The Rabbi, The Ambassador, A Sex Book and Political Office
No. It isn’t a joke…but it might be soon. Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, public relations guru relationship expert and Kosher sex marketer, is running for office because he doesn’t like that he lives in a free country.
Now that isn’t completely fair to the good rabbi. Rabbi Boteach is mad that his next door neighbor is the Libyan ambassador to the United Nations.
JTA Reports:
In an opinion piece published Thursday by JTA, Boteach said he was outraged that Libya’s U.N. ambassador, Abdurrahman Mohamed Shalgham, was permitted to take up residence in Englewood, N.J. The rabbi, best known for his book “Kosher Sex” and counseling the late pop star Michael Jackson, said that having the diplomat as his next-door neighbor has him angry enough to launch a career in politics.
“For the first time in my life, I find myself contemplating a run for elective office. The reason is simple: The Talmud declares, ‘In a place where there are no men stand up and become one,'” Boteach wrote in his JTA Op-Ed. “If Gadhafi’s envoy remains my next-door neighbor with the tacit blessing of my elected leaders, I will do my best to unseat them by every legal means necessary.”
This summer, Boteach played a lead role in the successful campaign to keep Libyan leader Muammar Gadhafi from staying at the Libyan-owned property in Englewood during the U.N. General Assembly. But Shalgham recently moved to the property, according to a report in the New Jersey Jewish Standard. Read More
Please take the time to snicker under your breath. Done? Great. Let us take a look at his platform.
Outside of fighting international law, Boteach will be fighting for “school-choice” aka taking public money and giving it to religious schools. He says he is a “passionate advocate of school-choice” continuing with the tried and true complaint of rightwing-public-education¬-hating-wing of the Republican party, “Religious parents in my area, both Jewish and non-Jewish, can no longer afford the astronomical New Jersey real estate taxes, not a penny of which goes to their children’s education.”
As school districts are facing massive budget cuts and teacher layoffs, shouldn’t we do everything we can to support this system? You want to make the choice to send your kids to day-school or yeshiva, gey gezundt. I am not paying for it.
Public education in this country must once again be the great equalizer and by divesting cash from the funding sources around the country all we will do is ensure that the next generation of children will be further behind, less prepared to lead and inadequately trained to be the firefighters, doctors, police officers and (wait for it) elected officials of tomorrow.
That gets me to my second point: Boteach has NO experience for this job. He didn’t run a business. He isn’t a lawyer. He isn’t a community organizer (well sort of but still). He is a professional personality with a rabbinical degree. Let’s be fair here: how many rabbis do you know that shouldn’t be running organizations, let alone running for office?
My hope is that this situation is that it will be farcical and won’t turn into a shundah fur de goyim.
It’s hard to imagine the circumstances under which I’d vote for Mr. Boteach, no matter what office he was running for, but, if you’ll recall, a rabbi/psychologist who had “never run anything” was a candidate for Congress on the Democratic ticket in NJ in the 2008 elections and was endorsed by many higher-ups.
I can think of successful politicians who, prior to entering politics, were dentists, professors, full-time parents, farmers. . you name it. Surely rabbi isn’t a disqualification, but being Shmueley might be.
This non-story made no sense to me. What office is he running for? Why is JTA sending out a special bulletin saying that Shmuely Boteach is “contemplating a run for elective office?” WTF?? Seems less newsworthy even than normally vaporous items like that Michael Steinhardt has joined some other nonprofit board http://blogs.jta.org/philanthropy/article/2009/10/26/1008743/michael-steinhardt-joins-board-of-jdc-taub-center or has a bad case of gas . . .
After he introduced Michael Jackson to that ambush journilist he wants to kick every Arab out of the United States. This man definitly believes he can get away with everything. Someone should give him a nice dose of reality. No one should degrade people this way.
A few years ago, I when I was considering the idea becoming Orthodox, Boteach helped dissuade me with articles like this: http://www.beliefnet.com/Love-Family/Relationships/2005/01/How-Kinsey-Ruined-Sex-For-The-Rest-Of-Us.aspx
I was a newly-wed at the time, and I remember sharing a laugh with my husband about it. “Did you know that sex is ruined?” I asked my husband, showing him the article. We decided to bravely carry-on with marital relations anyway….
From this silly press release, it appears that Boteach is as wise about foreign diplomacy as he is about human sexuality.
>>“Outside of fighting international law, Boteach will be fighting for “school-choice” aka taking public money and giving it to religious schools.”
Actually international law might be a tad more respectable if it didn’t accord respect to the officials and agents of oppressive tyrannies.
