March 24, 2010 | 12:52 pm

Israel confirms new construction in East Jerusalem

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Follow me on

This ought to go over really well with the locals:

With strains still high between Israel and the United States over the issue of Jewish settlements, construction of a contentious Jewish housing project in a predominantly Arab neighborhood of East Jerusalem could start at any time, Israeli officials and experts said Wednesday

Jerusalem city hall gave the project the final go-ahead on March 18, days after city officials said the landowners had paid the required fees. Once the fees were paid, City Hall said in a statement on Wednesday, “approval was granted automatically.”

A spokesman for the White House said on Wednesday that it was seeking “clarification” on the building project. In New York, the United Nations Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon, told the Security Council that “all settlement activity is illegal, but inserting settlers into Palestinian neighborhoods in Jerusalem is particularly troubling.”

He added: “This leads to tensions and undermines prospects for addressing the final status of Jerusalem.”

Those strains between the United States and Israel led President Obama to assure the world that there was “no crisis” in a relationship that has been essential to Israel.

March 24, 2010 | 7:54 am

Tebow told to ‘shut the f—- up’

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

I’m getting a bit tired of all the Tim Tebow-haters out there. The latest example comes from the NFL combine. Apparantly, before taking the Wonderlic test, which gauges QB IQ, Tebow asked those in the locker room to bow in prayer:

Said one of the other players in response:  “Shut the f—k up.”  Others players in the room then laughed.

No mention of how Tebow handled it, but I would suspect it included the descriptors “with grace.”

0 Comments — Leave your comment

March 23, 2010 | 2:02 pm

On ‘Capitalism and the Jews’

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

One of my favorite recurring topics on this blog has been Jews, money and stereotypes involving the two. I think my first post on the subject followed Tommy Thompson’s flub on the presidential campaign trail; the fodder seemed almost endless with the economic crisis this time last year.

You can imagine, then, that I’ll be buying Jerry Z. Muller’s new book, “Capitalism and the Jews.” A history professor at the Catholic University of America, Muller’s book likely won’t be as historically important as Werner Sombart’s early-20th-century book of a similar title, but for me it’s a must have.

And the review from the NYT wasn’t bad either:

The question of why so many Jews have been so good at making money is a touchy one. For hundreds of years, it has been fraught with suspicion, denial, resentment, guilt, self-hatred and violence. No wonder Jews and gentiles alike are so uncomfortable confronting Jewish capitalistic competence. Still, in his slim essay collection “Capitalism and the Jews,” Jerry Z. Muller presents a provocative and accessible survey of how Jewish culture and historical accident ripened Jews for commercial success and why that success has earned them so much misfortune.

(skip)

As Europe’s official money­lenders, Jews became both necessary and despised. The exorbitant interest rates they charged — sometimes as high as 60 percent — only fed the fury. But considering the economic climate, such rates probably made good business sense: capital was scarce, and lenders frequently risked having their debtors’ obligations canceled or their own assets arbitrarily seized by the crown.

This early, semi-exclusive exposure to finance, coupled with a culture that valued literacy, abstract thinking, trade and specialization (the Babylonian Talmud amazingly presaged Adam Smith’s paradigmatic pin factory), gave Jews the human capital necessary to succeed in modern capitalism. It also helped that Judaism, unlike many strains of Christianity, did not consider poverty particularly ennobling.

Most of Muller’s strongest arguments are in his first essay, which draws on everyone from Voltaire to Osama bin Laden to illustrate how the world came to conflate the negative stereotypes of Jews with those of capitalism’s excesses. The book’s remaining three essays deal somewhat unevenly with the fallout of the Jews’ economic success, and in particular the resentment it inspired among history’s economic also-rans. Muller explores, for example, how Jews improbably became associated with both abhorred poles of political economy: hypercapitalism and ­Communism.

This seems like a lot of heavily trodden ground. None of what appears in this review is a revelation. But I’m curious to see how Muller deals with this touchy subject—and why his publisher thought this was a book worth printing now.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

March 23, 2010 | 11:56 am

Most Americans believe God helps with daily life

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

From the Department of Unsurprising Findings:

Most Americans believe God is involved in their everyday lives and concerned with their personal well-being, though the well-educated and higher earners are less likely than their counterparts to believe in such divine intervention, a new study suggests.

