Wednesday, April 3, 2013
Political Moderation and the Conservative Disposition. By Peter Wehner.
Political Moderation and the Conservative Disposition. By Peter Wehner. Commentary, April 1, 2013.
Tipping Points: Is the Culture War Over? By Steve Hochstadt.
Tipping Points: Is the Culture War Over? By Steve Hochstadt. History News Network, April 1, 2013.
Jacksonian Historian Robert V. Remini (1921-2013) Has Passed Away.
Robert Remini has passed away. History News Network, March 31, 2013. Also find it here.
The Middle East War on Christians. By Kirsten Powers.
Middle East Christians need our protection. By Kirsten Powers. USA Today, April 2, 2013.
Baby Boomers and the “Gray Divorce” Boom. By Susan L. Brown.
A “gray divorce” boom. By Susan L. Brown. Los Angeles Times, March 31, 2013.
Middle East “Democracy.” By Thomas Sowell.
Middle East “Democracy.” By Thomas Sowell. Real Clear Politics, April 2, 2013.
Sowell:
The Obama administration treated the creation of “democracy” in the Middle East as a Good Thing. Ironically, those who created the United States of America viewed democracy with fear—and created a Constitutional republic instead.
Everything depends on how you define democracy. In its most basic sense, democracy means majority rule. But there can be majority rule in a free country or in a country with an authoritarian or even a dictatorial government.
In this age of sloppy uses of words, many people include freedom in their conception of democracy. But whether democracy leads to freedom is an open question, not a foregone conclusion.
In the United States, when the Union army of occupation withdrew from the South, years after the Civil War, majority rule returned to the Southern states—and the freedom of blacks was drastically restricted from what it had been under military rule.
Those who applauded the spread of democracy in the Middle East seemed to assume that the “Arab Spring” meant greater freedom. But there was no reason to assume that beforehand—and certainly no reason to believe it after the fact. Christians in Egypt have already lost whatever security they had under Hosni Mubarak.
The idea that “all people want freedom” is one of those feel-good phrases that some people indulge in. But you do not get a free country just because everybody wants freedom—for themselves. You can have a free country only when people are willing to let other people have freedom.
Nazis were free to be Nazis under Hitler and Communists were free to be Communists under Stalin and Mao. But nobody else was free.
Toleration for others is a precondition for a free society—and it is hard to think of more intolerant societies than most of those in the Middle East. There have been female heads of state in some other Islamic countries, but not in the Middle East.
Democracy in the Middle East context means majority selection of which individuals get the power to oppress. Why would anyone have seriously believed that it would mean anything more than that? Certainly not from the history of the region.
Too many people tend to think of democracy as a consumer good, so that high voter turnout on election day makes them happy. But the purpose of an election is not to make people feel good about participating. Its purpose is to select the best leaders available, to whom the well-being, and ultimately the lives, of the people can be entrusted. That is serious business.
Voting is not an end in itself. Had there been universal access to the ballot in Europe centuries ago, in an age of mass illiteracy, it is very unlikely that this would have led to freedom, and far more likely that the continent would have collapsed into confusion and anarchy—and been ripe to be enslaved by conquerors with more realistic governments.
Restrictions on who can vote have been based on assessments of who can best choose the nation’s leaders. Those assessments have varied from country to country, and from one era to another, and no doubt some restrictions make more sense than others. But the fundamental point here is that elections have far more serious purposes than participation.
Most Western nations had freedom long before they had democracy. Women have been voting in the United States less than a century. But, even before women could vote in England or America, they had freedoms that women in many Middle Eastern countries can only dream about today.
“Arab Spring” democracy has certainly not increased women’s freedom, nor was there ever any reason to expect that it would.
Why then was Barack Obama so hyped over his “achievement” in having helped put new rulers into power in the Middle East? First of all, this is a man with a monumental ego, to whom every avenue to self-aggrandizement is welcomed, whether it is ObamaCare or realigning the Middle East.
Either or both may end in utter disaster for others, but that is hardly a deterrent to Obama. What some see as a failure of his Middle East policy is a success in carrying out his vision of a historic realignment. The lives that are lost and the increased dangers of international turmoil are to him just “bumps in the road” on the path to his place in history.
Sowell:
The Obama administration treated the creation of “democracy” in the Middle East as a Good Thing. Ironically, those who created the United States of America viewed democracy with fear—and created a Constitutional republic instead.
Everything depends on how you define democracy. In its most basic sense, democracy means majority rule. But there can be majority rule in a free country or in a country with an authoritarian or even a dictatorial government.
In this age of sloppy uses of words, many people include freedom in their conception of democracy. But whether democracy leads to freedom is an open question, not a foregone conclusion.
In the United States, when the Union army of occupation withdrew from the South, years after the Civil War, majority rule returned to the Southern states—and the freedom of blacks was drastically restricted from what it had been under military rule.
Those who applauded the spread of democracy in the Middle East seemed to assume that the “Arab Spring” meant greater freedom. But there was no reason to assume that beforehand—and certainly no reason to believe it after the fact. Christians in Egypt have already lost whatever security they had under Hosni Mubarak.
The idea that “all people want freedom” is one of those feel-good phrases that some people indulge in. But you do not get a free country just because everybody wants freedom—for themselves. You can have a free country only when people are willing to let other people have freedom.
