- Got tips? Send them to tips (at) r8ny (dot) com
- Blog on Room Eight
- sign-up to receive a daily digest by email
- Advertise on Room Eight
- Login / Sign-up
Seymour: An Introduction [or The Kvetcher in the Brisket on Rye] (The Race In the 44th Councilmanic, Part Two)
NEW YORK TIMES: Two months later, Mr. Salinger is back at the typewriter thanking his friend for an update he devoured “greedily.” This time, though, he reports that he has become less enamored with New York’s charms. “Meaning,” he writes, “that there aren’t any places I like or love there any more. With the exception of the Museum of Natural History.”
While that was also a spot that Holden found comforting, Mr. Salinger also fantasizes about visiting Williamsburg, Brooklyn, in “the faint hope that some kindly old Hasid from the eighteenth century” would invite him home for matzoh ball soup or a cup of tea. Faint indeed. Sadly, if Mr. Salinger ever attempted to put his fantasy into practice, he would likely have been SOL, and I do not mean the King of Israel after David. Perhaps if it were Friday, and it were Crown Heights, instead of Williamsburg, JD could have pretended his mother was Jewish and copped a Shabbos dinner, but otherwise his best bet was likely to have been Borough Park’s Masbia Soup Kitchen, where these days his soup would likely be served to him by a City Council candidate promising to bring home more pork to the neighborhood. Of all the candidates whose name were raised as possible successors to Simcha Felder in the 44th Councilmanic, only one caused me even momentary enthusiasm, former State Senator Seymour Lachman, and even that was only in context. Back in 2008, the last time Lachman’s name was being bandied about for a Council seat (then the one he actually claims to live in, as opposed to the 44th , where he does not even claim to reside--of course, neither did either of the frontrunners before the campaign started), Lachman was being talked up as the Working Families Party’s magic bullet against Dominic Recchia in the aftermath of the evisceration of Term Limits. Lachman was the candidate if “change;” “change” apparently having become a synonym for nostalgia. An extremely pompous former President of the NYC Board of Education, and the author of many books, one of which someone has actually read, Lachman’s claim on being the exemplar of democratic outrage against the oligarchy had a long history, starting with his being foist upon the public as the handpicked choice of Howie Golden and Clarence Norman in a special election for State Senate which occurred only because they’d previously engineered the incumbent’s selection as a Supreme Court Justice. The Democratic County Committee meeting in which the seat was essentially handed to Lachman (with the support of Dov Hikind and his handed picked candidate in the present race, Joe Lazar) had its climax when the third-place candidate, Adele Cohen, in exchange for nods and winks implying a promise of future support (which, in a first for Norman, was actually delivered), switched just enough votes to Lachman to make the nomination litigation-proof, causing Lorraine Coyle-Koppell, the election attorney for the runner-up, Marty Levine, to do a very convincing imitation of Linda Blair in “The Exorcist.” An election was actually held, but its pretense of being anything but a formality was mooted by an inspection of Levine’s petitions, leaving Lachman essentially unopposed. Lachman then went to Albany for a few years and wrote a book outlining how shocked he was that the legislature was run just like the meeting where he was handed his seat. At the time, I called Lachman “a moderate social reactionary,” citing his endearing habit of telling pro-choicers, “I’m with you almost all the way on that one,” while rarely having seen an abortion restriction he couldn’t support.But in the race for the 44th Councilmanic, being a moderate social reactionary would practically qualify Lachman for endorsement by the Lambda Independent Democrats. Above all things, Seymour Lachman was an old-fashioned New Deal/Great Society Democrat with an unfailing sense of party loyalty, something sadly lacking amongst the candidates remaining in the race (except for the one who admits to being a Republican). Moreover, even on social issues, Lachman really tried to reach out as far as he thought his Orthodox Jewish beliefs permitted him, and maybe a bit more. When he told pro-choicers “I’m with you almost all the way on that one,” he wasn’t dissembling; he really meant it. It is hard to picture Dov Hikind or even Simcha Felder