You are how you read Returns

I saw Superman Returns with my brother motza"sh and was fairly impressed. One shot in the movie caught my particular attention, however. Towards the end of the movie we see Lois Lane pining for her lost love while the camera moves through her study (it might not be hers, but she looks awfully comfortable there). The angle starts low and proceeds through two bookshelves, opposite one another, chock full of books. Not binders or legal books but paperbacks and hardcovers, different sizes, shapes and publishers. There must be six five-foot cases all told. Lex Luthor, to contrast, is seen to own a boatload of sets, the kind of thing you pick up to fill shelves that you will not actually read (self-irony noted, if not intended).

While I think the latter choice says less about Luthor, I really think Bryan Singer crafted the scene with Lois. Lois was never portrayed as a brainy one in the past, but I think Singer composed the scene with the bookshelves to help cast a more contemporary interpretation on Lois as a really smart, contemplative (and, gasp, even intellectual) journalist who is also independent; with or without Superman (why do books=independence? Non-trivial question, with a set of trivial answers; also has to do with the scene--her pining contrasted with her Pulitzer, which she won definently wo/ Superman). Whether Kate Bosworth communicates that is a different issue...

Your are how you read

My dad starts, "There is a store over on Main that makes brass plates for bookshelves. So the question is, what categories do you use to categorize your library."

"Easy," I replied "Literature, Art & Graphic Arts, Politics & History, Social Theory, Religion, Science* & Math, Philosophy and Sifrei Kodesh."

And like that, I realized how simply (re: crudely) I saw the world. Drama is just literature; anthropology, social theory etc. Definitely a worth while exercise.

* by science I "really" mean physics, where biology is just tacked on, the way platypi are kind of like mammals.

Beatles Shmeatles

In the days of raging Beatlemania, the Beatles were not allowed to perform in Israel. The Minister of Education forbade them from doing so, fearing their music would have a corrupting effect on the youth (cf.). Well, that youth has grown up and they've brought the Beatles to Israel. Okay, not the actual Beatles (at least one of whom is dead, I'm told), but a group of young Israelis (about 30-45 yrs young) who can imitate the Beatles. I heard them last night where they performed in an ancient Roman amphitheater near Haifa with the Haifa Symphony Orchestra. In a way it was like a Montessori school reunion with a bunch of 50-60 year old Hilonim dancing, while seated, to the music. But when I took a closer look at their dancing in their seats, I noticed it bore a striking resemblance to the kind of shuckling many Orthodox people do in schul. This was their religion, I realized. Of course they were shuckling.

What if

instead of Lex Luthor, Superman was confronted Martin Luther hammering his 95 Theses to Superman's chest, with a kryptonite nail!!! That would get the Reformation going in a big way.

Saleet's Question

Three years ago Saleet asked me a great question: Why don't you marry Oren?

There are two obvious wrong answers to that question: 1. Because I/we are straight 2. Because Oren is married (which was not the case at the time).

I became further confused today, as I was arguing that their is no essential difference between the two sexes. If that is the case, why can't two men marry, raise a family and have children with a close female friend? Why does the mother of the child necessarily need to be part of the "nuclear" family? If men and women really are the same, is the reason for marriage purely utilitarian, i.e. it is just more practical to have the mother of the child serve as the second parent? Religious doctrine aside, why must sex (v) be confined to/part of marriage?

My only answer now (that I have proved to my self, through contradiction) is that there is generally does exist a distinction between the sexes, which is not a conclusion I am all-together happy with.

Ann Coulter meet Zizek

Listening, as I do daily, to the inimitable Keith Oberman on my way to work (thanks to Podcasting) I was treated to a rather vicious attack by Mr. Oberman of Ms. Coulter for her indictment of a group of widows from the 9-11 attacks who have used their new-found plight as a moral step-stool to assail the Bush administration.

Poor form aside, Ms. Coulter sounded more like Zizek than I could have ever imagined. She use a power argument to maintain that plight and victimhood should not inure one from reproach or rebuttal. These women, using their tragedy as leverage, hope to convince the American public of the political wrongs of the Bush administration. While they surely have suffered great loss, what makes them better spokespersons for Truth than any other citizen of this country? Their victim status somehow rhetorically privileges them above the political debate, and gives them the moral high ground--they can sling their arrows, but those below can volley nothing in return.

The great thing about the argument is that it doesn't really follow from the rest of the rhetoric on the Right. Our soldiers in Iraq are used as victim shields as are the husbands of these unfortunate women. Plenty of White House rhetoric is aimed specifically to disarm their opponents by stymieing debate--you don't hate the soldiers, do you? You don't want to dishonor the victims of 9-11 by letting the terrorists win, do you? Unfortunately Ms. Coulter is an ass and comes off as a bit inured herself. But I still give her marks for trying to slip a PoMo argument by for the Conservative-Right.

Kol Sasson

Welcome, and enjoy your stay. (The title is a link)

Iran will disrupt oil shipments if her right to nuclear power is threatened (JPost). One wonders how badly they need nuclear power if they are able to threaten other countries with cutting off the oil supply.

יום התלמיד

Starting this evening, we at Hebrew University of Jerusalem are celebrating יום הסטודנס. Celebrations involve typical student-like activities such as parties with loud rock-music and beer. Also school has been cancelled to celebrate this day.

In protest, I am celebrating יום התלמיד, a day in which I sit in the library and study all day. This is, I suppose, another way of being a student. The library has at least one thing those loud outdoor parties don't have - an air-conditioner.

Who do they think they are?!

How stupid can you be? It is as if they are sending a formal invitation (printed on card stock, matte paper) to the international community to compare this Iranian regime to 1936 Germany. Who does their PR?

I wonder if they will include a reply card.

Update: I had linked to a National Post article (Canadain national paper) that ran a story about a new law in Iran which would require all members of minority faiths to wear armbands with distinct colors; Yellow for Jews, Red for Christians and Blue for Zoroastians. This report appears to be false, but I would stay tuned as the Iranian gov't is known to have misrepresented themselves before (re: op-ed in the NYT "We do not have a nuclear weapons program" from about a month ago).

Babblefish in the Afterlife (or the lack thereof)

I am in the middle of an article about Cavell, Emerson, Aristotle, et al and I had the most curious thought: What if, when you die, you go to an afterlife that is completely foreign to you. You stand before a daemon, venting power and wrath, except s/he does not speak your language. You are at a complete loss to understand His/Her moral charges, but during the hearing, through no fault of your won, you crack up numerous times when the prosecutor utters words such as "Fuptubarb" and "Rakakamakamon." You can throw gavitas right out of St. Pete's window.

What an absurd ending.

Viva la Lobbists!

I have not learned very much in the past year. One thing I have learned is that democracy is all about making your voice heard...above everyone else's. While other people merely vote in the polls, we (those that bitch the night away) must do something more to insure that America does not make the wrong decision.

How can I make my voice heard over the mass of the loud hoi polloi, you ask? Easy, donate to a campaign. Yes, you, who live in Chicago, NY or New Haven can influence an election in a state that is not even contiguous to your own! God bless America and its nearly boundless freedom of expression, i.e. hard money contributions. So quit whining about interest group politics and become and interest group of your own!

I would have now plugged Casey against Santorum, but as Casey is pro-life, I can't, in good conscience, ask other people to do that.

Of Interest

Like every Monday morning at work, I set about perusing the NYT Online to see what I have missed through my inattention during the weekend. Among other important articles about the resignation of Goss from the CIA, I stumbled across a piece by Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt "A Star is Made." It is unimportant to present a careful dissection of the argument, but simply put, the authors posit that talent is near worthless to effort. Great musicians, athletes, writers, etc are not born with talent, but become good through repetition.

Slightly more subtly, the article moves from a paradigm of "practice" to one of "interest"--which was more intriguing to me.

Deliberate practice entails more than simply repeating a task; playing a C-minor scale 100 times, for instance, or hitting tennis serves until your shoulder pops out of its socket. Rather, it involves setting specific goals, obtaining immediate feedback and concentrating as much on technique as on outcome...Ericsson's research suggests a third cliche as well: when it comes to choosing a life path, you should do what you love; because if you don't love it, you are unlikely to work hard enough to get very good. Most people naturally don't like to do things they aren't "good" at. So they often give up, telling themselves they simply don't possess the talent for math or skiing or the violin. But what they really lack is the desire to be good and to undertake the deliberate practice that would make them better.