Nazis were free to be Nazis under Hitler and Communists were free to be Communists under Stalin and Mao. But nobody else was free.
Toleration for others is a precondition for a free society—and it is hard to think of more intolerant societies than most of those in the Middle East. There have been female heads of state in some other Islamic countries, but not in the Middle East.
Democracy in the Middle East context means majority selection of which individuals get the power to oppress. Why would anyone have seriously believed that it would mean anything more than that? Certainly not from the history of the region.
Too many people tend to think of democracy as a consumer good, so that high voter turnout on election day makes them happy. But the purpose of an election is not to make people feel good about participating. Its purpose is to select the best leaders available, to whom the well-being, and ultimately the lives, of the people can be entrusted. That is serious business.
Voting is not an end in itself. Had there been universal access to the ballot in Europe centuries ago, in an age of mass illiteracy, it is very unlikely that this would have led to freedom, and far more likely that the continent would have collapsed into confusion and anarchy—and been ripe to be enslaved by conquerors with more realistic governments.
Restrictions on who can vote have been based on assessments of who can best choose the nation’s leaders. Those assessments have varied from country to country, and from one era to another, and no doubt some restrictions make more sense than others. But the fundamental point here is that elections have far more serious purposes than participation.
Most Western nations had freedom long before they had democracy. Women have been voting in the United States less than a century. But, even before women could vote in England or America, they had freedoms that women in many Middle Eastern countries can only dream about today.
“Arab Spring” democracy has certainly not increased women’s freedom, nor was there ever any reason to expect that it would.
Why then was Barack Obama so hyped over his “achievement” in having helped put new rulers into power in the Middle East? First of all, this is a man with a monumental ego, to whom every avenue to self-aggrandizement is welcomed, whether it is ObamaCare or realigning the Middle East.
Either or both may end in utter disaster for others, but that is hardly a deterrent to Obama. What some see as a failure of his Middle East policy is a success in carrying out his vision of a historic realignment. The lives that are lost and the increased dangers of international turmoil are to him just “bumps in the road” on the path to his place in history.
Fear of a Liberal America. By George Packer.
Fear of a Liberal America. By George Packer. The New Yorker, April 2, 2013.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Charles Krauthammer on Obama’s Easter Sermon Controversy.
Charles Krauthammer on Obama’s Easter sermon controversy. Video. The O’Reilly Factor. Fox News, April 2, 2013.
The Bible vs. Heart. By Dennis Prager.
The Bible vs. Heart. By Dennis Prager. Real Clear Politics, April 2, 2013. Also find it here.
Prager:
I offer the single most politically incorrect statement a modern American – indeed a modern Westerner, period – can make: I first look to the Bible for moral guidance and for wisdom.
I say this even though I am not a Christian (I am a Jew, and a non-Orthodox one at that). And I say this even though I attended an Ivy League graduate school (Columbia), where I learned nothing about the Bible there except that it was irrelevant, outdated and frequently immoral.
I say this because there is nothing – not any religious or secular body of work – that comes close to the Bible in forming the moral bases of Western civilization and therefore of nearly all moral progress in the world.
It was this book that guided every one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, including those described as “deists.” It is the book that formed the foundational values of every major American university. It is the book from which every morally great American from George Washington to Abraham Lincoln to the Rev. (yes, “the Reverend,” almost always omitted today in favor of his secular credential, “Dr.”) Martin Luther King, Jr., got his values.
It is this book that gave humanity the Ten Commandments, the greatest moral code ever devised. It not only codified the essential moral rules for society, it announced that the Creator of the universe stands behind them, demands them and judges humans’ compliance with them.
It gave humanity the great moral rule, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
It taught humanity the unprecedented and unparalleled concept that all human beings are created equal because all human beings – of every race, ethnicity, nationality and both male and female – are created in God’s image.
It taught people not to trust the human heart, but to be guided by moral law even when the heart pulled in a different direction.
This is the book that taught humanity that human sacrifice is an abomination.
This is the book that de-sexualized God – a first in human history.
This is the book that alone launched humanity on the long road to abolishing slavery. It was not only Bible-believers (what we would today call “religious fundamentalists”) who led the only crusade in the world against slavery, it was the Bible itself, thousands of years before, that taught that God abhors slavery. It legislated that one cannot return a slave to his owner and banned kidnapping for slaves in the Ten Commandments.
Stealing people, kidnapping, was the most widespread source of slavery, and “Thou shall not steal” was first a ban on stealing humans and then on stealing property.
It was this book that taught people the wisdom of Job and of Ecclesiastes, unparalleled masterpieces of world wisdom literature.
Without this book, there would not have been Western civilization, or Western science, or Western human rights, or the abolitionist movement, or the United States of America, the freest, most prosperous, most opportunity-giving society ever formed.
For well over a generation, we have been living on “cut-flower ethics.” We have removed ethics from the Bible-based soil that gave them life and think they can survive removed from that soil. Fools and those possessing an arrogance bordering on self-deification think we will long survive as a decent society without teaching the Bible and without consulting it for moral guidance and wisdom.
If not from the Bible, from where should people get their values and morals? The university? The New York Times editorial page? They have been wrong on virtually every great issue of good and evil in our generation.
