NYT: Shabbat Continues Through Saturday Night

In an apparent effort to prove its bona fides as the paper of record for the culturally tone deaf, the New York Times sent its movie blogger, “The Carpetbagger,” out to explain to the world why he doesn’t find Sacha Baron Cohen funny. In the midst of his lamentation, he notes:

Baron Cohen is reportedly an observant Jew, give or take an appearance on “Saturday Night Live,” so he has license to use anti-Semitism to expose anti-Semitism.

So now the NYT is clueless about the most basic Jewish tradition? I guess it’s sort of understandable — it’s not like any Jews live in New York.
Full diss.

17 thoughts on “NYT: Shabbat Continues Through Saturday Night

  1. OH!!! When I read that post, I was totally mystified about what the SNL reference was supposed to mean. Thanks for the clarification!

  2. He is referring to a Newsweek article where it mentions that Cohen doesn’t roll on shabbes (even if not to a complete degree), but broke his own observance for the sake of the ‘SNL’ appearance, as they rehearse in the afternoon.

  3. Yeah, I read that. All I could think was than anybody who is sooooo self-referential as to continually refer to himself as “the Bagger” has no sense of humor to begin with.
    So says Proud Self-Referential Self-Loather.

  4. The sense I get is that SBC won’t do his schtick on Friday nights and Saturday, regardless of his exact observance level. I mean, it’s not against the Talmud to wear a fake moustache and act like a buffoon on Shabbat either … but he allegedly makes a point of switching it off.

  5. I love that: “is he lighting fires on stage?” Rehersing would be prohibited because he is preparing for something that happens after shabbes, on shabbes, which is tehnically assur (prohibited). I’m not sure if it is a deoreita (from the torah) or derabbanan (from the rabbis) but either way, he could probably get around it.

  6. Not to speak on his behalf, but based on what I’ve read I don’t think he’s worried about assur vs. deoreita, or Talmudic loophole … he’d just rather not do his schtick on Shabbat–but, in this case, made an exception. (Which also means he isn’t Orthodox per se, just a Jew who does what he can and wants to do, which happens to involve recognizing Shabbat … what a concept.)

  7. This is the Times that brought you Judy Miller, Achmed Chalabi, sat on the illegal wiretap story for a over a year, and devotes its sports pages to teams not from here. In short, are you surprised?

  8. Oh, and also sold a whole advertising section to Sudan in the midst of this awful mess in Darfur. Reminds me of that line from Ani’s Every State Line:
    “someone willing to settle for america ’cause there’s nowhere else to go”
    that sums my attitude about the Times. If this paper is “the liberal media” man, are we in trouble.

  9. If he was so observant, he would not be talking about blow jobs on SNL.
    If he was so observant he would not run around in the yellow man thong thing.
    No, none of my observant pals , or me do that.
    I don’t care is it is a “character”

  10. Regarding the orientation and political contribution of the Times, I have to disagree strongly with the assessment of Ruby K. and like-minded leftists. Yes, the Times is often gratingly dishonest, self-important, and – say, like newly elected Democratic Senators Casey, Conrad and Webb – less than supportive of many of the basic principles of liberalism. On the other hand, it is also true that the Times editorial page is consistently and often scathingly critical of the subversive, anti-democratic agenda of the Simpering Imbecile and his band of rightwing thugs. Frankly, it seems to me that the relative merits of any publication or other institution ought to be evaluated not according to its position on any particular set of issues, but on the basis of its broader contribution to defeating the queer-baiting, racist lynch mob that has taken over the Republican Party. Indeed, this same explanation exposes the speciousness of the nonsensical claim that Lieberman was rejected by Democratic voters only on the basis of his support for the Iraq War. Bullshit; beyond the fact that he looks like the spawn of some unholy union between a hooker and a Basset Hound, those of us who detest Lieberman do so not because of Iraq, but because nobody has done more to abet the Republican Party’s assault on the Constitution, or its relentless attacks on the patriotism and integrity of half of the population of the United States.
    If he was so observant, he would not be talking about blow jobs on SNL
    Just as an aside, “observant” isn’t a synonym for – and doesn’t have a goddamn thing to do with – being prissy, puritanical, self-righteous, and humorless. Even if you, and all of your observant friends, are.

  11. yellow man thong thing
    WTF does that mean? Yes, I’ve seen Borat in his thong, but what’s the “yellow man” reference? Is there some way that it’s not as offensive as it appears to be?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.