Like many Levittine arguments, I initially tossed it out; obviously there are people who are more talented than others. While Michael Jordan is a better basketball player than I (which is no surprise, as he has practiced a whole lot more than I have) he is also better than Toni Kukoc, who probably shot nearly as many layups in his life.

What Levitt Inc propose is much more significant however--Michael Jordan is more interested in basketball than Toni Kukoc. Not interested in the sport--I am sure they both love the game--but the article posits that MJ is interested in those facets, the "specific goals" as they are referred to, than TC. Basketball is not one whole unit, but it is made up of zillions of finer aspects: dribbling, layups, guarding, wrist motion, etc. Levitt proposes that MJ just likes the sum of all these parts more than most players of the modern era, and as such, practiced to "obtaining immediate feedback and concentrating as much on technique as on outcome."

The obvious question which this thesis admits is: Ok, you have replaced the word, "talent" with "interest." So what causes one to be interested?

I didn't find the answer to that question in the article, but the conjecture is not as flat as I suggested. It means that if you think you are interested in a vocation, ask yourself, "Do I like the individual aspects, that sum to the whole?" Some people love physics, but are just not interested in doing long intergals or in trig. identities. I got news for you, it means you are not really interested in physics. And if you stay up at night pondering what other groups of Hermitian operators will solve Schodinger's equation, what you are doing in not called curling, it is called physics--sometimes things just get mislabeled (no philosophy of language discussion now, please), and you just might need to relabel them for yourself.

Homer Omer

I realize that this is square in the middle of the counting, but better late than never...

should you be in despair during sefirah, let Homer help you out! Zev would tell me that I would have failed to live up tradition if I didn't spread the word.

The Star Spangled Banner...in Spanish?

I woke up one morning last week to hear the host of the radio program I typically listen to (WLUP - 97.9) soliciting responses from people on the question of whether the recent Spanish translation of the Star Spangled Banner done by Adam Kidron (a Brit) should be encouraged among Latino immigrants in the country. While I expected the responses to be fairly opposed to the Spanish translation, I couldn't help but notice the xenophobic overtones in the comments. While I do think that the song should be sung in English, the issue didn't bother me nearly as much as it did for some of the callers. However, I wasn't sure if I simply couldn't dismiss the fact that the Loop (a classic rock(think 80's) radio station) has a listenership that mostly consists of working class Chicagoans, who might be more likely to have strong patriotic sentiments. I suppose that the question I'm posing is how one makes the distinction between patriotism and xenophobia?

(The) Hoi Polloi

I love this expression, not only due to how it rolls off the tongue, but also because my grandmother used to use it as one of her -isms. Upon reading the phrase last week I was provoked to find out what its origins were. And both the OED and Answers.com reveal the same thing: It is a Greek term meaning "the masses." Why then did my grandmother use it to mean high society, with an ironic touch (You don't want to be part of the hoi polloi, do you?)

About this point Answers.com has this to say: Hoi polloi is sometimes incorrectly used to mean “the elite,” possibly because it is reminiscent of high and mighty or because it sounds like hoity-toity.

While the literal meaning of the word is "the masses" I found it is not just my grandmother who used the term in its perverted usage. John McGahern in "Amongst Women" (132) writes, "Is she hoi polloi?" referring to the family's de facto sister-in-law. As the inquiring sister is from a poor farm in rural Ireland, I don't think she is accusing the woman of being common, but rather of being tosh.

I don't think the phonetic similarity provided by Answers.com really seems to cut it though. Maybe "the masses" came to refer to the indescript mass of artistocracy? Who knows.

Academic Speak?

I had submitted a paper to a journal and it was returned with a Revise and Resubmit letter and a copy of two reviews. I would think that would entail some contructive critism. And to this end one of the reviewers wrote:

As a potential avenue of research the paper makes interesting proposals. But the arguments are not fleshed out. The scholarship is very slight--especially on Hobbes.

While I take "scholarship" in this context mean secondary literature (where she is correct that I did not make much reference to) and not just an ad hominem it is not a tone I had expected from a R&R letter.

A tough bunch they are...

Looks like I will be in Philly for a while...

While my grad school initiative proved rather unsuccessful, I am not crushed--only very dejected. For the time being I plan I taking Matt Damon's line about library fines to heart and actually do some research in the Penn library. I have some plans to make next year's round a bit more successful. So it goes.

Blah.

HD or Blu Ray?

Anyone on odds?

My bet is on HD DVD for three reasons:

1. It's a cheaper technology. The HD disks cost $10 less than Blu Ray disks.
2. HD is a "thing" now, it is a hot marketing word. Televisions programs are "now in HD" your TV is HD, so naturally your DVD player should be. Blu Ray is the thing that is not like the other, the thing that is not the same.
3. Sony is inept. Sure, if Sony could pull off the PS3 by the end of the year it might make the battle close, but the company is in such chaos, who knows if that can happen.
4. Blu Ray is the "superior" technology (better picture), it has to lose.

So start lining up to buy your Toshiba HD DVD players...when they fall in price by $400.

Sucks to Hamastan

The US and EU have cut aid to the Palestinian "government." Not to worry: Israel is still paying for their water, electricity, defense, roads, etc.

Soloveichik shout out

I always enjoy reading articles where I can imagine the tone of the voice used.

The Welfare State

Disregarding, for the moment, the external hardships on the Palestinian people and society, I see a very clear parallel between the debate over domestic welfare and national welfare. While the PA treasury is empty, it is to be expected. With relatively little FDI (foreign direct investment) or economic infrastructure and now the lack of international aid, it is not a wonder Hamas cannot pay its bills.

The question appears to be: should we (the international community) fund the PA indefinitely, even though they have made little progress towards economic autonomy in that past decade?

This is, then, the same question as, "how long should we keep someone on welfare?" Can we expect every nation in the world to hold a job? There are circumstances outside the control of some nations. Drought, famine, border closings (eh hem- slight cough, you know). Should they receive indefinite funding, or should they be forced to look for a job at a point, even if there exist circumstances outside their control? Then obviously you have to ask if there is any justification for a true Welfare State?

And I just don't know...

Dear Anonymous,

While 3W allows anonymous comments (A) to allow people to post who do not wish to reveal themselves or (B) that don't want to sign up through blogger... I would people appreciate if others knew to whom they were responding.

Thnx

Israel is Our House (or "ישראל ביתנו')

Deeming the day of elections a better day for fun than the day after, Sara and I travelled to Haifa yesterday to have a bar-b-que with the Rubin and Kellner families. Indeed, one does not always know what to do with the day-after-election parties and many of those having day-after parties today are not those who expected to have them yesterday. Qadima, whose representative on Channel 2 claimed minutes before the polls closed that they were expecting to win all of the seats in the Knesset, fell 132 seats short of their goal. Shas, whose formal position appears to be to be bought off by anyone, is the number three party and has already been bought off by Qadima. A close fourth was a party that advertised almost exclusively in Russian and Israel's association of retired persons took as many seats as both Arab parties combined.

What will the future hold? More pullouts as Qadima and Labor bind together. Possibly fewer suicide attacks within Israel proper, but probably more Kassam and other attacks.

There is, however, a change on a larger scale that ocurred in this election. None of the leaders of the five major parties were generals or even high ranking officers in the Israeli army. If these people can put together a government, we will a see a significantly different form of regime. Whether non-military leadership will improve the country beyond what Sharon has already done remains to be seen.

Bibi, melech Yisrael...

...er rather sar otzar Yisrael... ah, the good 'ol days.

Sigh--the communists have once again taken over the country. I guess it is to hell in the proverbial handbasket-of-redistributed-wealth, again.

...and you flank from the left

So oddly enough I agree with Youssef Massad. I am ashamed to admit it, but I do. I would probably not go so far as to say that "[The US] has pursued and continues to pursue policies that are inimical to the interests of most people in these countries and are only beneficial to its own interests and to the minority regimes in the region that serve those interests, including Israel." But I would probably support his intuition, that Israel falls roughly along the U.S.'s greater foreign policy trajectory.

I guess politics makes strange bed fellows. Kinda like David Duke and John Mearsheimer ;)

Update: And apparently I am not alone (see "Strange Bedfellows").

Is it at all possible that this article was written in light of my post (as I sit here and scratch my head)?