Eric is right. U.S. out of North America!
I read the JTA email and wondered, “So he’s running on a ‘Not In My Backyard’ foreign policy streak…for a local office?”
The “Reverend Al” of the Jewish world.
The most absurd TV appearances were as the rabbi, reaching out in front of millions, to Jon Gossland. That makes 9.
So let me see if I understand this correctly:
Boteach wants to prevent the Libyan ambassador from living in his town, though it’s not clear what legal mechanism he would use to accomplish this, and though the Libyan ambassador’s residence in Englewood is not harming anyone: that is, regardless of what odious actions the Libyan government has done or is doing, assuming that Libya (like every country in the world except Vatican City and countries like Taiwan and Kosovo whose independence is disputed) will remain a member of the United Nations (not generally a question that is referred to the Englewood city council or whatever Boteach intends to run for) and will therefore have a UN ambassador, it makes no difference vis-a-vis Libya’s policies whether Libya’s UN ambassador is living in Englewood or Manhattan or Staten Island or anywhere else in commuting distance of the UN building.
Yet if Boteach is successful at promoting the idea that it’s ok to be selective about who your neighbors are and to use governmental power to prevent people from moving in, then more of his neighbors may use this principle to keep out other groups (e.g. Orthodox Jews) where there is a clearer legal mechanism to keep them away (using zoning regulations to prevent the construction of an eruv) and where there is a tangible harm that would come from that group moving in (some (not all!) Orthodox Jews would support and elect candidates with positions like Boteach, who openly seeks to siphon funds away from the public schools).
I would most actively use any semi-legal means to keep boteach out of my back yard!
@Ruth B:
MAkes me wonder if the rabbi ever actually read the talmud’s discussions of sex which are not in the least bit clinical or dissociated from from holiness, never degrade or subordinate women or children…um, what? Seriously, the talmud also examines sexuality -in many places- in a very dispassionate way, examining peoples’ actual behavior and trying to make them match up with halcha to minimize the death penalty for a variety of acts (a great example is its discussion of the famous verse quoted against homosexuality in Levitcus, which it concludes is actually a discussion of someone with both sets of sexual equipment… orit’s discussion about whether penetration of a child under a certain age renders that child invalid to marry a priest later on. It sounds awfully clinical and awful but in some ways does exactly what Kinsey was trying to do.. get rid of of punishment for the endges of “deviancy.”
KRG writes:
a great example is its discussion of the famous verse quoted against homosexuality in Levitcus, which it concludes is actually a discussion of someone with both sets of sexual equipment
Why don’t we hear about this more?
@BZ: Because it doesn’t help -much – ultimately it comes out the same way based on an “et” but still…
>>“Yet if Boteach is successful at promoting the idea that it’s ok to be selective about who your neighbors are and to use governmental power to prevent people from moving in, then more of his neighbors may use this principle to keep out other groups (e.g. Orthodox Jews) where there is a clearer legal mechanism to keep them away (using zoning regulations to prevent the construction of an eruv) and where there is a tangible harm that would come from that group moving in (some (not all!) Orthodox Jews would support and elect candidates with positions like Boteach, who openly seeks to siphon funds away from the public schools).”
Wow. Who woulda thunk one rabbi could pose such a clear and present danger to the Republic…
>>“As school districts are facing massive budget cuts and teacher layoffs, shouldn’t we do everything we can to support this system? You want to make the choice to send your kids to day-school or yeshiva, gey gezundt. I am not paying for it.”
And why should a poor inner-city family be forced to send their children, or pay to send other people’s children, to a failed drug-ridden public school when they’d rather use that money to send their child to a charter or private school where they’ll actually have a chance?
>>“Public education in this country must once again be the great equalizer and by divesting cash from the funding sources around the country all we will do is ensure that the next generation of children will be further behind, less prepared to lead and inadequately trained to be the firefighters, doctors, police officers and (wait for it) elected officials of tomorrow.”
Ah-ha. Because the American public school system has done so well at raising generations of intelligent, knowledgeable, thoughtful, well-read and mathematically competent children! Right?! Oh….
Well…maybe it hasn’t worked so great up until now….. but THIS time it’s REALLY gonna work! We’re gonna all MAKE it work! TOGETHER! On our hands and knees if we have to! We’ll shovel in even MORE cash this time! The dream shall never die!….
The battle cry of the true believer is more attractive than trying new solutions.
“ultimately it comes out the same way based on an “et” but still…”
Huh? I think I need one of Daniel Sieradski’s web applications to figure out what this means.