Scott Schieman, a sociology professor at the University of Toronto, examined data from two recent national surveys of Americans and their beliefs about God’s involvement in their everyday lives.

The results, published in the March issue of the journal Sociology of Religion, suggest these beliefs differ across education and income levels. Past research has suggested other factors involved with our religious beliefs, with one study revealing teachers are more religious than other college grads, and another suggesting women are more likely than men to believe in God.

Read the highlights here.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

March 22, 2010 | 10:25 am

Tiger Woods: ‘I’ve done some pretty bad things’

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

In an exclusive interview with ESPN’s Tom Rinaldi, Tiger Woods says he’s “done some pretty bad things.” No kidding.

2 Comments — Leave your comment

March 21, 2010 | 9:50 pm

Cardinal Mahony on immigration reform

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Cardinal Roger Mahony’s scandal-ridden tenure as the archbishop of Los Angeles Catholics is winding down, but Mahony is still stumping for immigration reform. Today he appeared on the lawn of the National Mall to campaign for reform, which he discussed as a guest voice on The Washington Post’s religion blog, On Faith:

The ultimate and determinative question for our country, much less discussed, is whether we should embrace or reject the immigrant heritage that has served us so well.

Right now, the trend is disturbing. For the past 20 years, we have pursued enforcement-only policies which have not significantly stymied illegal entry into the country. Since 2000, for example, we have spent over $100 billion on immigration enforcement. During the same period, the number of undocumented persons has grown from 7 million to 11 million.

Our legal immigration system, basically ignored by Congress for nearly 50 years, is outmoded and inadequate to our future labor needs, especially when the economy recovers. There are simply not enough visas for unskilled workers to come legally. The family-based immigration system, which has helped immigrant families remain together and thrive for decades, is unworkable and now keeps families apart.

The combined effect of these policies has negatively impacted immigrant communities, including their legal resident and U.S. citizen members.

We can return to our tradition as a nation of immigrants and welcome and invest in them, or we can continue to turn inward to the detriment of our own interests.

It is our choice. I pray we make the right one.

Read the rest here.

0 Comments — Leave your comment

March 21, 2010 | 8:57 pm

Abortion deal reached; House passes health care bill

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Health care reform passed the House today after Democrats got the pro-life wing of the party on board by prohibiting federal funding for abortion:

By a vote of 219 to 212, the House passed the bill after a day of tumultuous debate that echoed the epic struggle of the last year. The action sent the bill to President Obama, whose crusade for such legislation has been a hallmark of his presidency.

Democrats hailed the votes as historic, comparable to the establishment of Medicare and Social Security and a long overdue step forward in social justice. “This is the civil rights act of the 21st century,” said Representative James E. Clyburn of South Carolina, the No. 3 Democrat in the House.

After a year of partisan combat and weeks of legislative brinksmanship, House Democrats and the White House clinched their victory only hours before the voting started on Sunday. They agreed to a deal with opponents of abortion rights within their party to reiterate in an executive order that federal money provided by the bill could not be used for abortions, giving the Democrats the final votes. Democrats said that in expanding access to health coverage for uninsured Americans, they were creating a new program every bit as important as Social Security and Medicare, while also putting downward pressure on rising health care costs and reining in federal budget deficits.

Republicans said the plan would saddle the nation with unaffordable levels of debt, leave states with expensive new obligations, weaken Medicare and give the government a huge new role in the health care system.

The debate on the legislation has highlighted the deep partisan and ideological divides in the nation and set up a bitter midterm Congressional election campaign, with Republicans promising an effort to repeal it or block its provisions in the states.

I’ve seen a lot of distraught tweets this evening, on both sides of the political spectrum.

From the left, Jewschooler Daniel Sieradski:

omfg are they really hinging their opposition on abortion? what planet are we on?

And from the right, Tabitha Hale:

I’m done. Goodbye freedom.

Frankly, I think everyone is being a bit dramatic over the health care overhaul. I may be naively optimistic on the power of big government to fix a failure of the market—my self-employed, healthy and relatively young parents pay something like $950 a month—but this is not the end of America as we know it.