Walt-Mearsheimer

I have received requests to express my opinion on the recent Walt-Mearsheimer paper. In short, I was hoping to find an incisive debate over the merits of strategic alliances with Israel. Instead I found that the paper glossed over the interesting aspects (devoting a pallid 2.5 pages to the "moral" component of America's support of Israel) and only ten pages in explains that the only possible reason for U.S. support must be the Israel Lobby. In the context of the article the Lobby is both loosely defined to include AIPAC, The Middle East Forum, Jews in the media, neo-Conservative scholars (who to Prof. Mearsheimer's dismay are not realists) and other ranking diplomats such as Dennis Ross. At other points it seems clear that the Lobby refers to AIPAC specifically. This everywhere-nowhere distinction is problematic to my mind because it allows for the creation of a duality in which both everyone is implicated, but yet still affords room for an Illuminati, which sits at the command center.

The article does not allow for the possibility that the Israel Lobby is compelling on its own accord. It is possible after all to have a wrong (to the minds of Walt and Mearsheimer) argument but still be convincing. The paper seems to only alot for the possibility of undue influence, but does not seriously engage the strategic arguments that the neo-Con school articulates (not to mention non-neo-Con elements of the Israel Lobby, such as Peace Now). And how "letter writing campaigns" constitute undue influence, let alone a serious mention in an article concerning lobbies, seems absurd.

I will leave it here, but I found this piece ("Duke 1, Harvard 0") helpful to point out the factual disagreements various some scholars have with the Walt-Mearsheimer piece.

Additional Thought: I just wanted to mention how I suprized I was that Mearsheimer coauthored this paper. He sits on the International Board of a Bar-Ilan think tank and, though not to his knowledge, got me my position with the JCPA. So I don't know if one could call him anti-Israel, per se.

Great Quote: "We went out of our way to say that the lobby is simply engaging in interest group politics, which is as American as apple pie." -J. Mearsheimer

I think that helps probe what is going through his head.

I hate Mishloach Manos

This should come as no surprise to those who know I refuse to give gifts even to my wife. People put a great deal of time and money into giving others foodstuffs that the others generally would not have gotten of their own accord. In theory, this might make sense for those on the receiving end except that purim culture generally demands a roughly equivalent exchange. In general most everybody ends up with food they value much less than the time and money they put into it.

I think that the manner in which this mitzvah is carried out is generally attributable to women. This is not to say that men have not made their own unique contributions to Purim culture. The drunken stupor, for instance is primarily a male contribution. As is their nature, women have forced men to participate in their time consuming prettied up candy exchange. Men, on the other hand, do not demand that women join them in drunken stupor.

I am mindful of the halachik mandate and have always complied. In Purims past, I would give to my beloved brother. (With his back to me, I whip an apple at the back of his head. Just as he turns towards me in a rage, I hammer him between the eyes with a can of pop. Good times. Good times.) For the most part I have maintained my minimal compliance. This year, Rachel forced me to give mishloach manos to the boys' teachers, but other than them, I gave to none. We did, however, assist the boys in preparing some Mishloach Manos for some relatives. I worry that in the future we may join this silly game so our children do not feel shame.

Thoughts on a Sub-Conventional War

I heard Moshe (Boogie) Ya'alon speak tonight. It was mildly interesting, but as I remarked to a peer, "You Israelis make it sound so easy. Go in, kill a few Hamasniks, demolish a few houses, ve zehu." I find Israeli political intellectuals to be heavily tactical in their thinking (because of the overwhelming military culture in Israel) and very much unable to create theoretical models. But that is neither here nor there...

Ya'alon did say something which sparked my interest, however. He remarked that since '73 Israel has not fought a conventional war (and besides Iraq I, has anyone really?). It spurred me to realize that conventional war is a struggle of territory. You force the other side to say uncle by taking his land, and encroaching upon his capital. Although the Risk analogy is not perfect, it is simple. Present armed conflict, in what Ya'alon termed "sub-conventional," revolves around identity, forcing the de facto creation of Us-land and You-land. A pocket of resistance will emerge in order to define itself against its surrounding political entity (I thought better than to use the word "power").

It is in precisely this way that Israel gets screwed. In '67 Israel was like, "Ha! We won a war and captured land!" But it is in this exact period that the paradigm of military struggle shifts. Whereas in the 19th century wars to annex territory were common, I do not recall much literature about resistance fighting amongst the locals. Regions of Poland, for example, regularly moved between a variety of powers with little opposition from the locals--in this model the "two stages" of war (conquest and occupation) are one. However, beginning around 1967 these two aspects become separated. It thus becomes almost antiquated to speak of a war to annex land; if the residents of land you seize feel like creating Us-land, you are again embroiled in conflict. Since the strategy of engagement becomes completely altered, you taking the land and holding the territory become two completely different episodes.

This explains rather nicely why it is that massive military powers seem to have so many problems these days--they essentially think that the conflict of old (land war) is the same as the new war (land hold). Thus military scholars write of the well-planned Iraqi invasion, and point to the poorly executed occupation period. That is precisely wrong, however (according to Ya'alon and what I present here). The two events are not stages at all but completely separate endeavors. Thinking in these terms allows for a much better grasp of the intransigence of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict as well as numerous other anti-insurgency campaigns.

Otis Spunkmeyers

As I sat down to my lunch of Code Red Mountain Dew and Otis Spunkmeyers chocolate chip muffin, it occurred to me that it must not be a mere coincidence that such yummy, yummy muffins were kneaded by Mr. Spunkmeyers. No. There must have been a story, which might tell very much like this...

Long ago there live a boy, whose parents were very, very mean. While his parents kept normal, unobtrusive names, Robert and Louise Trott, they foisted upon their only son a truly wicked and absurd name, Otis Spunkmeyers. As soon as he was allowed to play with others (which was far before most children) he was incessantly tormented for his name. What is your name, the children would ask. "Otis, Spunkm..." but the end was invariably drowned out by silly girlish laughter and the thumping of crude boys’ fists. No one liked Otis, and how could they? It is doubtful that anyone so named Spunkmeyer has ever survived the ripe old age of three (do you know any Spunkmeyers?) They either die of shame, or of older boys beating them for the crime of possessing such ridicules name.

Otis's parents wanted it this way. They enjoyed seeing him come home stale and empty, having all the shit knocked out of him on a regular, or hyper-regular basis. You see, that is why his parents named him so cruelly, and thrust him into toddler society when he was much too young, and the other children could easily pick on him. Every day they would ask Otis, "How was your day?" Only to rejoice at a sniveling and barely audible reply.

Otis was not without any luck, however. He not only learned to speak far before his colleagues, but also how to run. And run he did. Around the jungle gym, through the swings, up the slide, down the monkey bars and into the classroom, where only the mocking scars of his teachers and peers could lacerate him.

But on he lived. And while a truly tortured life, he outlived the normal life expectancy of children named Otis Spunkmeyers by 5 fold (the avg. O.S. only lives to 17 months you see). And while 7 is not a very old age, it is if you are so named Otis Spunkmeyers and have incredibly cruel parents who force you to begin school at far too young an age. You see, every day Otis would come home from school, beaten and bruised, and every day his parents would rejoice. But, after a time they had hoped that the bullies would finish the job. But alas, Otis was too fast. So they skipped him, into a class of even bigger bullies. But yet again, he outran them. So they skipped him, and skipped him and skipped him some more, but he outran all of them. So by the ripe old age of 7 years and one month, Otis was already a Junior in highschool. And it is there that he found his true salvation--HomEc.

Ms. Casey was a kind and gentle woman, from the heart of east Dublin. A heart of gold and a culinary might to match. Well, when battered and bruised (but not quite dead) Otis Spunkmeyers entered her class she knew what she would have to do. She approached him and exclaimed, "No ther boi, wy d'thay beat un yoo so?" It took a moment for poor Otis to parse the thick accent, but at last he responded, "They think I deserve it, for having such a stupid name." "Wel then." Ms Casey quipped, "wee wil ave tu doo sumptin aboot that."

And faster than you can say, "Paint my suspenders red, and call me Zarathustra." (which if spoken by a Welshman, could take five to nine years) Ms. Casey demonstrated to young Otis how to whip up a batch of her famous Chocolate Chip muffins and use them in defense of the nasty, nasty bullies. "No uze theze, an' no won 'ill evr think yu stupid ageen."