They mocked Ronald Reagan for calling the Soviet Union an “evil empire.” More than any other group in the world, Western intellectuals supported Stalin, Mao and other Communist monsters. They are utterly morally confused concerning one of the most morally clear conflicts of our time – the Israeli-Palestinian/Arab conflict. The universities and their media supporters have taught a generation of Americans the idiocy that men and women are basically the same. And they are the institutions that teach that America's founders were essentially moral reprobates – sexist and racist rich white men.
When the current executive editor of the New York Times, Jill Abramson, was appointed to that position she announced that “In my house growing up, The Times substituted for religion.” The quote spoke volumes about the substitution of elite media for religion and the Bible in shaping contemporary America.
The other modern substitute for the Bible is the heart. We live in the Age of Feelings, and an entire generation of Americans has been raised to consult their heart to determine right and wrong.
If you trust the human heart, you should be delighted with this development. But those of us raised with biblical wisdom do not trust the heart. So when we are told by almost every university, by almost every news source, by almost every entertainment medium that the heart demands what is probably the most radical social transformation since Western civilization began – redefining marriage, society’s most basic institution, in terms of gender – it may be wiser to trust the biblical understanding of marriage rather than the heart’s.
My heart, too, supports same-sex marriage. But relying on the heart alone is a terribly flawed guide to social policy. And it is the Bible that has produced all of the world’s most compassionate societies.
This, then, is the great modern battle: the Bible and the heart vs. the heart alone.
Prager:
I offer the single most politically incorrect statement a modern American – indeed a modern Westerner, period – can make: I first look to the Bible for moral guidance and for wisdom.
I say this even though I am not a Christian (I am a Jew, and a non-Orthodox one at that). And I say this even though I attended an Ivy League graduate school (Columbia), where I learned nothing about the Bible there except that it was irrelevant, outdated and frequently immoral.
I say this because there is nothing – not any religious or secular body of work – that comes close to the Bible in forming the moral bases of Western civilization and therefore of nearly all moral progress in the world.
It was this book that guided every one of the Founding Fathers of the United States, including those described as “deists.” It is the book that formed the foundational values of every major American university. It is the book from which every morally great American from George Washington to Abraham Lincoln to the Rev. (yes, “the Reverend,” almost always omitted today in favor of his secular credential, “Dr.”) Martin Luther King, Jr., got his values.
It is this book that gave humanity the Ten Commandments, the greatest moral code ever devised. It not only codified the essential moral rules for society, it announced that the Creator of the universe stands behind them, demands them and judges humans’ compliance with them.
It gave humanity the great moral rule, “Love your neighbor as yourself.”
It taught humanity the unprecedented and unparalleled concept that all human beings are created equal because all human beings – of every race, ethnicity, nationality and both male and female – are created in God’s image.
It taught people not to trust the human heart, but to be guided by moral law even when the heart pulled in a different direction.
This is the book that taught humanity that human sacrifice is an abomination.
This is the book that de-sexualized God – a first in human history.
This is the book that alone launched humanity on the long road to abolishing slavery. It was not only Bible-believers (what we would today call “religious fundamentalists”) who led the only crusade in the world against slavery, it was the Bible itself, thousands of years before, that taught that God abhors slavery. It legislated that one cannot return a slave to his owner and banned kidnapping for slaves in the Ten Commandments.
Stealing people, kidnapping, was the most widespread source of slavery, and “Thou shall not steal” was first a ban on stealing humans and then on stealing property.
It was this book that taught people the wisdom of Job and of Ecclesiastes, unparalleled masterpieces of world wisdom literature.
Without this book, there would not have been Western civilization, or Western science, or Western human rights, or the abolitionist movement, or the United States of America, the freest, most prosperous, most opportunity-giving society ever formed.
For well over a generation, we have been living on “cut-flower ethics.” We have removed ethics from the Bible-based soil that gave them life and think they can survive removed from that soil. Fools and those possessing an arrogance bordering on self-deification think we will long survive as a decent society without teaching the Bible and without consulting it for moral guidance and wisdom.
If not from the Bible, from where should people get their values and morals? The university? The New York Times editorial page? They have been wrong on virtually every great issue of good and evil in our generation.
They mocked Ronald Reagan for calling the Soviet Union an “evil empire.” More than any other group in the world, Western intellectuals supported Stalin, Mao and other Communist monsters. They are utterly morally confused concerning one of the most morally clear conflicts of our time – the Israeli-Palestinian/Arab conflict. The universities and their media supporters have taught a generation of Americans the idiocy that men and women are basically the same. And they are the institutions that teach that America's founders were essentially moral reprobates – sexist and racist rich white men.
When the current executive editor of the New York Times, Jill Abramson, was appointed to that position she announced that “In my house growing up, The Times substituted for religion.” The quote spoke volumes about the substitution of elite media for religion and the Bible in shaping contemporary America.
The other modern substitute for the Bible is the heart. We live in the Age of Feelings, and an entire generation of Americans has been raised to consult their heart to determine right and wrong.
If you trust the human heart, you should be delighted with this development. But those of us raised with biblical wisdom do not trust the heart. So when we are told by almost every university, by almost every news source, by almost every entertainment medium that the heart demands what is probably the most radical social transformation since Western civilization began – redefining marriage, society’s most basic institution, in terms of gender – it may be wiser to trust the biblical understanding of marriage rather than the heart’s.