8 Comments — Leave your comment

March 21, 2010 | 4:31 pm

Greenberg: being awesome and a little Jewish

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Friends keep asking if Ben Stiller’s new movie, “Greenberg,” is based on my life. All I can say is I keep checking the mailbox for checks, but, alas, have thus far seen none.

What is the film about (besides, of course, being awesome and a little Jewish)? Watch the above preview and, I think you’ll agree that it looks excellent. Or, if you prefer, read Naomi Pfefferman’s Hollywood Jew review:

Having failed to make something of himself while his friends have developed successful careers and families, Roger Greenberg has left New York to house sit for his well-to-do brother in Los Angeles, where he is attempting to recuperate from a nervous breakdown.  There he chances to meet his brother’s twentysomething assistant, Florence Marr (Greta Gerwig), who turns out to be relationship material, in part because she is so passive she is able to absorb all of Greenberg’s abusive behavior and deflected self-loathing.

The depth of his self-hatred apparently extends to his Jewish background, as evidenced when Greenberg is persuaded to attend a Bel Air bar-be-queue where he meets up with some old Jewish friends.  These men are comfortably chatting about whether anyone has been to so-and-so’s seder;  various Jewish connections, and what constitutes a “Jewish” gesture (“You’re doing this,” one of them says to Greenberg, miming his effusive hand gesticulations).  “I’m half [Jewish],” Greenberg says.  “You look full,” a friend replies.  The appalled Greenberg has as much disdain for this Tribal schmoozing as he professes for his wealthy friends whom, in his opinion, have abandoned creativity in order to become successful. “Most people think I look Italian,” he says, sulkily.  “My mother is actually Protestant, so I’m not Jewish at all.”

Stiller’s own mother, the actress Anne Meara, converted to Judaism upon marrying fellow actor Jerry Stiller; Ben Stiller unabashedly identifies with the Tribe and also has mined his background to comic effect (during his stint as a presenter at the 2010 Academy Awards,  he peppered his “Avatar” spoof with Hebrew).  In “Meet the Parents” and its sequel, “Meet the Fockers,” Stiller plays a nebbishy Jewish nurse who is continually humiliated by his WASP father-in-law (Robert De Niro), a former CIA agent.  The third installment in the franchise, “Little Fockers,” will hit theaters Dec. 22, with a screenplay by Stiller’s longtime in-house writer, John Hamburg.

“The non-Jewish characters in the films are not anti-Semitic,” Hamburg told me last year.  “But there is the sense that Ben feels out of place among WASPS and also because he is a man who is not a doctor, but a nurse, which creates a kind of stigma.”

Much as I loved “Zoolander,” I’m hoping “Greenberg” is a return to the dramatic style that Stiller demonstrated in “Zero Effect.”

0 Comments — Leave your comment

March 21, 2010 | 12:48 pm

No such thing as March sadness

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

This year marks the first time since 2006 that I haven’t traveled to Vegas for a weekend of March Madness. But that doesn’t mean I haven’t spent the entire weekend watching basketball. I thought my bracket was donesky after Thursday’s game, which put my point total in the bottom 3 percent of ESPN Tournament Challenge participants. But then Kansas lost and now I’m the darkhorse favorite to win it all—long as Kentucky goes the distance.

All this to say ... we’re in desperate need of a basketball and religion story for The God Blog. And would you believe it, there are a few.

First there is Iranian-American Ali Farokhmanesh, whose clutch shot against Kansas (above) gave new life to my March. Honestly, who wouldn’t have taken that shot?

And while the NBA may only have Jordan Farmar and Omri Casspi as Jewish reps, the NCAA has plenty of MOTs. In a lamentation of Jon Scheyer snubbing the Fighting Illini, just like he snubbed the Maccabiah USA team last summer, The Great Rabbino offers this list of Jewish All-Americans:

1) Jon Scheyer – G – Duke Blue Devils – 18.6ppg, 5apg, 3.6rpg
2) Sylven Landesberg – G – Virginia Cavaliers – 16.6ppg, 2.8apg, 6rpg
3) Jake Cohen – F – Davidson Wildcats – 13.3ppg, 5.1rpg
4) Dane Diliegro – C – New Hampshire Wildcats – 8.9ppg, 8.1rpg
5) Derek Glasser – G – Arizona State – 10.1ppg, 4.8apg, 2.5rpg

Only Scheyer made the tourney. Read more of The Great Rabbino’s mourning Scheyer here. And go Wildcats.