Otis was skeptical, but that day, in during Dodgeball, all the nasty boys were poised to bludgeon poor Otis Spunkmeyers. But before they could say, "Paint my suspenders red, and call me Zarathustra." Otis offered them some of his delicious Chocolate Chip muffins. Well, as you must know by now, Otis Spunkmeyers's Chocolate Chip muffins are the best source of fat, sugar, carbohydrates, calories and Mmm Mmm Good, this side of Baton Rouge. Who could hate Otis after eating such yummy muffins?

After the boys had their fill, they were too plump and jolly to be inclined to harm neigh a hair on the poor boys head. And even if they had wanted to throttle poor Otis, they could hardly run in such a condition.

Well, as you can imagine, Robert and Louise were neigh too pleased. They forced Otis to bake his yummy yummy muffins, until they burst--and burst they did. All their anger, rancor and wrath splattered their small town of Dussilvontrapvonschnit, and it tasted sweet, like Otis's yummy yummy muffins.

And that is why, to this day, his muffins are still known by his name.

Now I Get It

I just got a joke today, which was told to me over three years ago...

Three years ago I mustered up the courage to ask R. Aaron (Lichtenstein) a question that had been bugging me all through my first year of college. It appeared to me that the ethic within the university of open discourse, and the notion that dialogue will somehow lead to the betterment of Man and Humanity, is at odds with a Rabbinic sentiment that "all is contained within it [Torah]" and such prohibitions as bechukoteichem lo teleichu.

Well, I phrased the question somewhat along those lines (R. Aaron did not understand at first, so he needed to reformulate it) and as he walked to the Bank Mizrachi he explained that in the 19th century there existed this grand idea, expressed by the Romantics in particular, that Man's perfection will come through the perfection of the mind; if we pursue knowledge a bit further we would be able to perfect our universe. However, many 20th century philosophers have refuted this idea, and it seems clear that an intellectual ethic, on its own, is not particularly moral or helpful. He suggested that I go read John Henry Newman's Apologia, which articulates the point well and explains Chazal's perspective—that of essential mistrust of secular wisdom—succinctly.

I was never able to find the volume, until this weekend, when reading the New Yorker I found a reference to John Newman and remembered this conversation. John Henry Cardinal Newman was an Anglican who parted ways with the Church of England to become a Roman Catholic priest. The Apologia (appropriately titled) is a defense against the Anglicans. R. Aaron sent me to read a book of Catholic theology in order to answer the question of how Jewish thought regards secular knowledge...

...that's hysterical. What a bright, bright man.

In Context

So this is the cartoon which has spurred the demolition of Danish embassies in the Middle East. After so much hype, I can't say that I find it particularly offensive. Blasphemy is very passé in the West, it just doesn't rile people up the same way it did way-back-when.

As a thought experiment for a moment, let's pull a Chomsky and change the face of Muhammad to Sharon. Would the Jewish World be outraged? I would guess so. The distinction in our reaction comes from the implication, i.e. Islam is innately violent--since some part of us would concede that Islam promotes violent doctrines (rightfully or not) we laugh at a cartoon poking fun at Muhammad. As we consider Sharon's past very sensitive, we would likely protest the corollary. So let's call the cartoon in poor taste, if nothing more. However, it appears to me that the rioting which has ensued is not due to the equation of Islam to violence, but is in response to the heresy of displaying the face of the prophet.

I can't help but think about the infamous Ramirez cartoon five years back. People were offended, the LA Times apologized, that was that--I still do not think kindly of the cartoonist, however.

The question, of course, is not whether the response in the Middle East is justified (which it is not, in case you were wondering) but whether hurtful characterizations ought to be avoided. Cartoons are supposed to "poke fun" and are by nature controversial. They ought not be graphic (bloody limbs, etc) or otherwise pornographic (Jesus molesting little children would compel a response, I would venture to bet). However, the only real dictum I can settle on is that the cartoon expresses a mainstream opinion. If a cartoon is too far removed from "good taste" it becomes "hurtful." And, well, that is just too subjective for my liking. Alas, I am left to the Common Sense (Smell Test) which fails so many so often.

ברוך דין אמת

My thesis advisor, Professor Aryeh Leo Motzkin died last Saturday in Jerusalem. I learned a tremendous amount from him and will miss him greatly.

Jack bests the New York Times

It is simply amazing how the establishment media refuses to actually run the cartoons over which much of the Islamic world is having a tantrum. If not for the internet, the Celitic Semite would probably not have been able to come forth and debunk one of the "cartoons"

Whither Civil Liberties?

More interesting than Bush's SotU was the Democratic response. It was delivered by a soft young Democrat, Tim Kaine, who talked about Good News (cringe). But completely omitted from the address was any talk about the hearing scheduled to be held concerning the legality (and lack thereof) of Bushes warrantless wiretaps on millions of Americans. Is that just not an issue? Do overt and causeless invasions into the lives of average Americans not licit a response, when Pres. Bush reiterated his fervor for the practice. In the words of the revered Napoleon, "Gawd."

Only yesterday

did Rachel and I get an invitation to the Bassik-Gedwiser wedding. The reason for the tardiness, no doubt, is that Rachel and I moved to Skokie. Of course, the tardy invitation is no excuse for my absence from the wedding. Miriam sent me multiple e-mails asking me whether I would come. I was incredibly rude and didn't even respond. In general, I am terrible at responding to e-mails, but here I also acted (or did not act) out of some absurd notion that saying I wouldn't come would prevent me from changing my mind. We should not, however, let my rude and obnoxious behavior distract us from the real atrocity - Halper's absence.

The corrosive effects of living in Hyde Park, Chicago

I was speaking to a friend yesterday about Jack Abramoff. I told my friend, "at least he will be in federal prison rather than state prison." My friend responded, "He'll probably go to that federal prison in Connecticut that has a daily minyan". For some reason, though, I first understood him to say "Daley minion". Only when he mentioned the daf yomi shiur at the prison did I realize my error.

But Why?

News reports of another person "going postal." Though I don't feel like digging through the GoogleNews to find the recent episodes of such mania, the expression indicates the tendency for postal workers to act out violently. Does anyone have a reasonable hypothesis as to why postal workers appear more inclined to return to their place of employment, and shoot their coworkers?

How much worse off are the homeless?

According to Newsday,

Homeless adults in New York City had higher rates of HIV and tuberculosis, were more likely to be hospitalized because of mental illness or substance abuse, and died at twice the rate of adults with homes.

This is quite a claim! When I was last in New York City (over two years ago) I believe the death rate was still what it was for the last 5766 years, viz. 1 to a person -- irrespective of any facts pertaining to home-ownership

An Intelligent Word

on the Palestinian elections was said by David Warren, a prominent Canadian journalist.

On the Possibility of Future Attacks by Hamas...

On the possibility of future terrorist attacks by Hamas, Shaul Mofaz said it (Hamas?) would be the subject of an "unprecedented attack."

The one thing that I found to be surprising about this statement is that Mofaz would be so public about such a strategy - I thought he would've approached the topic a little more subtly.

On Hamas

So as everyone knows by now, Hamas has claimed 79 of the 132 seats in the Palestinian election. A result, I may add, which none of the pollsters and all of the journalists predicted. This indicates an interesting facet of Palestinian/Arab public opinion, which for whatever reason, is difficult to quantify, a priori.

The relevant question, as always, is: Is it good news for the Jews? On this point I am uncertain. I can see three distinct courses history could take, but have no notion of how to quantify them (e.g. 30% likelihood, 40%, 7%). In my thinking, however, I take for granted that Hamas is not a "viable partner for peace" (much like Arafat), and barring radical and sustained changes on behalf of Hamas, Israel will likely be forced to take further unilateral action in the coming years. Only a fool or a madman could attempt to negotiate with a PA representative (e.g. Abbas) who does not represent the present government (Hamas).

First scenario (less likely): A friend of mine asked me last night, if all the polls show that the vast majority of Palestinians want peace, how can they vote for Hamas? I think this answer is obvious. The results indicate that the majority of the Palestinians are concerned with infrastructure and social welfare and do not currently wish to engage in negotiations towards a final status agreement. Throughout America's history we have swayed back and forth between imperialism and xenophobia (to take two extremes) and I see no good reason why the Palestinians should not feel the same. In this scenario the Israeli-Palestinian dynamic remains static for the coming three years. With Hamas engaged in its role as a social welfare provider, it will not have the means to concertedly combat the "Zionists." Moreover, any Hamas provocation would likely provoke an Israeli response which would be contrary to the entire impetus for voting for Hamas in the first place, namely, building civic infrastructure.