BZ- Boteach’s complaint against the Libyan embassy originally was that the Libyans had cut down the trees on their shared property border, in violation of local zoning laws. They have had trouble finding a place to buy since Qaddafi insists on sleeping in a special tent that most zoning laws dont allow (he even asked NYC to stay in central park for the UN assembly, and was of course denied). Call it amazing situational comedy that the one plot of land he does acquire happens to be right next door to Boteach.
Eric-
Year after year the best schools in the country are public schools. Check the lists. Yes drug infested inner city schools should recieve more funding and the self serving property tax cutting right wing jack ass who wonder why he can’t get any good workers can look to himsleve and the lack of cash coming into the system. I am not advocating for not trying something new, just for keeping the system as fair as possible.
Eric writes:
And why should a poor inner-city family be forced to send their children, or pay to send other people’s children, to a failed drug-ridden public school when they’d rather use that money to send their child to a charter or private school where they’ll actually have a chance?
Your concern for poor inner-city families, if genuine, is well-taken. Too bad the poor inner-city children who would be enabled by vouchers to attend private schools are just as imaginary as the family farms that would be bankrupted by the estate tax, or the welfare queens driving Cadillacs, all of whom exist only in the world of right-wing talking points. This is because school vouchers (for the amount spent per student in the public schools) would not be sufficient to cover private school tuition in full, so families with no disposable income still wouldn’t be able to send their children to private schools; vouchers would primarily benefit middle-class families who can cover the rest of the tuition themselves. Meanwhile, the poor inner-city students whose failing public schools would get even worse as a result of diminished funding are all too real.
Ah-ha. Because the American public school system has done so well at raising generations of intelligent, knowledgeable, thoughtful, well-read and mathematically competent children! Right?! Oh….
Compared to Orthodox day schools?!
The battle cry of the true believer is more attractive than trying new solutions.
Providing all public schools with the funding they need would be a new solution; I don’t know why it hasn’t been tried yet.
Look, I’ll admit that the public school system is lacking, to say the least. But once again, I think too much pressure has been placed on the government to fix this. I went to one of the top 100 high schools in the nation (according to US News and World Report), and it was a public school. We had crappy facilities and a faculty that was, on average, mediocre. So why did we learn? Why do I have so many classmates who are now in graduate school? Because our parents cared. I believe that is the biggest determining factor between private school success and public school failure. Even parents who worked three jobs found a way to make it to parent-teacher conferences. I know public schools aren’t perfect, and there are many things the government could improve (particularly, BZ’s suggestion that schools be adequately funded). But they can’t do it on their own.
As for Rabbi Shmuley… I have little respect for someone who would kick a person out of his/her home because of what that person’s country did. Social psychological research has shown repeatedly that you can’t fix prejudice unless you foster positive intergroup relations (see Sherif’s Robber’s Cave experiments).
In any case, the rabbi may have a talent for politics. After all, his platform is based on arguing to change things that aren’t really possible but sound good to easily frightened, xenophobic constituents. Plus, if that Beliefnet article (posted by Ruth B) is any indication, he’s also excellent at attacking straw men. I see a shining political career in his future…
“Yes drug infested inner city schools should recieve more funding and the self serving property tax cutting right wing jack ass who wonder why he can’t get any good workers can look to himsleve and the lack of cash coming into the system.”
Hmmmmm…. evil property tax cutting jack asses…. I guess it just hasn’t occurred to those greedy evil property tax cutters that high property taxes are just a wonderful way to attract people to a city….
“…because school vouchers (for the amount spent per student in the public schools) would not be sufficient to cover private school tuition in full, so families with no disposable income still wouldn’t be able to send their children to private schools; vouchers would primarily benefit middle-class families who can cover the rest of the tuition themselves.”
You sure about that? I’d suggest checking up on your facts. Because poor families in Washington DC love that city’s voucher program and are desperate to stop Congress from killing it.
Anyway, why do you believe so strongly that the 7,949th truckload of cash will succeed where the previous 7,948 have failed?
“Compared to Orthodox day schools?!”
I’m talking about the US public school system. What’s with your fixation on “Orthodox day schools”?
I’m talking about the US public school system. What’s with your fixation on “Orthodox day schools”?
That’s what the original post is about — Shmuley Boteach wants to take funding away from public schools and use it to fund Orthodox day schools.
I’ll look at the links later.
Boteach: “Religious parents in my area, both Jewish and non-Jewish, can no longer afford the astronomical New Jersey real estate taxes, not a penny of which goes to their children’s education.”
Nu? I didn’t say “exclusively fund Orthodox day schools”.
On a side note it is nice when BZ and I can get on the same side of an agrument here at Jewschool…