My heart, too, supports same-sex marriage. But relying on the heart alone is a terribly flawed guide to social policy. And it is the Bible that has produced all of the world’s most compassionate societies.
This, then, is the great modern battle: the Bible and the heart vs. the heart alone.
Mark Levin: “I Am Sick And Tired Of My Country Being Attacked From Within.”
Mark Levin: “I Am Sick And Tired Of My Country Being Attacked From Within.” Real Clear Politics, March 29, 2013. Also at The Right Scoop.
How Did the Right Lose on Gay Marriage? By Jennifer Rubin.
How did the right lose on gay marriage? By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, March 31, 2013.
Don’t blame gay marriage. By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 1, 2013.
Marriage Looks Different Now. By Ross Douthat. New York Times, March 30, 2013.
Coming Out Ahead: Why gay marriage is on the way. By Ramesh Ponnuru. National Review, July 28, 2003. Also find it here.
Jim DeMint’s Misfire on Marriage. By David Boaz. Cato Institute, March 27, 2013.
What Do Social Conservatives Want? By David Boaz. Cato Institute, September 20, 2010.
Now, let’s get straight on marriage. By David Blankenhorn and Jonathan Rauch. New York Daily News, March 31, 2013.
Idle threats on gay marriage. By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 2, 2013.
Is anyone coming out to oppose gay marriage? By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 2, 2013.
Knot Yet: The Benefits and Costs of Delayed Marriage in America. By Kay Hymowitz, Jason S. Carroll, W. Bradford Wilcox, and Kelleen Kaye. National Marriage Project, March 2013. PDF. Video of panel at Brookings.
When Marriage Disappears: The Retreat from Marriage in Middle America. National Marriage Project, 2010. PDF.
The Lessons of Social Conservatism’sSetbacks. By W. James Antle III. The American Conservative, April 4, 2013.
Gay Marriage and Public Opinion. By Jennifer Rubin. NJBR, March 24, 2013.
Sex After Christianity. By Rod Dreher. NJBR, March 27, 2013 with related articles.
Don’t blame gay marriage. By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 1, 2013.
Marriage Looks Different Now. By Ross Douthat. New York Times, March 30, 2013.
Coming Out Ahead: Why gay marriage is on the way. By Ramesh Ponnuru. National Review, July 28, 2003. Also find it here.
Jim DeMint’s Misfire on Marriage. By David Boaz. Cato Institute, March 27, 2013.
What Do Social Conservatives Want? By David Boaz. Cato Institute, September 20, 2010.
Now, let’s get straight on marriage. By David Blankenhorn and Jonathan Rauch. New York Daily News, March 31, 2013.
Idle threats on gay marriage. By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 2, 2013.
Is anyone coming out to oppose gay marriage? By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 2, 2013.
Knot Yet: The Benefits and Costs of Delayed Marriage in America. By Kay Hymowitz, Jason S. Carroll, W. Bradford Wilcox, and Kelleen Kaye. National Marriage Project, March 2013. PDF. Video of panel at Brookings.
When Marriage Disappears: The Retreat from Marriage in Middle America. National Marriage Project, 2010. PDF.
The Lessons of Social Conservatism’sSetbacks. By W. James Antle III. The American Conservative, April 4, 2013.
Gay Marriage and Public Opinion. By Jennifer Rubin. NJBR, March 24, 2013.
Sex After Christianity. By Rod Dreher. NJBR, March 27, 2013 with related articles.
Changing of the Guard in the GOP? By Jennifer Rubin.
Changing of the guard in the GOP? By Jennifer Rubin. Washington Post, April 1, 2013.
It Won’t Be Your Father’s GOP. By Jennifer Rubin. NJBR, March 24, 2013. With related articles.
It Won’t Be Your Father’s GOP. By Jennifer Rubin. NJBR, March 24, 2013. With related articles.
The New Republican Party. By Ronald Reagan.
The New Republican Party. By Ronald Reagan. Speech at the 4th Annual CPAC Convention, February 6, 1977. Reagan 2020.
How Sarah Palin in 2008 Echoes Ronald Reagan in 1977. By Erick Erickson. RedState, November 19, 2008.
How Sarah Palin in 2008 Echoes Ronald Reagan in 1977. By Erick Erickson. RedState, November 19, 2008.
The Bloody Company Hollywood and Academia Keep. By Michelle Malkin.
The Bloody Company Hollywood Keeps. By Michelle Malkin. MichelleMalkin.com, March 29, 2013.
Academia hearts the Weather Underground: Kathy Boudin at Columbia and NYU. Michael Malkin. MichelleMalkin.com, April 2, 2013.
This Is Columbia University. By David Horowitz. National Review Online, April 2, 2013.
Columbia’s pet terrorist. By John Podhoretz. New York Post, April 2, 2013.
From perp to professor? Former radical teaching at Columbia. Video with Michelle Malkin. America Live with Megyn Kelly. Fox News, April 2, 2013. Also find it here.
Murder victim’s son “disgusted” by ex-radical’s teaching job. Video. America Live with Megyn Kelly. Fox News, April 4, 2013.
No tears for dead cops. By Michelle Malkin. Townhall.com, December 11, 2002.