Second scenario (more likely): Remember friends, because so many forget, Israel exists. And just like France, it is not going to dissolve any time in the future. So many in the neo-con camp seem to overlook the fact that Hamas does not pose a significant threat to Israel (Iran is something different, however). Therefore, the doomsday scenario in my eyes is that Hamas will use its position of authority to procure weapons and foreign support for its terrorist campaign, and ramp up its capabilities. It seems hard for me to believe that Hamas will be able to kill too many innocents before Israel would intervene and inter Hamas's political officials, but unlike Hamas's prospects in 1997, it does not look like their group will dissolve in the near future.

The final scenario, which is much less likely, is that Hamas, representing the Palestinian extreme, will actually be able to compromise and come to a lasting agreement. While Begin and Sharon were able to forge lasting arrangements due to their particular positions on the right, it does not seem to me that 1. Hamas is nearly mainstream enough 2. They have been involved long enough. Maybe after 30 years of political involvement Hamas could take a position of compromise, it does not seem reasonable that it will happen in just three.

One of the big wild cards here is how closely are rhetoric and policy linked in the Arab Politic? Can Hamas act moderatley while preaching violence? In the past Jihad means Jihad, but, for instance, I don't think Iran is going to attempt to wipe Israel off the map in the near future, despite Ahmadinejad's rhetoric to the contrary.

So is it good news for the Jews? I frankly see it being better than the current state of affairs. As my dad pointed out last night, truth is better than fiction. For the past months the world has been under the fiction that Abbas could restore order to the Palestinian territories. Now Hamas runs the region both in name and in fact and thus would seem easier for Israel to monitor, and identify a unified Palestinian voice (rather than bargaining with one voice, and bombing with another). Additionally, politics has its devilish way of making people complacent, maybe it will work its magic on Hamas as well.

Pork Soup

Apparently one of France's traditional meals is posing some problems for some of the poor within France. While there have been steps to denounce such actions, this strikes me as, yet again, another way in which the far right has been able to remain a legitimate political force in France.

A Note on the Value of Elections

Traditionally, even the greatest supporters of liberal society have been wary of the democratic value of elections. The American constitution (article 2) created a system of electors in order to ensure that the presidential elections were slightly removed from a purely popular vote. The well-known European thinker, Edmund Burke, has the following to say about the value of popular elections:

To govern according to the sense and agreeably to the interests of the people is a great and glorious object of government. This object cannot be obtained but through the medium of popular election; and popular election is a mighty evil. . . . They are the distempers of elections that have destroyed all free states. ("Speech on a Bill for Shortening the Duration of Parliament")

Despite such warnings, our contemporaries appear to have come up with the idea that democracies are constituted by and only by popular election. Thus we learn that Egypt is democratic, Iraq is democratic, and even Palestine (though it is not yet even a country) is democratic. By the way, the list of parties running in the Palestinian elections would make anarchists blush. This list I have found (source) includes five parties:

1. Fatah


2. Hamas


3. People's Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP)


4. Third Way (for people who have grown disillusioned with Fatah, but are reluctant to endorse Hamas' program)


5. Independent Palestine (headed by Mustafa Barghouti)

Three of those parties are well known terrorist organizations. The other two appear to be made up of independent terrorists. If these are the representatives of a democracy, there may be more "distempers" to worry about than those caused by the elections.

All of the Fun

none of the shvitz. It's Oren and Miriam wedding photos.

Wide or Narrow?

I am fasting today, and thus I am not entirely there (and I really wanted to see Apple announce the 13.3" iBook that they did not. Bummer.) so please excuse this post if it is not to your liking. On my last day here at Schumer's I have been listening to the Alito hearings and have been tuning in and out (More out than in during the MacworldExpo Keynote Address). I did catch something this morning something that caught my interest. Alito opined that his judicial philosophy would instruct him to rule, "not going to broader grounds when a narrower is a fair one." Why is that the case? Why should we think that Occam's Razor should apply to law (i.e. simpler is better)? I could image that lovey-dovey liberal environmental laws were enacted to evoke the most liberal reading possible. Why then should they be interpreted narrowly?

Reality Check on Douglas

While I will never be able to compete with the storied writings of Yo Miss! but I still think cataloging things kids say is important.

I substituted at Kadimah last week, the local day school, and I stayed to help out in the extended-day program. Sitting at a table of third and fourth graders reading a wonderful short work by Justice William O. Douglas "Points of Rebellion," I was trying to explain how important Justice Douglas was to those present. One of the kids interjected, "Well, my parents are still divorced."

Man, she schooled me.

Mmmmmmm. Shwarma

"In an attempt to stimulate the senses of ailing Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, well-wishers brought [shwarma] into his hospital bedroom at Hadassah En Kerem" (JPost). This well wisher also tried to bring Sharon a delicious laffa full of shwarma (with pickled eggplant and hummus). Unfortunately the shwarma looked so good that I ate it on the way to the hospital. Mmmmmm shwarma.

Mazal Tov

to Dave and Tikva Levitt on the birth of a baby boy on Friday. Bakol mikol kol, as they say.

Why I want to go to Penn

After:
A. Finishing 7 grad apps of my own and
B. finishing 3 college apps for my brother and
C. the imminent prospect to moving to the Penn campus

I found this Doonesbury hysterical

If one wishes to meet the king of Sweden, I can recommend better colleges to attend.

The Presidential Hanukah Bush

This is the Hanukiah in front of the President's House in Jerusalem.
Between the Hanukiah and the presidential entryway, one can see a bush.

With Liberty and Tolerance for All

The Sydney Morning Herald ran an article this morning entitled, "Spielberg outrages terrorist." According to the article, "The Palestinian mastermind, [Mohammed Daoud], of the Munich Olympics terrorist attack, which killed 11 Israeli athletes, says he is outraged at not being consulted for the Steven Spielberg thriller Munich." Daoud went on to say that Spielberg "should have listened to both sides of the story and reflected reality, rather than serving the Zionist side alone." That Spielberg is mighty outrageous! I don't know for sure, but my guess is that the Nazis were pretty offended by Schindlers List. The movie was not balanced at all, but showed a definite bias toward Jews and hardly gave the Nazis any chance to tell their side of the story.

According to the Jerusalem Post, former Shin Bet chief Avi Dichter "says pullout proved itself, Kassams [are] now terrorists' only means to attack Israel." Gee, now I feel much safer!

Finally, Some Policy from Peretz

Peretz has done what one might think impossible. In a land battered by kassams, suicide bombs, terrorist stabbings, and shootings, Peretz is managing to run on an economic policy ticket. Let us not forget the continued existential threats from Iran, Libya, Syria, and Lebanon. One might think that minimum wage would not be the foremost issue in Israeli politics. Yet it is the issue on which Peretz is focusing. Comparing Israel's minimum wage to that of the US and Britain, Peretz claims, "our minimum wage is a fraction of theirs" (Jerusalem Post). That is certainly true numerically, as Israel's minimum wage is $3.70, while US and Britain both have over $5.50. But I would imagine that cost of living is considerably lower in Israel. Nevertheless, he has announced something of a foreign policy/ military policy recently, claiming, "We need to immediately . . . dismantle the illegal outposts," said Peretz. "I would also stop all funding to expanding communities there, and only continue with the minimum aid needed to maintain the communities," added Peretz. "Instead, we should put those funds into developing the Negev and Galilee, where we can expand opportunities for our youth" (Ibid.). While I am all for developing the Negev and Galilee, I am still curious as to what he plans to do about terrorism. I am not an economist, but my guess is that constant threat of serious attacks is not very good for anybody's wages.

Is Sharon a True Bush-Imitator?

In the past couple of years, I have noticed that Sharon's image has begun to look more and more like Bush's image. Sharon also began to wear the pin with the flag on his left lapel (only Sharon's pin is of Israel's flag). Sharon speaks in simple language to the media. He even has a "ranch" in the Negev, to which he periodically goes to refresh himself. His recent recovery from a small stroke has, however, led Bush himself to suggest to Sharon a way to become even more "Bush-like." In the words of Haaretz: "U.S. President George W. Bush told Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to eat less, work less and exercise more. . . . The president also reportedly told Sharon that he needs him healthy, and said he hoped to see results of physical exercise and weight loss when the two meet in a couple of months." The results of this change in lifestyle, Bush went on to say, could be crucial to the war on terror.