1 Comments — Leave your comment

March 19, 2010 | 3:09 pm

Jewish students speak out at UC Irvine

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Two years ago I wrote a story about the treatment of Israel at UC Irvine, UCLA and a few other campuses. A number of academics criticized the piece as an unproductive re-hash of old hash. Since then things have only gotten worse at UCLA and UCI, particularly UCI, where Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren was prevented from speaking last month.

The UCI student government recently passed a resolution supporting the members of the Muslim Student Union who prevented Oren from speaking and criticizing the university for punishing the protesting students. At the student government public hearing, a few Jewish student leaders spoke out.

2 Comments — Leave your comment

March 18, 2010 | 1:52 pm

You know who’s responsible for dogs—the Jews

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Ancient hunting dog

OK, so that headline is a bit misleading. Though fascinating new research traces the domestication of dogs to the Middle East, that history dates back to about 10,000 years ago, which is about double the age of Jewish history. The article appears in today’s issue of the journal Nature. The NYT reports:

A research team led by Bridgett M. vonHoldt and Robert K. Wayne of the University of California, Los Angeles, has analyzed a large collection of wolf and dog genomes from around the world. Scanning for similar runs of DNA, the researchers found that the Middle East was where wolf and dog genomes were most similar, although there was another area of overlap between East Asian wolves and dogs. Wolves were probably first domesticated in the Middle East, but after dogs had spread to East Asia there was a crossbreeding that injected more wolf genes into the dog genome, the researchers conclude in Thursday’s issue of the journal Nature.

The archaeological evidence supports this idea, since some of the earliest dog remains have been found in the Middle East, dating from 12,000 years ago. The only earlier doglike remains occur in Belgium, at a site 31,000 years old, and in western Russia from 15,000 years ago.

Humans lived as roaming hunters and gatherers for most of their existence. Dr. Wayne believes that wolves began following hunter-gatherer bands to feed on the wounded prey, carcasses or other refuse. At some stage a group of wolves, who happened to be smaller and less threatening than most, developed a dependency on human groups, and may in return have provided a warning system.

Several thousand years later, in the first settled communities that began to appear in the Middle East 15,000 years ago, people began intervening in the breeding patterns of their camp followers, turning them into the first proto-dogs. One of the features they selected was small size, continuing the downsizing of the wolf body plan. “I think a long history such as that would explain how a large carnivore, which can eat you, eventually became stably incorporated in human society,” Dr. Wayne said.

The full journal article can be read here.

4 Comments — Leave your comment

March 18, 2010 | 10:12 am

‘Jihad Jane’ pleads not guilty

Posted by Brad A. Greenberg

Breaking news from the AP:

Colleen LaRose, 46, of Pennsburg, appeared in court wearing a green jumpsuit and corn rows in her blond hair. A May 3 trial date was set.

The rest of the story deals with the background details surround LaRose’s October arrest:

She was accused of conspiring with jihadist fighters and pledging to commit murder in the name of a Muslim holy war. Authorities say she wanted to kill a Swedish artist who had offended Muslims.

Authorities say she grew acquainted online with violent co-conspirators from around the world. They say she posted a YouTube video in 2008 saying she was “desperate to do something” to ease the suffering of Muslims.

(skip)

From June 2008 through her Aug. 23, 2009, departure, the woman who also called herself “Fatima Rose” went online to recruit male fighters for the cause, recruit women with Western passports to marry them, and raise money for the holy war, the indictment charged.

She had also agreed to marry one of her overseas contacts, a man from South Asia who said he could deal bombs and explosives, according to e-mails recovered by authorities.

He also told her in a March 2009 e-mail to go to Sweden to find the artist, Lars Vilks.

“I will make this my goal till i achieve it or die trying,” she wrote back, adding that her blonde American looks would help her blend in.

0 Comments — Leave your comment