Portrait of a Progressive Terrorist. By Greg Yardley. FrontPageMagazine, August 25, 2003.
From Radical Background, a Rhodes Scholar Emerges. By Jodi Wilgoren. New York Times, December 9, 2002.
The Ugly American: A Rhodes Scholar Goes South. By James Kirchick. World Affairs, Fall 2009. Also find it here.
Academia hearts the Weather Underground: Kathy Boudin at Columbia and NYU. Michael Malkin. MichelleMalkin.com, April 2, 2013.
This Is Columbia University. By David Horowitz. National Review Online, April 2, 2013.
Columbia’s pet terrorist. By John Podhoretz. New York Post, April 2, 2013.
From perp to professor? Former radical teaching at Columbia. Video with Michelle Malkin. America Live with Megyn Kelly. Fox News, April 2, 2013. Also find it here.
Murder victim’s son “disgusted” by ex-radical’s teaching job. Video. America Live with Megyn Kelly. Fox News, April 4, 2013.
No tears for dead cops. By Michelle Malkin. Townhall.com, December 11, 2002.
Portrait of a Progressive Terrorist. By Greg Yardley. FrontPageMagazine, August 25, 2003.
From Radical Background, a Rhodes Scholar Emerges. By Jodi Wilgoren. New York Times, December 9, 2002.
The Ugly American: A Rhodes Scholar Goes South. By James Kirchick. World Affairs, Fall 2009. Also find it here.
Is Technology Rewiring Children’s Brains?
Is technology rewiring children’s brains? Video with Dr. Keith Ablow. America Live with Megyn Kelly. Fox News, April 2, 2013.
Are MOOCs Really Destroying Education? By Walter Russell Mead.
Are MOOCs Really Destroying Education? By Walter Russell Mead. Via Meadia, April 2, 2013.
MOOCs of Hazard. By Andrew Delbanco. The New Republic, March 31, 2013. Also find it here.
Beware of the High Cost of “Free” Online Courses. By Steve Lohr. New York Times, March 25, 2013.
Are the Costs of “Free” Too High in Online Education? By Michael A. Cusumano. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 56, No. 4 (April 2013). PDF.
Will MOOCs Destroy Academia? By Moshe Y. Vardi. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 55 No. 11 (November 2012). PDF.
MOOCs and Historical Research. By John McNeill. Perspectives on History, Vol. 51, No. 3 (March 2013).
The Professors’ Big Stage. By Thomas L. Friedman. New York Times, March 5, 2013.
The End of the University as We Know It. By Nathan Harden. The American Interest, January/February 2013.
MOOCs of Hazard. By Andrew Delbanco. The New Republic, March 31, 2013. Also find it here.
Beware of the High Cost of “Free” Online Courses. By Steve Lohr. New York Times, March 25, 2013.
Are the Costs of “Free” Too High in Online Education? By Michael A. Cusumano. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 56, No. 4 (April 2013). PDF.
Will MOOCs Destroy Academia? By Moshe Y. Vardi. Communications of the ACM, Vol. 55 No. 11 (November 2012). PDF.
MOOCs and Historical Research. By John McNeill. Perspectives on History, Vol. 51, No. 3 (March 2013).
The Professors’ Big Stage. By Thomas L. Friedman. New York Times, March 5, 2013.
The End of the University as We Know It. By Nathan Harden. The American Interest, January/February 2013.
The Culture Wars in Brooklyn: Yuppie Women vs. the Hasidim. By Ruth Rosen.
The Modesty Wars: Women and the Hasidim in Brooklyn. By Ruth Rosen. OpenDemocracy, March 25, 2013. Also at History News Network.
Keeping It Kosher. By Frank Bruni. New York Times, October 7, 2010. Also find it here.
Take Back Our Neighborhood. COLlive, January 22, 2012.
The Orthodox Fringe: Moshiach Oi! Merges Orthodox Judaism and Punk Rock. By John Leland. New York Times, March 9, 2013.
Modesty in Ultra-Orthodox Brooklyn Is Enforced by Secret Squads. By Joseph Berger. New York Times, January 29, 2013.
A Life Apart: Women and Hasidism. Video Clip 4 of 5 from Hiding and Seeking: Faith and Tolerance After the Holocaust. POV. PBS, August 30, 2005.
Rosen:
In a 2005 Public Broadcast Network documentary of the Hasidim, called “A Life Apart: The Hasidim in America” interviewees explained that women must dress and behave modestly because their greatest spiritual mission is motherhood. Girls, therefore, are educated separately from boys and rarely study beyond high school. Parents arrange marriages, although children may refuse their choices and ask for different matches. Women often work outside the home, dressed in modest clothing, so that their men may study and pray all day.
The vast majority of Hasidim women however, do not view themselves as second-class citizens. One woman interviewed in the documentary explained why raising and protecting her family is her greatest joy. “Who cares about running Westinghouse?” she asked. “Children are your legacy forever.” Another woman pointed out that she finds her “spiritual fulfilment in motherhood, in raising children, teaching them values, and thanking God for the breakfast she has laid out for them.”
As the documentary concludes, “The Hasidic rejection of America’s popular culture and education has resulted in goals deeply desired by many Americans: stable families, strong communities and lives infused with meaning. In return, Hasidim pay a price most Americans would find too high: they adhere to strict rules of behavior; they live in a traditional society with clearly defined and prescribed roles for each member; and, within the Hasidic world, individualism is suppressed for the sake of community.”