making such an effort. Unfortunately, Lachman, dropped out almost as quickly as he dropped in. Reached by reporters at his year-round “summer home” in Long Island, Lachman cited “personal and familiar reasons,” probably meaning his wife was not interested in moving their Brooklyn pied-a-terre from Bensonhurst to Borough Park. “It does not mean that in the future I will not consider running for public office; I will consider things that come up, as they come up, in the next year or two.” Perhaps the Nassau Democrats are looking for a strong candidate for the Long Beach seat in the County Legislature. On social issues, the best one can probably hope for from this field is lack of interest, in the manner of Simcha Felder, who’d just as soon change the topic and hope it never comes up again. David Greenfield and Joe Lazar might vote “no” on issues of interest to the LGBT community, and make a little speech, but they are probably not going to expend any political capital or use such topics to inflame the passions of their constituents. Concerning Jonathan Judge, President of the Brooklyn Young Republicans (and the only candidate who actually lived in the District before the seat became vacant), I’m not sure I can promise even that. His campaign seems mostly a matter of trying to stir up resentment against Orthodox Jews: “Not all the communities have been represented as much as some,” says Judge, “and we’re working to make sure everyone is represented in the same way,” Who between the two civilized candidates would be more tolerant? Well, Greenfield is surely more modern and worldly, while Lazar is more black-hat, but on the other hand, Lazar seems to have a slightly larger number of liberal friends (mostly courtesy of a quid pro quo for his and Dov’s endorsement in a City Council race; excepting Jim Brennan, who has high regard for Lazar’s work in the field of Mental Health)--probably a draw. I will say that, as someone who spent his life working for a Democratic majority in the State Senate, and would now like to see that majority become “Amigo Proof” in time for the Congressional reapportionment, this field does not offer much hope. The one Republican office holder with an all Brooklyn seat is State Senator Marty Golden, whose seat overlaps parts of the 44th. An “Amigo Proof” majority would be far more likely if Golden could be beaten. However, none of the candidates in this race are likely to be of any assistance in that endeavor. Take Joe Lazar. Along with his mentor, Dov Hikind, Lazar worked in 2002 for Golden’s election against incumbent Vinnie Gentile (I had an Election Day encounter with him on a street corner). Further, Lazar’s contributed to Golden’s campaign committee as recently as 2008, and he‘s been endorsed by Assemblyman Peter Abbate, who openly brags about his successful efforts to make sure Golden’s had no Democratic opposition, and Councilman Matthieu Eugene, a Golden contributor. Moreover, Lazar’s joined Dov Hikind at the hip practically every time Dov’s jumped ship on the Democrats, which is quite frequently. While David Greenfield has been endorsed by three Democrats who worked for Gentile in that race (Lew Fidler, Dominick Recchia and Gentile himself). He has also been endorsed by two who jumped ship for Golden (Mike Nelson and Carl Kruger), as well as by Golden himself. Would a loyal Senate Democrat’s endorsement help clear the picture? After Lazar announced he’d been endorsed by Kevin Parker, Parker sent out a press release denying it, while, in the span of a few short weeks, Diane Savino has in rapid succession endorsed Greenfield, then Lachman, and then Lazar (it‘s a good thing the campaign is not longer). No help there. Given Hikind’s mercurial nature (he endorsed longtime enemy Noach Dear for Judge and tried to get him to run in this race; he was a strong supporter of Vinnie Gentile until he suddenly decided to endorse Golden against him for Senate and then immediately followed up by supporting Gentile for Golden’s old Council seat; he mentored both Felder and Greenfield, who are now his mortal enemies), and Lazar’s tendency to follow Dov Quixote like a Sancho Panza (a Sandor Pupa?) perhaps there is some chance Lazar will end up working against Golden, but I wouldn’t bet the tzedakah box on it. Truth be told, the only result which would discomfort Marty Golden in this race would be a victory by Jonathan Judge (who is affiliated with an anti-Golden Republican faction), and he thinks Golden is too liberal. Nor are endorsement by other reactionaries a reliable guide. Greenfield’s been endorsed by the Executive Committee of the Kings County Conservative Party, a group traditionally more interested in a place at the trough than ideology, but still somewhat distressing. However, Lazar may have beaten it by appearing at a meeting of “Igud Harabonim,” where sources say he promised to take a “firm stand against any issues that are against family values.”