On Restraint

I am opposed to the Patriot Act, in part. While I don't like the Patriot Act, I recognize that many of the issues that upset me are not contained therein. However, the Patriot Act reauthorization has acted to raise public opinion and awareness about issues of privacy and security.

As Pres. Bush was so kind to specifically honor senators from NY, CA and NV as members who oppose the current formulation of the bill. As such we have received many calls in the past few days in support of the Patriot Act. A conversation might go like this:

Zev: Hello, senators office, how can I help you?

Constituent: I want to tell the senator that he should stop protecting the terrorists and start protecting the citizens of this country. How could he vote against the citizens of the country? Maybe he should be deported.

Z: Thank you very much for your opinion, may I please have your name, address and telephone number so I can pass your comment along to the senator.

C: My name is Robert Macarthur. I live at 78 North Terrace Rd Buffalo NY 14202 716-828-4590.

Z: Thank you very much for your call. We will just put your name through a central database of known enemies of the United States to ensure that no subversives unduly impact the American legislative process. Just for securities sake we will also give your name to the IRS to guarantee that you have no financial links to terror. If you get audited this year, that will be why.

But I show restraint, and cut myself off before that last part.

Public Service Announcement

The senate is deliberating on the Patriot Act today. Call your senator to voice your opinion. I will suggest calling local offices, as the DC office is probably swamped. Offices are currently monitoring the issue.

Shmuli's Legacy Jig 

Broken Walls at Hillel

After 8 years, it looks like Rachel, Shmuli & co. are ending their tenure in Hyde Park. They leave with quite the legacy, and I wish them well up in their new neighborhood. With Shmuli gone, who will be around Hillel to break the walls?

Go shorty, it's your bat mitzva, we gonna party, like it's your bat mitzvah

A bas-mitzveh that cost over 10 million dollars! It included such "artists" as Tom Petty, Aerosmith, and 50 cent and had goody bags that included ipods and digital cameras. The goody bags were so successful that one 14-year old guest said that they were the "coolest" part of the part-ay. According to the Jerusalem Post, "The guest asked that her name not be used because she didn't want her friends to think that she had only attended the party for the bags." She added that she also liked the music.

One need not think that such an expensive bar or bas mitzve is necessary, however, and the Jerusalem Post lists a couple of tips on how to keep it affordable:

1. Plan the event yourself. This can save thousands of dollars you would otherwise spend on an event planner.


2. Make the tables' center-pieces yourself, this will save a $200/table fee for renting them for a night.


3. Don't have famous musicians. This could save millions.

No matter what you do to keep down the costs, "at the end of the day there will always be the pressure to compete with other bat and bar mitzvas."

Even though my bar mitzveh had none of these gimmicks and cost somewhat less than the recommended minimum of $20,000, I still think I had the best bar mitzveh in town. I am also completely certain that those who came for the goody bags were sorely disappointed.

The Islamic Scare

These allegations of gross infractions on human rights and international sovereignty are cause for immediate real concern. The justification for these acts sounds something like Sen. McCarthy on an irate diatribe. Whither Edward Murrow?

Update: Thank you one and all. As I was running out of the office on Thursday I wrote this post noticing that I ought to link to a different article. By that time it was too late, so I changed the link now. I still think "renditions" are a big deal though.

mmmmm

Sufganiot...

Modern donuts look like little cakes and soft donuts filled with inferior quality strawberry jam are almost a thing of the past.

So true, but so yummy.

Liberalism = -(Conservatism)

In my continuing struggle against fickleness, I am sorely bothered by the reversal of the liberal agenda in the course of the decade. In David O. Russell's 1999 film "Three Kings" he lays out the inadequacy of the American response to the first gulf War. A band of three rogue US soldiers led by Maj. Archie Gates (George Clooney) set out to abscond with Iraqi gold in the fog surrounding the American invasion. The soldiers set out to steal the gold, ignore the insurgent's (told to rise against Saddam by Bush I) and return without incident. After witnessing the wasteful slaughter of innocent Iraqis the soldiers are impelled to aid their cause and move this village of insurgent's across the boarder to Iran.

The message of the movie is clear, America let Saddam's opponents down in the wake of the first invasion. The US promised to topple Saddam, but instead left these poor people to be butchered by the state.

It seems to me that, irrespective of the false pretenses for war, the US had a moral obligation not only to topple Saddam's evil regime, but to aid in the reconstruction effort in Iraq. How the US could morally justify leaving these people in the midst of violent political turmoil is beyond me. The analogy to Vietnam is not fair. We are not trying to protect one nation from another in Iraq, rather here we are attempting to revitalize a failed state*. I don't understand why my fellow liberals don't agree, besides for a loathing to be the the same side of any issue with Bush II.

* Whether Iraq should be split into two or three separate nations is a good question, which I do not boast to have an answer to.

Aeon Flux on Style

I blog too much about movies and too little about books. So it goes.

I saw Aeon Flux motza"sh with my brother. It is a very cool movie. The really notable part about the movie is the design. The vision of the future is only minimally technologically futuristic; there is very little technology in the movie which indicates scientific advance. Rather, it is the lines and shapes which communicate to the audience that the time is no where near the present. The style, cut, fabric and lines of all the people imparts a deep feeling of temporal distance. I really liked that.

$10 to anyone

who can understand this paper whose initials are not ML.

Thanks to Sam for pointing this out.

[offer void as of 12/1/05 2:12pm EST]

Priests will be Priests

Somehow many Americans do not find the Vatican's ban on heterosexual priests nearly as offensive as its ban on homosexual priests.

NYT Shout Out

I will not bother liking to the article, as it will be dead in a few days anyhow. On Friday (Nov. 25th) "Such Sound and Fury! Tradition! Einsteins in Food Fight of Words" led the NYT National Section (p. 21). UofC Hillel's Latke-Hamitashen debate gets top billing. Pretty cool, says I.

Thanks to Maggie for pointing it out to me.

The End of Israel's Left?

For five years now analysts have been asking this question, however, for all intents and purposes they have been wrong. The left (economically, socially and strategically liberal) has existed as a party with a measurable (though muted) effect on Israel's politics. I would contrast this to American politics which is economically "conservative" (by which I really mean libertarian: let companies run without intervention). In the US is assumed that companies should be able to do what they want, so long as there is not a specific political need. This is in contrast to Israel where it is assumed that companies need to request permission from the gov't to act.

The creation of a "centrist party" may in fact destroy the left. All Israelis are committed to two things: their security and livelihood. In the early 90's it looked to many Israelis as if their security could improve through Oslo. A reduced armed forces is first and foremost to limiting casualties (if such an opportunity presents itself). 12 years later most Israelis believe they can improve their security by isolating the PA and endorsing measures such as the fence, disengagement and a smaller, more efficient military. While Likud and the Centrist Party can debate over these specifics, Labor will struggle to present any viable third alternative. With a two party system the opposition party need only present the opposing opinion, in a three party system that becomes increasingly difficult for one of the two opposing voices.

With regards to Israel's economy there are very few who still endorse a socialist system. Particularly with Peretz, an old-skool socialist with a history of close camaraderie with his associates (read: corruption), Labor will find it difficult to deliver a real message to which the people will respond. The election of Peretz indicates that Labor is falling back on their traditional economic values, which are increasingly out of touch with the Israeli people. They are so desperate to retain their voice, that they have chosen one which is irrelevant.

The catch is the new party. If Sharon is truly ousted from within, the Centrist Party may collapse and leave the old two party circus. However, if Sharon is a viable leader (which I believe he is) this may constitute the death-spell for Labor.

Israel's Next (Previous?) Enemy

Peretz said he hoped that an agreement on early elections would calm markets concerned at prospects of political turmoil as well as his pledges to roll back free-market reforms.

"I think that if we reach the Knesset on Monday with an agreement between the prime minister and myself, it will bring quiet to the political framework, it will calm the markets in Israel," he said. (Haaretz)

Roll-back free market reforms? And by "calm markets" I think he means "kill markets."

Georgia on Our Mind

or "Why's the North always a' Pickin' on Us?"