Being part of this community means that Jewish law, as well as the will of their fathers and husbands, govern women’s entire lives. But equality is not their goal. For the most part, Hasidic women—at least the majority who do not leave—are satisfied to live in a stable community, dress modestly, raise their children, and work outside the home. It is in these closed and cohesive communities that they find spiritual fulfilment. It is here that they can avoid a secularized and sexualized America that celebrates individualism, materialism, and consumerism. And it is here, fortified by the Hasidic way of life, that they can avoid the consequences of modern life—social isolation, family instability, lack of community cohesion, and a profound spiritual thirst.
Although it doesn’t provide the freedoms and opportunities enjoyed and valued by modern women, it is – with all its rules and regulations – their spiritual home.
Keeping It Kosher. By Frank Bruni. New York Times, October 7, 2010. Also find it here.
Take Back Our Neighborhood. COLlive, January 22, 2012.
The Orthodox Fringe: Moshiach Oi! Merges Orthodox Judaism and Punk Rock. By John Leland. New York Times, March 9, 2013.
Modesty in Ultra-Orthodox Brooklyn Is Enforced by Secret Squads. By Joseph Berger. New York Times, January 29, 2013.
A Life Apart: Women and Hasidism. Video Clip 4 of 5 from Hiding and Seeking: Faith and Tolerance After the Holocaust. POV. PBS, August 30, 2005.
Rosen:
In a 2005 Public Broadcast Network documentary of the Hasidim, called “A Life Apart: The Hasidim in America” interviewees explained that women must dress and behave modestly because their greatest spiritual mission is motherhood. Girls, therefore, are educated separately from boys and rarely study beyond high school. Parents arrange marriages, although children may refuse their choices and ask for different matches. Women often work outside the home, dressed in modest clothing, so that their men may study and pray all day.
The vast majority of Hasidim women however, do not view themselves as second-class citizens. One woman interviewed in the documentary explained why raising and protecting her family is her greatest joy. “Who cares about running Westinghouse?” she asked. “Children are your legacy forever.” Another woman pointed out that she finds her “spiritual fulfilment in motherhood, in raising children, teaching them values, and thanking God for the breakfast she has laid out for them.”
As the documentary concludes, “The Hasidic rejection of America’s popular culture and education has resulted in goals deeply desired by many Americans: stable families, strong communities and lives infused with meaning. In return, Hasidim pay a price most Americans would find too high: they adhere to strict rules of behavior; they live in a traditional society with clearly defined and prescribed roles for each member; and, within the Hasidic world, individualism is suppressed for the sake of community.”
Being part of this community means that Jewish law, as well as the will of their fathers and husbands, govern women’s entire lives. But equality is not their goal. For the most part, Hasidic women—at least the majority who do not leave—are satisfied to live in a stable community, dress modestly, raise their children, and work outside the home. It is in these closed and cohesive communities that they find spiritual fulfilment. It is here that they can avoid a secularized and sexualized America that celebrates individualism, materialism, and consumerism. And it is here, fortified by the Hasidic way of life, that they can avoid the consequences of modern life—social isolation, family instability, lack of community cohesion, and a profound spiritual thirst.
Although it doesn’t provide the freedoms and opportunities enjoyed and valued by modern women, it is – with all its rules and regulations – their spiritual home.
Rick Perry on “Vulture Capitalism” from the 2012 Election Campaign.
Perry: Venture Capitalism Is Good, Vulture Capitalism Is Bad. Real Clear Politics, January 11, 2012.
Perry Says Romney and Bain Capital are Vultures. Crooks and Liars, January 10, 2012.
Perry: Mitt’s company “just vultures” who “eat the carcass” of companies. By Alexander Burns. Politico, January 10, 2012.
Rick Perry Targets Mitt Romney, Defines “Vulture Capitalism.” Fox News Insider, January 11, 2012.
Rick Perry on South Carolina: I’m Here to Win. Fox News Insider, January 12, 2012.
King of Bain: “When Mitt Romney Came to Town.” Official Trailer. Video. NewtTubeWOF, January 7, 2012. YouTube.
When Mitt Romney Came to Town: Full, complete version. Video. MarcinCalifornia, January 11, 2012. YouTube.
Rick Perry in Lexington, South Carolina. January 11, 2012. Part 1. Part 2. Video. YouTube.
Excerpt on vulture capitalism, Part 1 at 17:04:
Listen, I’ve been a governor of a state that has created more jobs than any other state in the nation during the decade of the 2000s. I get it about job creation. I understand the difference between venture capitalism and vulture capitalism. We need to have more venture capitalism going on in America and less vulture capitalism. The idea that you come in and you destroy people’s lives. The idea that you come in just to make a quick profit; tear these companies apart. I understand restructuring. I understand those types of things. But the idea that we can’t criticize someone for these get- rich-quick schemes is not appropriate from my perspective. I’m about creating jobs, but I’m kind of like that old ad. I believe in doing it the old fashioned way. Working at it; working for it. And I happen to think that companies like Bain Capital could have come in and helped these companies if they truly were venture capitalists. But they’re not. They’re vulture capitalists.
