nfgo3

Now that I think about it, the opening post raises some interesting issues.

For starters, what is so important about political labels like Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, progressive, right-wing, left-wing, supporter of Israel, strong supporter of Israel, stronger supporter of Israel, and so on? The answer is, in part, that they are short-hand ways of summarizing a candidate’s (or any other person’s) positions on particular issues. They are an easy substitute for thorough, reasoned analysis of an issue and any related policy proposals, legislation, regulation or other executive-branch or judicial-branch action.

What disturbs me about the opening post is the implication that politician could “disguise” him/herself by using a misleading label. But serious voters do not have to worry about that, if they know what a candidate will do in response to an issue. Do you want government subsidies for yeshiva tuition? Do you want your sidewalk repaired? Better police protection for your mosque? Labels provide only the crudest hints of what a politician would do on these issues. It is incumbent upon voters to get direct, clear information on political issues.

I am also disturbed that some news sources think they have provided helpful information by reporting on labels, when they would be more helpful (but not necessarily more profitable) reporting on policy issues and genuine analysis.

So if you are worried about being tricked by a politician’s labels, don’t look at the labels, look at the issues and the policy proposals.

They still count for a minyan.

The term “wonk” has its roots at Harvard College, where it was used by some students to refer to classmates who study particularly hard. It carries a negative connotation, implying that deep or excessive study is a sign that a “wonk” is not smart enough to understand his studies with only light effort.

The term is now used to refer to politicians, or their advisors, who have deep and substantive understanding of particular issues, as distinguished from politicians who are skillful at pandering to voters looking for easy answers on hard issues.

Confidential to WIY, first post: If you pay your bills on time, the collectors will leave you alone.

The observation that frum people use too many suprelatives is incredible.

To flatbusher: What an odd comment. For people who have been maimed or killed, the crime rate is too high. For the rest of us (of which I am one, B”H), crime rates are a rough tool for assessing the risk of being a victim of a crime. Many violent crimes are family affairs, and Jewish victims of those crimes in the US are, I believe, extremely low. Other crimes, like on-the-street assaults and robberies, in the US, affect a broader range of victims and may include – I don’t really know – more Jews than intra-family crimes. (Some gentiles think Chareidi Jews keep lots of money in their black hats, which might invite more crime against them. I am surprised that gentiles don’t know that most Chareidim don’t have much money, especially after they pay the yeshiva tuition, buy the fund-raising-dinner tickets and give tzedukkah.)

A gentile friend of mine from Wyoming thinks a temple mount is a horse that a Jew rides to shul.

Re zahavadad’s first post: “Queens English” is what is spoken in Forest Hills, Kew Gardens, Jackson Heights, Elmhurst, Flushing and Long Island City. “The Queen’s English” is what is spoken by the upper class in Great Britain.

Apostrophes matter in any English.

Would any of the nattering nabobs of conservatism (sorry I could not alliterate the phrase, but I love “nattering nabobs”) who have spoken for liberals above (the first five posts) be interested in hearing from an actual liberal on this subject? No? Well, too bad, because here I go.

As a liberal and supporter of the State of Israel (“SI,” which I suppose is the opposite of “IS”, the Islamic State), and a Jew who looks forward to Moshiach and our return to Eretz Yisrael, I don’t see support of SI as a problem for liberals. SI is a democracy, it allows Palestinians to vote – which distinguishes SI from nearly all Arab governments – and it provides a better life for Palestinians than Arab governments not having oil money. Plenty of liberal Jews support Israel, and plenty of liberal gentiles do, too. SI politics is a colossal mess, but, as Churchill said about democracy, its better than politics as practiced among Israel’s neighbors.

There are serious political divisions in the SI population, but that is an issue for SI voters/taxpayers to settle, not kibbitzers like me in the comfort and security of the US. In fact, people who consider the Iran deal a serious threat to SI security should seriously consider moving out of SI and waiting for Moshiach, rather than sitting within the range of Iran’s missles, Asad’s poison gas, and Hamas car bombs. I have complete faith that Hashem can return us to EY when we are ready, and we get ready by doing His Mitzvahs, not by oppressing the descendants of Avraham’s first son.

And just to be clear, I consider the Iran/P5+1 deal good and enforceable. Consider the Israel/Egypt deal brokered by the much-vilified President Carter 30+ years ago, which has protected Israel from Egypt, even in the last few years, following the turmoil of the “Arab Spring.” The Iranian people are sophisticated and modern in their outlook. The ayatollah – not so much. But the ayatollahs do not have as much influence over the Iranian people as they pretend to, and I expect the deal to work, or, worst case, to give SI, the US and others time to intervene and enforce the agreement if Iran tries to break it.

The opening post is so wrong in so many ways that it has taken me 4 years to figure out where to begin. But with 4 years behind us, I suggest that a good way to evaluate the opening poster would be to look at his/her expectations for the outcome of the 2012 US presidential election, or the defeat or failure of Obamacare, or any number of other events that have come to pass notwithstanding the opening poster’s expectations to the contrary.