“Igud Harabonim,” has been called a “hate group“ by “HateWatch” a branch of the prestigious South Poverty Law Center, one of America's leading tracker of hate mongers, including anti-Semites. HateWatch called Igud "an extremist organization opposed to basic human rights." How bad is Igud? According to HateWatch, it has espoused anti-gay bigotry in the teaching of Holocaust history. In 2000, even a hardcore right winger like Dr. Laura Schlessinger found the group’s praise so embarrassing, she removed the group's letter of support from her website. Igud’s Executive director, Hikind pal Gershon Tannenbaum, has called homosexuals “deviants” and “anthropological misfits.” Igud has also organized against Jerusalem’s Gay Pride Parade, using the sort incitements that led to the stabbing of three young men. In 1997, Igud offered testimony before Congress that it would boycott the U.S. Holocaust Museum if it referred to gay victims of the Holocaust. In testifying, an Igud spokesman said such material would be “a perversion,” adding, “Do we have a prostitutes’ exhibit?” This nicely Dovtails with Hikind’’s opposition to acknowledging homosexual victims of Nazi persecution at Brooklyn’s Holocaust Memorial. Did I mention Igud’s crusade against “Monty Python’s Flying Circus”? Going to Igud and talking about “family values” is like chumming shark infested waters with fresh blood. And, most famously, Igud’s President, Rabbi Abraham Hecht, successfully called for the assassination of Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.I’m pretty sure Igud trumps the Brooklyn Conservatives (though maybe not the State Party), but in fairness, I’ll call that one a draw. Looking at the candidates’ websites for clues on non-social issues, I found that Greenfield favored a lot of new spending, a tax cut and fiscal responsibility, while the only issues Lazar mentioned were better Holocaust education and less parking enforcement on Saturdays (Greenfield seems to favor less enforcement on the other six days as well). So perhaps it is best to focus not on the political beliefs of these gentlemen, but what sort of legislators they would be. Joe Lazar is a very nice man, who’s been active in the community for nearly as long as David Greenfield’s been alive, but while one could call him an “Activist,” what he really stands for is stasis. A speaker at the Belzer Hasidic community’s endorsement of Lazar summed it up beautifully: “We don’t need change. Over the last year we’ve seen a lot of change and all our Mosdos are left with is change. We need continuity of service and Joe Lazar, the choice of the majority of the Mosdos Hatorah, and the choice of the Belzer Mosdos, will give us that continuity.” Joe Lazar is the candidate of the Borough Park status quo, which can be summed up in two words: Dov Hikind. As I stated in part one, Lazar is a Dov Hikind sycophant. How close are they? One elected official told me:“How could Dov Hikind's candidate be reform? The guy is a lobbyist [Lazar Consulting Group]. Hikind directs people to him. They pay him a fee. He advertises on Hikind’s radio show. Hikind gets them funding.” But I find another, more verifiable example far more illuminating. In the original drafts of this piece, I included an anecdote which, including the necessary introductory material, ran nearly four pages. It illustrated the willingness of Joe Lazar to serve Dov Hikind’s interests by helping Hikind to obscure the truth about the stance of a politician on an issue both Hikind and Lazar held near and dear (not Noach). Israel. While I am not so sure many of my readers share their passion, it is without a doubt that many, if not most voters in the 44th Councilmanic do. More importantly, as I stated in my original drafts, if Joe Lazar is willing to prostitute even his deeply held right wing Zionism at the behest of Dov Hikind, is there any shred of independence in the man whatsoever? My belief is that one could be Noam Chomsky and still find that behavior problematic. Unfortunately, telling the story properly threw this piece way off balance. My initial response to this criticism from a few friends I previewed this article with was to quote the words sung by another yiddishe boy chick, “Sue me if I