Once again my homestate has made it to the arena of national debate over her voting practices. Due to problems with this sort of thing in the past, Georgians have to submit all proposed changes in voting procedures that might affect minorities to the Justice Department up in Washington so they can continue to exercise control over our elections (see Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act of 1965). Anyway, here is the current problem (from Wash Post):

The [proposed] program requires voters to obtain one of six forms of photo identification before going to the polls, as opposed to 17 types of identification currently allowed. Those without a driver's license or other photo identification are required to obtain a special digital identification card, which would cost $20 for five years and could be obtained from motor vehicle offices in only 59 of the state's 159 counties.

That's not all:

Proponents said the measure was needed to combat voter fraud, but opponents charged that Republicans were trying to keep black voters, who tend to vote Democratic, away from the polls.

I guess the assumption here is that Blacks don't have driver's licenses or other photo id cards and many are too poor or would be significantly inconvenienced by going to a nearby county to buy an id card.

Anyway, I really can't see how this move specifically targets blacks. With the Mexican immigrant population in Georgia increasing daily, such measures could easily be understood to target them. Or perhaps it targets all poor people, or all lazy people. Or perhaps they are actually worried about voter fraud and think that people should have better ids.

I'm waiting for all you Chicagoans to explain to me why this really is against blacks and why we don't need to worry about voter fraud.

Results

In the summer of 2004 I worked to research International Security Initiatives in Post-Disengagement Gaza. As far as I can tell these are they--and I am sorely displeased. It appears that the Palestinians gained on every front.

The following is the text of an email I sent to my boss at the JCPA, I think it captures everything I have to say on the matter:

I have read the State Depts release on "Movement and Access" for the Palestinian controlled areas, it looks like this is the result to which our paper looks. I am very confused.

The PA seems to have won on every front. They "gain control over entry and exit from their territory" through Rafah [at least the way it works here, in Buffalo, is that the Canadians control entry and the US controls exit--from my perspective. Why does the PA get both?] A seaport is to be constructed and "the importance of an airport" is acknowledged. They are even afforded convoys between WB and Gaza! I recognize that it can be done securely, but I had thought that that World Bank proposal was off the table.

The US is to act as a security coordinator (a task you indicated they were not up to under Oslo) and the border control (which **** told me the US would oversee) is being looked after by the EU--the UK is not even mentioned.

Is it just my reading, or does Israel have very few security guarantee with this compromise? Why, so soon after disengagement, has the PA been afforded such mobility, despite their poor showing on the political front?

I guess this is it.

Make my life easier

For those of you who do not already know, Miriam Gedwiser and I are betrothed to be married in Boston on January 15, 2006.

If you are reading this blog, you are almost certainly invited. You will make my rather hectic life easier by emailing to my obassik-at-lehman.com your name, address, and possibly phone number. Thank you.

"Hate"

For those of you who are looking for a good movie to watch, particularly one that happens to have an uncanny similarity to the recent events in France, I highly recommend watching the movie "La Haine" (Hate), a Mathieu Kassovitz film, which won a Palm D'Or in 1995. The amazing thing about it is that even though it was produced 10 years ago, it contains the same exact storyline as the current riots - ethnic youths rioting against authority in the Parisian suburbs. Apparently the difficulties that the youths are currently experiencing has not changed for a while - it was the same when I was in Paris three years ago, and evidently it was the same back in '95. While Kassovitz had good foresight in producing this movie, and had J.M. LePen won the election back in '02, his movie would have become reality even sooner.

On Andy Warhol

I heard an interview with John Updike this morning on NPR about his new book "Still Looking."

Updike explained Warhol in a completely new light, and in so doing, blew my mind. Warhol was known for making very ironic statements such as, "I like boring." I have always understood his art to be a jibe at the superficial, artificial culture. Updike maintains that, like all Pennsylvanians, Warhol is not ironic. He enjoys the boring and the superficial and his art embraces those very elements.

Updike once met Warhol at a party wearing a tuxedo. Updike thought it odd and put the question to Warhol who then lowered his pants to reveal jeans underneath.

It is all about what's on the surface.

Oh the Youth!

I tried explaining one of Churchill's whiticisms to my brother today.

Z: Do you even know who Winston Churchill was?
B: No.
Z: He was only one of the greatest statesmen to ever live. He was the leader of Britian in WWII.
B: Oh, this is kinda like the time I didn't know who Snoop Dogg was.

No Benny, its not like the time you didn't know who Snoop Dogg was.

Ditto

Ibid.

Intifada 2005

This time it's in France. Consider this my formal recommendation that Israel send observers to France to ensure that they do not act against any international laws.

Supreme Strategy

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, was complimentary of Miers. He raised Miers' name during a September 22 breakfast meeting with the president in which Sens. Frist, Specter, Leahy and he discussed possible candidates with the president, Reid spokeman Jim Manley said. Reid believes Miers would bring a "fresh perspective" to the court, Manley said.

"I like Harriet Miers," Reid said in a statement. "As White House counsel, she has worked with me in a courteous and professional manner. I am also impressed with the fact that she was a trailblazer for women as managing partner of a major Dallas law firm and as the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association." (CNN)

Shmuli is the person who pointed out to me that Reid's endorsement of Miers is the linchpin to understanding the recent series of events. I stand utterly astounded that Reid can still stand by his endorsement of Meirs, in light of all the criticism which has ensued. At the very least it just seems ill-advised politically; but that is neither here nor there.

Bush attempted to choose a candidate for the Supreme Court that would have bi-partisan support. Who would not nominate their personal attorney to the bench, whose conservative views are clear and has the support of the Senate Minority Leader?! In the end, however, it was the conservative lobby, not the Liberals or Dems that forced Miers to withdraw. I had thought earlier that the Dems ought not attack Miers before the hearings, as then they would look like they were just playing partisan. The result has been that Bush, seeing that the Right brought his former nominee down, chose to rally his party around a strong conservative nominee instead of making another bipartisan offering. Because the Dems stayed pretty silent on attacking Meirs, there was no need to cater to their base--they are irrelevant.

Alito looks to be a good guy (read: qualified- well educated and experienced, and has a family for what it's worth). From Scotius, anyhow, he does care about issues like feminism, racism and people with disabilities--he is just more strict about applying laws. I can live with that.

I immediately

thought of Oren when I saw the title to this post at Crescat.

Proof: the Movie

So I saw Proof with my sister Motza"sh. My sister liked it more than I did. Atop the fact that the movie was only ok, I (like The New Yorker) felt that they kept on talking around the math. A more thorough explanation of the central theme of this movie than, "this is the most important proof in the last 50 years." might have felt more true to life. Excessive jargon is bad, but none at all indicates that the actors on stage are guarded-- they know you are listening and, in deference to your ineptitude, don't want to bore you with details. But you did decide to spend your Saturday evening at movie called, "Proof," you can't hate math that much and I, for one, like hearing words I don't understand. A good movie allows all involved, both actors and audience, to feel comfortable. Maybe I know too many Mathies, but no one refers to a Theoretical Physicist as a Theoretical Physicist; it just sounds wooden.

That being said, the lack of math detail is made up by the incredible amount of HP subtlety. The movie was filmed in HP, Northwestern and England-- with the house being in England (so I gather). The penultimate scene of the movie has Paltrow opening up a drawer in their house revealing, amongst other things, a matchbook (or something like it) from the Medici. Someone had to cart that thing thousands of miles just to give the illusion to people who know HP that the house is really located there. Hats off.

The Nobel Prize for Economics

has followed me to Hebrew University in Jerusalem. When I was at Chicago, they were winning the prize. Now that I am at Hebrew U . . .

I am currently on vacation in Athens, so we'll see if anyone here wins it.

King of the Hill

While reading online about the Miers nomination I saw (I forget where) a reference to my favorite King of the Hill line.

HANK: I thought you were busy teaching girls to blow up basketballs. When did this turn into a desire to ruin wrestling?
PEGGY: Oh, give me a break. I don't see how having a girl on the team would ruin it. Did a woman judge ruin the Supreme Court?
HANK: Yes, and that woman's name was Earl Warren.

I wonder

if taller women are less into getting gifts from their men?

Meirs Market

Anyone willing to venture odds on Meirs conformation? Even Cons on the blogosphere seem to be shouting patronage. Just a guess- 2:13 she goes down.

Shanna Tova

To all those that I have not had the presence of mind to call personally (I hesitate to list them, for the sake of monotony) Shanna tova techatev vetechatem le'alter chaim tovim vesholom.