If Trump is growing on you, try fast-actin’ Tinactin, or Jublia, or Desenex.

Is it untznius to be too good-looking? That would give me a problem.

As usual, Charlie Hall gets it right. I have not seen the letter, don’t know whether it is genuine. There are other ravs who have opposing viewpoints on the halacha of vaccinations. Parents who oppose vaccination for their children are (i) ignorant, (ii) undereducated, or (iii) self-absorbed Upper West Siders (and their self-absorbed siblings in other locations) who daily demonstrate how people with nominal education and real money can be utterly stupid.

RebYidd23 tells us: “The Yiddish language has its own rules of grammar.” Actually, every language has its own rules of grammar. Can someone recommend an authoritative text that lays out Yiddish rules of grammar? In the Yiddish-speaking yeshivas, is there a text book that is used to teach Yiddish grammar?

I will respond to Joseph. The responses on my behalf by “coffee addict” are unauthorized, inarticulate and inaccurate. I will give just a few examples.

I think Hillary is more likely to increase infrastructure spending, as none of the Republicans have shown any understanding of the value of government spending in a sluggish (if recovering) economy. Infrastructure spending, funded by government borrowing at record-low rates, would be an important stimulus to the economy and improve US infrastructure. As a resident of the New York/New Jersey Connecticut area, I am particularly sensitive to the need for a new Hudson River rail tunnel, a project that Republican Chris Christie killed several years ago, to the detriment of the citizens of New Jersey.

I think Hillary would resist any efforts at tax cuts for the rich, or at least is more likely to do so than any Republican.

I think Hillary understands the need for appropriate adjustments in the funding of Social Security. A few modest changes will put the program on sound footing for another generation. Privatizing and other simple tricks, like raising retirement age, will be inadequate and counterproductive.

I think Hillary recognizes the success of Obamacare to date, and the need to continue it. Republican rhetoric about Obamacare is nonsense.

I think Hillary’s choices for new Supreme Court justices would be better than the nominees any Republican might pick.

Let me emphasize that I think Hillary is arrogant, dishonest and egocentric. She was wrong about the Iraq war, and could do some dangerous things in the Middle East, especially by getting US troops involved in disputes among Arabs and Muslims, which could have adverse effects on the security of Israel. But all Republican candidates are talking loudly and have not told us what size stick they think they think the US can carry. At best, Hillary will be a barely adequate president, but she appears to be better than the Republicans currently in the race.

I don’t know why this old topic came back to life, but since it did, I want to know what, if anything, ever happened to that proposed mosque. I think the promoter of the idea lost his backing, both financial and religious. So all that outrage was for nothing.

When Donald Trump first announced his candidacy, I figured he would be out of it in a month. When he insulted John McCain, I thought he would be gone in 3 weeks. When he insulted Megyn Kelly, I thought he would be gone in 3 days.

I now think he will be the Republican nominee, or the kingmaker of whoever gets the Republican nomination. If John Kasich stays away from Trump’s bad side, I think The Donald will back him and Kasich will be the nominee.

To WolfishMusings: Your age is showing.

There was a shop I used to frequent that posted a hechsher from “Vaad Harabbonim of Long Island.” I did some checking and discovered that there is no such Vaad. The shop was renovated, and the “VHLI” hechsher was replaced by the “Cup-K” hechsher. I assumed that since the shop was willing to post a phony hechsher once, it would do so again. Additionally, the “Cup-K” name is confusingly similar to the respectable and legitimate “Kof-K” hechsher, which made me suspicious. I have no further information about “Cup-K,” but my experience with it leads me not to trust it.

And to Sage of Chelm’s comment about trusting people on this blog: I don’t trust any of them, with the possible exception of myself.

Maybe Jews lack cleaning skills. Or maybe the premise of your question is wrong.

I’m totally confused. I thought a yeshiva hater was someone who sells hats to yeshiva bochurs.

Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton. Fair and balanced, and I don’t trust Fox “News.”

I would have mentioned Donald Trump, but I didn’t want to give an unbalanced answer.

Has anyone accumulated the data about bochurs and kollel guys and how long it takes after they join the workforce to start paying their own way (with and without contributions from their wives)? To put it another way, where is the next generation of moneyed fathers and fathers-in-law coming from?

My dentist is painless and very short. So we’re halfway there.

The opening poster has asked a good question about “investing” in law school, any law school. There is no legal requirement that law schools – Harvard or CUNY or anything in between – give reliable and meaningful data that would enable a prospective investor/enrollee to determine that typical return on investment for a particular law school. I have never heard anything good about CUNY, and lots of bad things, but CUNY cannot be trusted to give you the information you need to make a sound investment decision. And if you do not think that any educational program is an investment decision, you need to go back to school, regardless of the ROI.