Comments on: Teshuva and Changing Politics

By: Mark Frankel

Mark Frankel — Mon, 11 May 2009 23:02:21 +0000

Steve,

Chesed, Gevurah and Tiferes as well as the other Sefirot are globally applicable spiritual forces.

I don’t think I mentioned anything about Shmittah or Yovel.

By: Steve Brizel

Steve Brizel — Mon, 11 May 2009 22:28:27 +0000

Mark-WADR, I think that it is a mistake to extrapolate from uniquely Hashkafic and/or Halachic concepts of Chesed and Gvurah or Shmittah and Yovel or even such Kabbalistic based concepts as Tiferes and to attempt to pigeonhole them into the distinctly secular concepts of conservative or liberal.

By: Mark Frankel

Mark Frankel — Sun, 10 May 2009 20:19:12 +0000

Liberalism seems to be rooted in Chesed (lovingkindness) as evidenced by concern for the poor, reluctance to impose restraint and reaching out towards foreign opponents.

Conservatism seems to be rooted in Gevurah (might) as evidenced by striving for individual self-sufficiency, imposition of behavioral standards and striking foreign opponents when called for.

The solution is Tiferes (beauty) which is the ideal balance between lovingkindness and might.

To find that balance we have to first hear and truly understand the forces of lovingkindness and might and to apply them in the right measure at the right time in the right places.

By: Albany Jew

Albany Jew — Sun, 10 May 2009 17:00:49 +0000

That’s why I said “I know I shouldn’t do this” but I do believe that a big Torah value is the preservation of our people and there is my link.

By: Bob Miller

Bob Miller — Sun, 10 May 2009 16:55:23 +0000

Let’s say I know a Jew who now actively supports the unconstitutional government takeover of America. How tolerant should I be?

By: Gary

Gary — Sun, 10 May 2009 16:49:40 +0000

The focus of this thread is not party affiliation (Democrat, Republican, Green, Working Families, Right to Life, etc.), but rather the ideals with which one identifies, and how Torah-observant Jews of different ideologies act towards one another.

By: Albany Jew

Albany Jew — Sun, 10 May 2009 16:04:21 +0000

I know I shouldn’t do this but I can’t let Arthur’s statements go unanswered. I for one, can’t see one being Jewish and Democrat in some instances. Take the liberal hero Roosevelt for instance. From sending Jewish refugees back to Germany to die, to refusing to bomb the camps (perhaps missing the chance to save 100s of thousands of Jewish lives) he was in many ways a disaster for our people. He even attacked Robert Morganthau his Jewish secretary of the Treasury, when he tried to plead the Jewish case, yelling that Jews should stop complaining because he felt Jews should thank God they were allowed to live in America without suffering the fate of the Jews in Germany.

And how about Reagan which he mentions. I actually didn’t vote for him but I am now pretty darn happy he beat the rabid anti-semite Carter. Do you know what Reagan said after the bombing of the Iraq nuclear facilities? “Boys will be boys” and said their would be no sanctions. Let’s see what Obama says after the Isrealis are forced to do the same thing again. By the way I am no fan of the first George Bush, but I think that anyone who makes blanket statements about any political party is not considering history.

I guess that brings me up to 5 cents.

By: Bob Miller

Bob Miller — Fri, 08 May 2009 18:18:01 +0000

In 1948 Humphrey’s vocal opposition to segregation caused Southern Democrats to walk out of the Democratic convention to form their own party. It failed to defeat Truman, and its supporters rejoined the Democrats for many years after.

See: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/huberthumphey1948dnc.html

By: Gary

Gary — Fri, 08 May 2009 15:23:33 +0000

“Does anyone remember the Southern Democrats, the key constituency of the national Democratic Party into the 1960’s that was segregationist to the bone? Not a peep from the great FDR or JFK about them! The one who took them head on was Hubert Humphrey.”

If so, the adjective “great” would more appropriately be applied to Hubert Humphrey than to JFK or FDR. Once again, it’s not about what someone is called, but about what he or she does!

By: Bob Miller

Bob Miller — Fri, 08 May 2009 11:56:58 +0000

Does anyone remember the Southern Democrats, the key constituency of the national Democratic Party into the 1960’s that was segregationist to the bone? Not a peep from the great FDR or JFK about them! The one who took them head on was Hubert Humphrey.

By: Joe Doe

Joe Doe — Fri, 08 May 2009 04:22:16 +0000

Neither conservatism nor frumkeit support racism and/or oppose pacifism. Conservatives support the civil rights movement, not people like Jesse Jackson and Maxine Waters who value money over justice. As for pacifism, Conservatives believe in peace when it is practical. When people fly planes into buildings and make plans to blow themselves and others up, one could guess that they are not interested in peace treaties. Even the Torah advocates killing someone who is trying to kill you.
If you experienced any prejudice from frum people because of your politics, I, on behalf of other Conservatives, apologize. One of the common complaints we have about liberals is that they come up with catchphrases instead of arguments. People occasionally disagree, but that doesn’t mean we must stay seperate; otherwise, we have no way of knowing which ideas don’t hold water. I disagree with you about Obama, but I am still willing to listen to your opinion of him…because I support dissent.

By: Dovid

Dovid — Thu, 07 May 2009 23:29:09 +0000

I believe that there will eventually be a third party in the US, because the Democratic party has been overun by the far left, and the Republican party is no longer made up of individuals with the values held by that party during earlier generations. It seems inevitable to me that a Conservative party will emerge from elected officials who represent the majority of the country’s population living mainly outside the major city centers. Liberalism today shares little with the values that so many Jews were atracted to 40-70 years ago. Nor do the political parties. The Jews who are attracted to it today, did not grow up with the same values of the liberalism of those who came before them.

The loss of moral values over the last 40 years
in the US has been gradual, but constant. Many of us have grown used to it or have ignored it.
It’s quite sad actually. But I don’t believe that the country’s core population will continue to allow the moral decay for much longer, without developing its own political party to provide an avenue to preserve the values that the country was founded upon, and made it truly great for so many generations.

By: Gary

Gary — Thu, 07 May 2009 23:06:43 +0000

It is often said that there should be no “religous test” in politics. It then stands to reason that there should be no “political test” in religion.

By: Arthur

Arthur — Thu, 07 May 2009 21:27:25 +0000

Hhmmmm

Frum vs not
returning to the fold so to speak vs not
Conservative vs Liberal

Personally in my humble opinion I do not understand how any minority, black, latino, Jewish or whatever person can be a republican. Would Tiger Woods be able to play at Agusta if he wasnt on the tour and inited?
Would mr Obama?

So many of the original Union orgnaizers were Jews, frum or not because of the idea of tikkun olam because of the idea of doing right by others.

Conservaives own wall mart not jews

it als bears noting that in Mississippi 3 of the four murdered youngsters or activists were Jews.

How can one be frum and/or Jewish and not be a democrat?

does that mean blindly following the extreme left leaning ideas no it does not.

again just my 2 cents – take it or leave it

but do not ever tell me that George W or George HW or Regan could ever represent any minority

By: Bob Miller

Bob Miller — Thu, 07 May 2009 16:02:55 +0000

If the nature of today’s Federal Government is any indication, voters want pie in the sky above all else.