Yuri Undershaft

There can be no doubt that "Major Barbara" (George Bernard Shaw) lies as the literary precursor to Nicholas Cage's newest movie "Lord of War." Intellectually, they are really talking about the same thing: how can you sell that which you cannot morally defend? In the proximity to the question, Lord of War puts us on the front-lines of African massacres-- Yuri Orlof (Cage) is given full knowledge of what lies ahead for the weapons he peddles while Andrew Undershaft can only dream. Oren also pointed out to me that, for at least part of the movie, you want to be Yuri. He has money, power, and family all thanks to his nefarious business. But there is where the movie peaks.

After seeing Major Barbara this summer at Shaw Festival (greatest show on earth!) I was really excited to see a modern day equivalent. Needless to say Shaw is unique. Shaw creates a villain so perfect, so idyllic that all slander is forcibly syphenned off to the side. He never drinks, cheats or gambles. The antagonist is polite, courteous and a generous philanthropist. As a result of Understaft's clean record, all eyes are perched glaring at his one flaw-- he sells guns. Because Shaw is so funny, the villan always wins. By the end of the play Undershaft convinces Adolfus to join his factory, and all the other characters are shown to be more or less buffoons. The play causes you to completely rethink your moral reservations with the subject matter or only at the very end does it give you some hope that your intuitions are not completely in err.

Yuri has none of these graces. He is self absorbed (which is only accentuated by Cage's boring monologue throughout the movie) and not a very nice person. He cheats, never sees his family, does hard drugs and loses control of himself from time to time. In light of all these offences he does not come across as a moral purist. The supporting characters are weak and supply no counter-balance to Yuri. Even the Interpol investigator comes off looking like a stupid attack dog lacking the refinement to parry Yuri's rather weak blows.

It is hard to compete with Shaw's whit and brilliance, but Lord of War comes no where close.

UChicago Law

Look at the new UChicago law blog. Looks to be a real blog, instead of essays, like Becker-Posner. We can expect many good things.

Foreign Law is History

Now that Roberts and Ginsburg have both successfully refused to answer questions that would predict future rulings, one of the few areas of controversy left to quiz nominees on is the citation of foreign law. The anti-foreign law position (the GOP stance) is easily justified to the public and the Democrats have nothing to gain policy-wise from pushing the point. A future Democratic President will probably avoid the controversy by appointing only nominees who will state that they will not cite foreign law.

My freinds are cooler than yours

As evidenced by the fact that they (well she really--Adina Brickman) play football in international fora. How many frum women can say that?!

Persecution and the Art of Blogging

In an effort, no doubt, to give evidence for Leo Strauss's theory that in times of persecution writers had to hide their meanings in their works so as to avoid censorship, the leftist organization Reporters Sans Frontieres has released a handbook to inform bloggers who live under tyrannical regimes how they can avoid censorship. The main technique for avoiding censorship appears to be for a blogger not to disclose his identity. This allows the bloggers to say whatever they want about the regimes under which they live with a lower level of risk of persecution since the government cannot identify them. This is significantly easier than what earlier authors had to do, according to Strauss's theory, since unknown bloggers can disclose their true meaning without having to hide it in the text of their document. Nonetheless, I wonder how safe their anonymous disclosures can be from increasingly techno-savvy regimes. If I were dissenting in a regime that might kill me for it, I still might follow the old method of hidden meanings. But perhaps this is a sign of my own cowardliness.

Schumer, Roberts and Dr. Zhivago

I have tried to pay pretty close attention to the hearings (especially now that I might get questions about it at work), but alas, I was not able to give my undivided attention to the proceeding the past few days. I have, however, tried to keep up with Schumer's remarks to Roberts.

Now the question, to my mind, is not whether Roberts will be confirmed, but whether the Dems should endorse him. Frankly, I think he is a wonderful candidate and will make a fine justice, but what I have heard of the hearings the last four days really upsets me. Through hours and hours of questions, through three days of questioning the most substantive things Roberts told the commission was that he believes in the right to privacy, as found in the liberty clause of the 14th amendment and that two of his favorite movies are "Dr. Zhivago" and "North by Northwest," the man was a tar baby.

Generally I felt that Roberts was taciturn on many issues which were "softballs" (in the words of Schumer-like stupid comments of Pat Roberts and asking for an apology for using the word "amigo" in a memo). More importantly though, he repeatedly refused to answer direct questions from senators about his view of the law. While I think that questions like, "Well, how would you have voted on Kelo?" are stupid, questions which ask how he understands basic legal principles like the interstate commerce clause (which he kind of did open up to Schumer on day 4) ought to be taken seriously. That he was not forthcoming indicates to me that he knew he would be confirmed and thus any answer would only put him at risk.

In Schumer's remarks today I think he said as much when he announced he would vote against the nomination. Again, the senate vote by Schumer is not one for Roberts's conformation, but against meaningless hearings.

Not Just a Jewish thing...

So women want to stay home. This is not new. The question is why? Why don't these women feel that their future husbands should sacrifice their careers instead?

Belated Birthday Blessing

17 Elul, exactly two months after my birthday, was Shmuli's birthday. Though I searched ויקיפדיה and Wikipedia, I was unable to find lists of famous people born on that day or famous events that happened. We shall have to settle for Shmuli's birth as a momentous enough day, without which Yavneh and probably the entire U of C Hillel would not exist.

Racism at the U of C

One of the little mini-controversies over the Roberts nomination was his use of the term "War Between the States" rather than "Civil War". The former supposedly suggests segregationist sympathies. It seems to me that both terms are equivalent in their neutrality. The official U.S. term is "War of the Rebellion" clearly takes sides but almost nobody uses that one. There apparently is also a name for the Civil War that clearly takes the side of the South. I used to know a Southern fellow at the University of Chicago who would refer to the "War of Northern Aggression". For this fellow's sake he best not choose a vocational field where liberal sentiment is strong. In any case, if Roberts' use of "War Between the States" shows insufficient opposition to segregation, then what are we to say of my former acquaintance?

UPDATE: To be fair, I understood this fellow to be speaking in jest. As another mini-controversy from the Roberts nomination shows, however, that won't save you from stern reprimands from Senatorial blowhards.

On September 15, 1980

my wife was born. As per our prenuptial agreement (not to give gifts to eachother) I did not give Rachel a birthday present. Not only have I always held true to my promise to Rachel, I have also forgiven her for the few times she broke her corresponding promise to me. Given that we share our wealth, we both feel it is silly to purchase something the other obviously chose not to purchase.

I will admit that I have been criticized by other married men for my practice. "Never mind what Rachel says," they argue, "all women are crazy and need gifts to feel appreciated." I ask the married and committed men among you - are your women sane enough to appreciate you NOT getting them gifts?

Dunk the Man from US News

I would assume that many people who read this page are disgruntled with the US News rankings of Chicago (15, tied with Brown, ew). Here is a quick way to get a little esteem back through silly ratings contests. The Chicago Tribune is having an online poll of the seven great wonders of Chicago, of which one nominee is UofC. So get out there and vote!

My picks were:
1. Chicago Blues
2. The Lakefront
3. Millenium Park
4. Wriggley Field
5. Sears Tower
6. The Watertower
and 7. the UofC

R'Ovadia

I was particularly impressed with R'Ovadia's recent statements, correlating Katrina with Bush's support of the disengagement. Throw in the racist statements, and it surpasses all inflammatory remarks that he has made in the past.

מזל טוב

It is my pleasue to wish Oren Bassik and Miriam Gedwiser mazal tov on the occasion of their engagement.

I am almost as happy as a jumping monkey.

Economics of Katrina

I am sort of confused about the economics of city building, maybe on of you could help me out.

Let's say a city is worth X. X is probably a pretty big number considering all the infrastructure and revenue a city produces. Then Y is the amount of money it would cost to rebuild that city. Y can also be seen as "how bad do you really want it?" Obviously if Y is greater than X you just scrap the city and start over somewhere else. It also seems to indicate (to me, at least) that the value of the city is X+Y or the "actual" value of the city plus "how much do you really want it?" As it appears that no one is really talking about scrapping New Orleans just yet, which would indicate that cities are hugely undervalued. If there is enough capital to rebuild the entire city from scratch (almost) then the New Orleans market was hugely undervalued for all those years that it was not underwater (and thus every other major city). Is the "market" on N.O. that off-base or has it really been accounting for this risk all along?

Happy 10,000!

Thanks you for all the clicks over the past year. 10,000 clicks is a lot of clicks. I should know, I probably made half of them myself!