Subscribe to The Jewish Standard free weekly newsletter

 
font size: +
 

Obama and our not-so-humble opinions

 
 
 

Miss the good old days?

When, that is, we had a president who refused to allow the United States to participate in the U.N.’s Durban Review Conference because he believed Israel would be unfairly criticized.

A president who rejected the Goldstone report and refused to participate in joint military exercises with Turkey when Ankara insisted Israel be excluded.

A president who asked Congress to approve a $205 million package to help Israel build a new anti-missile defense system.

A president who spoke up on Israel’s behalf to help it gain acceptance into the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

A president who didn’t shy from authorizing the killing of an American-born radical Muslim cleric hiding in Yemen.

A president who, in a speech delivered in the heart of the Arab world, told his listeners that they need to recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state.

A president who, addressing the U.N. General Assembly, stated clearly and unequivocally that “Israel is a sovereign state and the historic homeland of the Jewish people” and went on to say that “It should be clear to all that efforts to chip away at Israel’s legitimacy will only be met by the unshakeable opposition of the U.S.”

A president who, on the domestic front, signed an executive order that preserved the faith-based social service funding initiative and pointedly did not forbid participating religious groups from discriminating in hiring in order to be faithful to their religious beliefs.

Well, take heart. The good old days are more recent than you think. You have that president. His name is Barack Obama.

No, I didn’t vote for him in 2008. I’m a lifelong Republican, an alumnus, in fact, of Young Americans for Freedom. (I was once young.)

But it bothers me that Mr. Obama is negatively viewed by so many Orthodox Jews, ostensibly because he treats Israel badly and is hostile to religion.

I have no statistics, only anecdotal evidence and journalistic gleanings, for my feeling that he is so viewed by many intelligent and otherwise well-informed frum folks. But if I’m right and he is, one has to wonder why.

Maybe it’s his fiscal strategy. Economics is an esoteric, inscrutable science to me, something on the order of particle physics. And so it may well be that the president deserves opprobrium by the heapful for his fiscal policies. But those policies are not the major part of the criticism one hears about Mr. Obama “in the mikvah,” so to speak. There he is indicted on charges of insensitivity (or worse) toward Israel or religious Jews.

Surely our community is not so uninformed as to consider Mr. Obama’s middle name, given him at birth, an indictment of his character; or so credulous as to doubt his citizenship; or so crass — one hopes — as to distrust him for a surplus of melanin.

There may well be reasons to feel negatively toward the current administration (certainly many people, and they are hardly limited to our community, do). History will have its say in time. But if any readers were surprised a few paragraphs above to discover that the “good old days” of American support for Israel and concern for religious rights are the here-and-now, they must admit that they were not as well-informed about our president as they thought.

The real problem here, though, isn’t Mr. Obama or our feelings about him. It’s something deeper.

One of the most basic Torah imperatives is modesty. Not only in dress and in speech but in attitude — in recognizing that there are things we don’t know, in some cases can’t know.

And yet so often we seem to feel a need to embrace absolute, take-no-prisoners political opinions; to reject any possibility of ambivalence, much less any admission of ignorance.

Certitude is proper, even vital, in some areas of life. But in the realm of politics it can be, in fact usually is, an expression of overconfidence or worse.

Part of wisdom is knowing what one doesn’t know. And part of modesty is acting accordingly.

AMI MAGAZINE

Rabbi Avi Shafran
Rabbi Avi Shafran is an editor at large and columnist for Ami.
Disclaimer
The views in opinion pieces and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of The Jewish Standard. The comments posted on this Website are solely the opinions of the posters. Libelous or obscene comments will be removed.
 
 
 
Yehoshua Solomon (of Adas Yeshurun) posted 26 Dec 2010 at 08:23 PM

Thank you Rabbi Avi for sharing once again the wisdom you have been granted on the worldly concerns of our times, as you would often do in our shul. It took me time in yeshiva to understand how the chachamim are level-headed and keep their calm, and that this is the true, mature path. Your words present that calmness to me. Also: your writing style, about which the Rabbi (as we in my family know him) says, “I do not know where he gets it from; it’s not from me!”

JOE THE PROFESSOR posted 28 Dec 2010 at 12:16 PM

I heartily agree with most of Rabbi Shafran’s comments. I am very curious however as to his political motives in issuing this statement which will be anatema to much of his “base”.
My guesses (in descending order of likelihood are
1) Fear that the “tea Party”  will become a major force for antisemitism. (“Orthodox Jews are not ‘Real Americans’ .”
2) Paul and company will cut off Fpreign Aid programs
3) The Republicans will dismantle parts of the Social Safety Net which aid Kollel Families

 

A bully in the pulpit

 

Maybe baby … or maybe not

The most famous person of 2013 hasn’t even been born yet.

I’m talking, of course, about the royal baby, the future heir to the British throne, who will be the most photographed, tweeted, and talked-about newborn of the early 21st century.

For me, it’s beginning to feel like 1982 all over again. From my then child’s-eye vantage point in rainy Manchester, England, I watched the nation’s unemployment rate soar, while the Tories introduced austerity measures to try to rein in spending. Then the announcement of Charles and Diana’s pregnancy suddenly gave ordinary people a reason to “keep calm and carry on.”

 

 

God included women at Sinai

For more than half a century, rosh chodesh Sivan, the start of the Jewish month of Sivan, has evoked mixed emotions in me.

On the one hand, it heralds the arrival of Shavuot, with its rejoicing at the re-enactment of Sinai; on the other, it marks the yahrzeit of my beloved bubbe, Breineh (Becky) Didovsky Green. Intertwined with communal joy, the excitement at approaching Sinai — and the cathartic effect of making blintzes — is the personal sorrow for the loss of the grandparent whom I knew best and longest, who lived with us in the Roxbury section of Boston and was my constant childhood companion.

 

 

RECENTLYADDED

What if the Nazis had tweeted?

 

Black to the future

Picture it. The 1960s ad market. Cigarette boxes danced and kids colored with “Flesh” crayons straight from the Crayola Caucasian collection — assuming you were either anemic or came from Flekkefjord.

And then, Alevai! PC pummeled in. Ciggies were out and Crayola got the memo. “Flesh” was renamed “Peach” in 1962, “Indian Red” eventually became “Chestnut,” and even earlier “Prussian Blue” turned to “Midnight Blue” in case Kaisers started goose-stepping during the Cold War.

We’ve come a long way — or have we?

Recently, Dov Charney’s American Apparel introduced a “kewl” new addition: A nail polish collection free of formaldehyde — but clearly not free of the company’s signature chutzpah.

 

 

Hezbollah:  From terrorism to war crimes

An unexpected obstacle to efforts within the European Union to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization emerged last week when the new Bulgarian foreign minister, Kristian Vigenin, said in a radio interview that evidence connecting the Lebanese Shi’a organization with last year’s murderous assault on a busload of Israeli tourists in the resort town of Burgas was “not conclusive.”

Vigenin produced no new evidence to counter the conclusion, shared by American, Israeli, and British intelligence agencies, that Hezbollah was behind the attack. Yet by casting doubt on Hezbollah’s role, Vigenin has opened the possibility that the bitter political divides within this comparatively marginal member of the EU could affect the bloc’s Middle East policy as a whole.

 

 
 
S M T W T F S
1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30