Thursday, February 24, 2011

Glenn Beck Is Right Again

In Beck's latest line that pissed off liberal reform jews, he said

"On his February 22 radio show, Beck compared Reform Judaism to "radical Islam," saying that both were more about 'politics' - changing what is outside of oneself - rather than about 'religion' - changing what it inside of oneself."


This is true. There is a difference in that liberals want the world to be a socialist utopia. and that islamic fanatics want the rest of the world to disappear; but Beck's premise is correct that both Reform Judaism and Radical Islam is more about politics than self improvement.

14 comments:

Friar Yid said...

Beck's premise is correct that both Reform Judaism and Radical Islam is more about politics than self improvement.

Are you really going to pretend there is no politics in Orthodox Judaism? Or the LDS church, which Beck belongs to? Ridiculous. There's politics in everything. Obviously, these rabbis are participating in a political act, but Beck-- and you-- are applying an unfair standard to disqualify them as being legitimate clergy, rather than respond to the substance of their complaint, which is that he uses the Holocaust as a personal cudgel to smack people he disagrees with over the head.

When Beck goes after the LDS church members who financed prop 8, or singles out the Haredim in Israel who pontificate on political matters on a daily basis, then we can talk. Until then, this is a slimy and cowardly attempt to distract people from the real issue.

SJ said...

>> Are you really going to pretend there is no politics in Orthodox Judaism? Or the LDS church, which Beck belongs to.

No.

>> but Beck-- and you-- are applying ... standard to disqualify them as being legitimate clergy

As well as the rest of the right wing sector of jewish society.


>> which is that he uses the Holocaust as a personal cudgel to smack people he disagrees with over the head.

I think this oversimplifies Beck's premise.

Amanda said...

I think this oversimplifies Beck's premise.

I think he grossly mis-uses the Holocaust when talking about people he dislikes and disagrees with. He references it way too much, he makes comparisons when they aren't appropriate, he uses it to attack people, and it's BS.

Now then: he's clearly not the only one, not on the right, nor the left. But as long as we're talking about HIM, that's one of my big beefs. (And yes, I watched/listened to his Soros stuff, and while I respect his right to disagree with his politics, his Holocaust collaborator comments are unfair and dishonest.)

If you think that I'm mistaken on any of this, I welcome being educated.

SJ said...

Well yeah there are better ways to make your point than referencing the holocaust and stuff like that.

What's unfair/dishonest about Beck's Soros stuff? It seems pretty well documented. If you think that I'm mistaken, I welcome being educated.

Friar Yid (not Shlita) said...

What's unfair/dishonest about Beck's Soros stuff? It seems pretty well documented.

Yes, it is-- and Beck has selectively edited the documentation.

Beck's factually incorrect about what Soros did during the Holocaust. He did not confiscate any property, and most certainly did not collaborate with Nazis or "help" send Jews to death camps. Beck has claimed all of this, and it's not true. Even worse, he's continued to repeat his accusations for months despite that they are wrong. Which, IMO, means they cross the line from merely being incorrect to being deliberate lies.

SJ said...

Here is a December 20th interview that shows whether or not Beck is lying.

Friar Yid (not Shlita) said...

I don't know if you checked out my link or not, SJ, but it contains the same interview transcript as the link you just posted. The only difference is the emphasis. Soros described horrible things happening around him, but nothing that he was personally doing. Hence, in his mind, no guilt. We can debate whether that's weird or appropriate or whatever (personally I suspect it may be some sort of psychological front he's created to avoid dealing with Shoah trauma), but the one thing you can't say was that he was a Nazi collaborator or helped "ship Jews off."

The only claim that may have some validity is that he had some role in helping his godfather confiscate property, and even that seems to be rather tricky to determine. Michael Kaufman's Soros biography certainly doesn't seem to support that interpretation. The only evidence suggesting the contrary that I've seen has been a one line, "Yes, yes" from Soros from the Kroft interview-- which, to me at least, reads as an emotional ambush attempt to get Soros to open up and reveal something juicy and personal on camera. Rather than being some bombshell revelation, I read Soros' "yes, yes" as being closer to a "What can I say to make you stop talking about my childhood so we can move on to another topic?"

No evidence for this, of course. But so far, the only evidence for the contrary view painting him as the 14-year-old counterpart to Ferenc Szálasi is that single "yes, yes." Which, IMO, is a hell of a stretch.

Ichabod Chrain said...

Friar Yid,
As to your first comment, I don't see why you might even have thought that SJ didn't think there were at least some politics in Orthodoxy. My own experience though is that I've never heard an MO rabbi give a partisan political speech from the beemah. In the Reform movement it happens all the time.

SJ,

Thought you might want to see this:
http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/02/21/will-400-rabbis-condemn-soros-for-comparing-fox-news-to-the-nazis/

I thought it interesting that Jewish Funds for Justice the organization that supported the ad about Beck didn't disclose in the ad the fact that they're funded by Soros's Institute.

Jewish Funds for Justice is involved with the Reform Movement. According to their website:

"In 2006, the Jewish community’s involvement in CBCO leapt forward when JFSJ partnered with the Union for Reform Judaism to create the URJ’s Just Congregations, an initiative aimed at supporting synagogue organizing within Reform congregations, launched with generous support from The Nathan Cummings Foundation. Just Congregations represents the first denominational commitment to engaging synagogues in CBCO, and has changed the way the Reform movement supports synagogue justice work. There are now more than 75 Reform synagogues engaged in organizing in their communities."

SJ, This is slightly OT, but speaking of organizations like Jewish Funds for Justice, you might want to take a look at this:
http://www.nas.org/polArticles.cfm?Doc_Id=1834, and then follow the link to the Facing History site and look at the Jewish foundations that support them:
http://www.facinghistory.org/about/partners_supporters
Freaking unbelievable.

SJ said...

>> I don't know if you checked out my link or not, SJ, but it contains the same interview transcript as the link you just posted

I guess you're right. XD I didn't.

In any case it's an interesting backtrack first he did help confiscate stuff and then he didn't.

kookie said...

Interesting, perhaps. Substantive enough to support all this Nazi conspiracy nonsense? Hardly.

Friar Yid said...

Above was me.

SJ said...

You think yes means no, I think yes means yes.

Friar Yid said...

I think one yes does not an elaborate narrative make, and that the people (like Beck) that are pretending it does are so deeply prejudiced against Soros that they are looking for any excuse to hate him and turn him into a Satanic Nazi boogeyman. This is particularly odious given Soros' young age during the war years.

Don't misunderstand me- I have no special love for Soros. And I understand how there's legitimate disagreements people can have with his politics and where he's chosen to put his money. But if you're going to hate him, at least do it for things there's actual evidence for, as opposed to a single soundbite that may or may not be a slip of the tongue.

If Beck had any intellectual honesty, he'd be focusing his ire on Soros' politics, not producing hatchet-job attacks on his character by suggesting he was a teenage brownshirt.

SJ said...

>> may or may not be a slip of the tongue.

he said yes twice at least. O.O