And that’s what I want the people of South Carolina to think about. Do you want somebody who grew up on a farm, who understands the values of hard work. That understands that you got to conserve things. Whether it was the water on the back porch ’cause you didn’t have indoor plumbing, or whether it’s the money that is limited in your life. We need a President of the United States that understands that you can’t spend your way to prosperity.
CPAC 2013: Governor Rick Perry (R-TX). Video. The ACU, March 14, 2013. YouTube.
Perry Says Romney and Bain Capital are Vultures. Crooks and Liars, January 10, 2012.
Perry: Mitt’s company “just vultures” who “eat the carcass” of companies. By Alexander Burns. Politico, January 10, 2012.
Rick Perry Targets Mitt Romney, Defines “Vulture Capitalism.” Fox News Insider, January 11, 2012.
Rick Perry on South Carolina: I’m Here to Win. Fox News Insider, January 12, 2012.
King of Bain: “When Mitt Romney Came to Town.” Official Trailer. Video. NewtTubeWOF, January 7, 2012. YouTube.
When Mitt Romney Came to Town: Full, complete version. Video. MarcinCalifornia, January 11, 2012. YouTube.
Rick Perry in Lexington, South Carolina. January 11, 2012. Part 1. Part 2. Video. YouTube.
Excerpt on vulture capitalism, Part 1 at 17:04:
Listen, I’ve been a governor of a state that has created more jobs than any other state in the nation during the decade of the 2000s. I get it about job creation. I understand the difference between venture capitalism and vulture capitalism. We need to have more venture capitalism going on in America and less vulture capitalism. The idea that you come in and you destroy people’s lives. The idea that you come in just to make a quick profit; tear these companies apart. I understand restructuring. I understand those types of things. But the idea that we can’t criticize someone for these get- rich-quick schemes is not appropriate from my perspective. I’m about creating jobs, but I’m kind of like that old ad. I believe in doing it the old fashioned way. Working at it; working for it. And I happen to think that companies like Bain Capital could have come in and helped these companies if they truly were venture capitalists. But they’re not. They’re vulture capitalists.
And that’s what I want the people of South Carolina to think about. Do you want somebody who grew up on a farm, who understands the values of hard work. That understands that you got to conserve things. Whether it was the water on the back porch ’cause you didn’t have indoor plumbing, or whether it’s the money that is limited in your life. We need a President of the United States that understands that you can’t spend your way to prosperity.
CPAC 2013: Governor Rick Perry (R-TX). Video. The ACU, March 14, 2013. YouTube.
A Very Nasty Divorce.
 |
|
Acrimonious:
Lorry driver Robin Baker, 45, has publicly vented his feelings towards his
estranged wife on a homemade sign on the front of his house.
|
Face of the furious husband who put up a sign to shame his wife: Now he says he would prefer it was repossessed to stop her getting anything. By Paul Bentley. Daily Mail, April 1, 2013.
Man Shames Wife He’s Divorcing With Angry Sign Hung on House. By Graham Wood. AOL Real Estate, April 1, 2013.
A Christian Catastrophe. By Ralph Peters.
A Christian Catastrophe: Islamist “cleansing” in Mideast. By Ralph Peters. New York Post, March 31, 2013.
Herod the Great: Friend of the Romans and Parthians? By Jason M. Schlude.
Herod the Great: Friend of the Romans and Parthians? By Jason M. Schlude. Bible History Daily, March 29, 2013.
Monday, April 1, 2013
Advice for the Young Women of Princeton: Find a Husband. By Susan A. Patton.
Advice for the young women of Princeton: the daughters I never had. By Susan A. Patton. Letter to the Editor. The Daily Princetonian, March 29, 2013. Also find it here and here.
Susan Patton’s “Daily Princetonian” Article Urges Female Students To Find Husbands Before Graduating. By Nina Bahadur. The Huffington Post, March 29, 2013.
An Alumna’s Advice for the Young Women of Princeton: Marry My Son. By Eveline Chao. The Daily Beast, March 30, 2013.
Why I Told Female Princeton Students to Find a Husband. By Susan Patton. The Huffington Post, March 31, 2013.
Accepted to Princeton: Parental pride –and shame. By Susan A. Patton Jaffe. Princeton Alumna Weekly, February 15, 2006.
Susan Patton Told the Truth. By James Taranto. Wall Street Journal, April 1, 2013. Also find it here.
Tiger Mama Susan Patton’s Ineffectual Marriage Strategy. By Susan Walsh. Hooking Up Smart, April 1, 2013.
Princeton Mom Writes Letter Urging Female Students to Find a Husband Before They Graduate. Fox News Insider, March 30, 2013.
Susan Patton Defends Op-Ed Urging Female Princeton Students to Find a Husband Before Graduating. America Live with Megyn Kelly. Fox News Insider, April 1, 2013. Also find video here.
Ivy League Marriage Advice. Video. The Five. Fox News, April 1, 2013.
Princeton Mom to All Female Students: “Find a Husband.” By Maureen O’Connor. New York Magazine, March 29, 2013.
Q&A: Princeton Mom Wishes She Married a Princeton Man. By Maureen O’Connor. New York Magazine, March 29, 2013.
Is this the world’s most embarrassing mother? Woman who wrote to Princeton student newspaper urging female students to snag man . . . just like her son. By Snejana Faberov. Daily Mail, March 29, 2013.
