seem like an exhibit, predictable where he was unpredictable, leaving me as lonely as, well, Shlomo himelf.
What the poets say about baseball goes double for the Jewish life: It is designed to break your heart.
Romney’s Religion Problem / James Besser in Washington
Jewish leaders who held out some hope the 2008 presidential election wouldn’t continue the trend of mixing up the stump and the pulpit are having a bad few weeks.
First there were debates where candidates were asked questions like how they view the inerrancy of the Bible and the story of creationism – questions that would have been unthinkable in a presidential debate a decade ago.Democrats and Republicans alike are working feverishly to shore up their religious credentials.
This week there was former Gov. Mitt Romney’s long-awaited “Mormon speech.” (Watch exerpts below)
Romney earned some credit with church-state separation groups with his refusal to spell out the details of his Mormon faith and his rejection of religious tests for high office.
He offered words of praise for other religions.
“I love the profound ceremony of the Catholic Mass, the approachability of God in the prayers of the Evangelicals, the tenderness of spirit among the Pentecostals, the confident independence of the Lutherans, the ancient traditions of the Jews, unchanged through the ages, and the commitment to frequent prayer of the Muslims.”
But he was also more explicit about his own belief in Jesus than presidential candidates have been in major speeches.
The Anti-Defamation League, chastiser-in-chief of candidates to drag religion into campaigns, acknowledged that some of Romney’s increased talk about religion is the result of widespread bias against Mormons.
“We realize that Gov. Romney is fighting anunacceptable prejudice against him because of his faith, and understand his need to proclaim himself a Christian,” said ADL director Abraham Foxman.
But Foxman expressed deep concern “that it has become part of our political culture for candidates to be forced into asserting their religiosity, with some even openly hawking their faith on the campaign trial…There is this dance, this appeal based on religion, that candidates use to attract religious voters which we feel is contrary to the spirit of what this country is all about.”
Orthodox Union Washington director Nathan Diament was happier with the speech. In his blog, Diament praised Romney for his “stated commitment to religious liberty and pluralism in the United States.”
Romney has good reason to worry; a recent Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life poll indicated that 25 percent of Republican-leaning voters and 36 percent of evangelicals would be less likely to vote for a Mormon as president.
(Eli Grossman is a senior from Teaneck, New Jersey. He attends the Abraham Joshua Heschel School in Manhattan, a pluralistic Jewish day school. He attends Camp Ramah in the Berkshires during the summers and is an involved USYer. )
Shout out to Gary Rosenblatt, editor and publisher of the Jewish Week, for landing me this gig. My name is Eli Grossman. I live in Teaneck, NJ (the capitol of Diaspora Judaism), and am a senior at the Abraham Joshua Heschel School in Manhattan.
There are a lot of things swimming around in my mind: college, school, sports, friends, the shame of being a Mets, Jets, and Knicks fan, etc. I hope to discuss most, if not all, of these subjects in my bloggings, but in my first blog I want to-well-bloviate about something that stems from my recent summer trip to Israel.
An issue that has been fermenting in my mind for a while-at least since this summer-has been the possibility of aliyah. I spent the summer in Israel on Ramah Poland-Israel Seminar. I came back with a recharged love for the land, the people, the language, the food, and the culture. All this forced me to consider seriously the possibility of living in Israel one day. I already plan to spend the gap year between high school and college in Israel, but there is a special allure to truly living there. My dad-the raging Zionist-would surely help me pack my bags tomorrow (and would likely stow away in the carriage of the El-Al flight), and my mother-the devoted Diaspora Jew-is less keen about the idea. I like to think that aliyah would be easy, that the transition to life in Israel from life in Teaneck would be seamless.
But I'm marginally realistic; I know that life in Israel, for even the most comfortable, is inherently difficult. So I vacillate almost daily about whether or not I want to live there. Maybe this is all a product of my knowing that college is fast approaching, which means that independent life is fast approaching, as well. Life in Israel is tough. Life in Teaneck is easy.
I am reminded of my favorite verse from Pirkei Avot, the Ethics of our Fathers: "The reward is proportionate to the suffering" (5:22). So I'm left with a tough decision: do I take the tough, but rewarding life in Israel, or the easy, but rewarding in its own merit, life in a place like Teaneck?
This week marks the 20th anniversary of one of the most important events in post-Holocaust Jewish history -- the December 6, 1987 Soviet Jewry March in Washington, DC.
I was fortunate to be part of the planning effort in mobilizing more than 250,000 Americans from all walks of life to participate in the March.It is an experience I have never forgotten, and forever has changed what I believe we accomplish as individuals and as a community.
This event transformed our community and expedited the release of hundreds of thousands of Jews from the Soviet Union.By any measure, it was an overwhelming success.
My organization, NCSJ, formerly known as the National Conference on Soviet Jewry, joined together with every segment of the organized American Jewish community as well as those groups outside of the organized community to pull off one of the great feats in our community's history.We had little over a month to organize the March and Rally.It required a Herculean effort by a steering committee willing to put aside -- for the most part -- our organizational egos to ensure a successful day.
And what a day it was!
Jews and non-Jews of all ages from across North America, former Refuseniks and Prisoners of Zion, elected officials, religious, labor, and educational leaders, prominent entertainers, and many others marching down Constitution Avenue and pouring in from other Washington, DC streets to the foot of Capitol Hill to send a simple, powerful message on the eve of Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev's summit meeting with President Ronald Reagan.
I did not get to march on December 6th because of my responsibilities at the Rally site.
However, as I was standing on the stage watching people arrive from every direction possible, an incredible sense of accomplishment and pride rushed through me.Unlike my parents and grandparents who had to ask themselves why our community didn't do more to save Jews during the Holocaust, at that moment, I knew we were and would continue to do whatever was necessary to save Jewish lives in the Soviet Union and around the world.
The day itself was a blur.It was a long program, but a powerful one. Recently freed Soviet Jewish leaders lit candles with their American supporters.The Vice President of the United States represented the Reagan Administration.Members of Congress from both parties spoke and marched.And the incomparable Pearl Bailey and Peter, Paul and Mary performed to the delight of everyone.
As the sun began to set over the magnificent Washington skyline of monuments and museums, and the rally ended, my life would never be the same again.
I continue to work on behalf of Jews in the former Soviet Union.My organization's mission is different today than 20 years ago -- no less important, but different.We are dealing with 15 governments instead of one, we are confronting popular anti-Semitism, not state-sponsored anti-Semitism, and while more than one million Jews emigrated, more than one million Jews remain throughout the former Soviet Union.
I still apply today the many lessons learned over twenty years ago.But the most important lesson remains -- when the American Jewish community works together, puts aside our differences, anything is possible.
Mideast Next Stop for Bush, Antarctica After That? / James Besser in Washington
Almost lost in the fuss over this week’s National Intelligence Estimate on Iran were reports President Bush is planning a stop in Israel in January, his first since taking office i