The Real Problem With Susan Patton’s Daily Princetonian Letter. By Alyssa Rosenberg. ThinkProgress, April 1, 2013.
Is a Good Man Hard to Find? By Walter Russell Mead. Via Meadia, April 1, 2013.
Princeton’s Battle of the Brides: A roundup of the best reactions to Susan Patton’s infamous letter. By Sarah Begley. The Daily Beast, April 2, 2013.
What feminism has come to. By S.E. Cupp. New York Daily News, April 3, 2013.
Find a Man Today, Graduate Tomorrow. By Emily Esfahani Smith. Wall Street Journal, April 4, 2013. Also find it here.
If only I’d snagged a Princeton man. By Donna Brazile. CNN, April 2, 2013.
Susan Patton interviewed by her cousin Rabbi Joseph Potasnik and Deacon Kevin McCormack. Audio. Religion on the Line. 77 WABC Radio, April 7, 2013. Interview starts at 67:05.
Susan Patton’s “Daily Princetonian” Article Urges Female Students To Find Husbands Before Graduating. By Nina Bahadur. The Huffington Post, March 29, 2013.
An Alumna’s Advice for the Young Women of Princeton: Marry My Son. By Eveline Chao. The Daily Beast, March 30, 2013.
Why I Told Female Princeton Students to Find a Husband. By Susan Patton. The Huffington Post, March 31, 2013.
Accepted to Princeton: Parental pride –and shame. By Susan A. Patton Jaffe. Princeton Alumna Weekly, February 15, 2006.
Susan Patton Told the Truth. By James Taranto. Wall Street Journal, April 1, 2013. Also find it here.
Tiger Mama Susan Patton’s Ineffectual Marriage Strategy. By Susan Walsh. Hooking Up Smart, April 1, 2013.
Princeton Mom Writes Letter Urging Female Students to Find a Husband Before They Graduate. Fox News Insider, March 30, 2013.
Susan Patton Defends Op-Ed Urging Female Princeton Students to Find a Husband Before Graduating. America Live with Megyn Kelly. Fox News Insider, April 1, 2013. Also find video here.
Ivy League Marriage Advice. Video. The Five. Fox News, April 1, 2013.
Princeton Mom to All Female Students: “Find a Husband.” By Maureen O’Connor. New York Magazine, March 29, 2013.
Q&A: Princeton Mom Wishes She Married a Princeton Man. By Maureen O’Connor. New York Magazine, March 29, 2013.
Is this the world’s most embarrassing mother? Woman who wrote to Princeton student newspaper urging female students to snag man . . . just like her son. By Snejana Faberov. Daily Mail, March 29, 2013.
The Real Problem With Susan Patton’s Daily Princetonian Letter. By Alyssa Rosenberg. ThinkProgress, April 1, 2013.
Is a Good Man Hard to Find? By Walter Russell Mead. Via Meadia, April 1, 2013.
Princeton’s Battle of the Brides: A roundup of the best reactions to Susan Patton’s infamous letter. By Sarah Begley. The Daily Beast, April 2, 2013.
What feminism has come to. By S.E. Cupp. New York Daily News, April 3, 2013.
Find a Man Today, Graduate Tomorrow. By Emily Esfahani Smith. Wall Street Journal, April 4, 2013. Also find it here.
If only I’d snagged a Princeton man. By Donna Brazile. CNN, April 2, 2013.
Susan Patton interviewed by her cousin Rabbi Joseph Potasnik and Deacon Kevin McCormack. Audio. Religion on the Line. 77 WABC Radio, April 7, 2013. Interview starts at 67:05.
The Corruption of Capitalism in America. By David A. Stockman.
State-Wrecked: The Corruption of Capitalism in America. By David A Stockman. New York Times, March 30, 2013.
Pastor Luis Leon Slams Religious Right at Obamas’ Easter Service.
Pastor Luis Leon slams religious right at Obamas’ Easter service. CBS News, March 31, 2013.
Megyn Kelly And Fox Guest Rail Against Obama’s Reverend Who Criticized “Religious Right.” By Matt Wilstein. Mediaite, April 1, 2013. Also find video here.
Does politics have a place in the pulpit? Video. America Live with Megyn Kelly. Fox News, April 1, 2013.
Presidential Preacher Reflects Triumphal Tone of the Left. By Chris Stirewalt. FoxNews.com, April 1, 2013.
Easter, Obama, and using the pulpit to bash the right. Video. On the Record with Greta Van Susteren. Fox News, April 1, 2013.
Megyn Kelly And Fox Guest Rail Against Obama’s Reverend Who Criticized “Religious Right.” By Matt Wilstein. Mediaite, April 1, 2013. Also find video here.
Does politics have a place in the pulpit? Video. America Live with Megyn Kelly. Fox News, April 1, 2013.
Presidential Preacher Reflects Triumphal Tone of the Left. By Chris Stirewalt. FoxNews.com, April 1, 2013.
Easter, Obama, and using the pulpit to bash the right. Video. On the Record with Greta Van Susteren. Fox News, April 1, 2013.
Need a Job? Invent It. By Thomas L. Friedman.
Need a Job? Invent It. By Thomas L. Friedman. New York Times, March 30, 2013.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)