play too long,” but in the end, it was clear that I was going to have to publish it under separate cover under separate cover. One may well argue that David Greenfield would be just as subservient to Vito Lopez as Lazar is to Hikind. I have argued that that is surely a lesser evil, but even if it is , I’m not sure the accusation is true.The truth is that Greenfield appears to be one ballsy sun of a bitch. The issue on which Greenfield displayed his testosterone is one in which I fervently disagree with him: Tuition Tax Credit--I oppose them, Greenfield supports them, as do Hikind and Lazar. It is the manner in which Greenfield worked for tuition tax credits which I find positively refreshing. As reported in City Hall News, in 2006, Greenfield formed a coalition across the religious spectrum called Teach NYS and began a lobbying and mail campaign in support of a plan to give private school parents a $500 yearly tuition tax credit. The plan was opposed by Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and the New York State United Teachers.Greenfield shocked and rocked Albany by breaking the rules and sending mailers into Silver’s Assembly District, asking private school parents, including Silver’s fellow Orthodox Jews, to contact Silver about the issue. My G-d, you would have thought we were in America instead of New York! Greenfield’s tactics, which could have come out of a grade school civics lesson, infuriated Silver, though they eventually resulted in the symbolic victory of a $330 a year tax credit to all school parents (which I also oppose). Teach NYS later went on to help win $30 million in extra funding for special-needs schools in New York City (which I favor). Silver has gone on to make destroying David Greenfield a personal crusade, at one point intervening to prevent him from getting a top staff job with Council Speaker Christine Quinn (the fact that Greenfield came so far in the selection process for a job working for a lesbian is at least evidence of Greenfield’s personal level of tolerance for diversity). And now Silver has made pulled out all the stops to stop Greenfield’s election. Email circulated in political circles, and then misreported on Room 8, has stated that Vito Lopez tried to prevent an endorsement of Lazar by Borough Park’s favorite shabbes goy, John Heyer, by sending emissaries to Heyer's house.I have it on the word of one of Heyer’s closest allies, Mark Shames, that this is a lie. However, apparently someone did call Heyer and asked him to reconsider. Gee, how thuggish can you get? (that was snark). If one wants to see thuggish, I suggest one explore the role here of Shelly Silver. A Borough Park based real estate lawyer named Nachum Caller also wanted to run for the seat and was perceived as a threat to Lazar among the ultra-Orthodox vote. Silver met with Caller, and gave him a “frank assessment” of his chances. Shortly thereafter Caller withdrew. Silver denies urging Caller to withdraw. Caller’s son was quoted as saying his father’s candidacy was “terminated.” “Terminated with extreme prejudice” might be a more accurate description. Sources tell me that Silver’s summoning Caller to a meeting was not a case of an intervention by a friend. Caller’s law practice is J-51 and 421-a development work, and Silver was apparently not subtle in making it clear that he would regard Caller’s candidacy as the act of an enemy. Whatever the words used, Caller got the message. And others are getting the message as well. It is no coincidence that every Assemblymember who’s endorsed in this race has endorsed Joe Lazar; even Felix Ortiz, whose Assembly District does not overlap this Councilmanic one block, has been dragged out to appeal to the district’s six Latinos. Even those Assemblymembers rightfully scared by Greenfield’s tremendous following in the Sephardic community are nonetheless even more scared of Shelly Silver. Despite the real risks at home, Steve Cymbrowitz, whose late wife was Egyptian, has endorsed Lazar, while Bill Colton has somehow managed to remain neutral. Meanwhile, according to Vos Is Neias, Hikind “appears to be pulling out all the stops in getting the word out that whoever backs Greenfield will have no access to him or State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver.”In a community where elections are almost all dominated by arguments about who can bring home the most money, that is surely a frightening promise. All for urging some voters to contact their Assemblyman. (By contrast, the same article’s report of a purported offer by Vito Lopez of peace to a Hasidic faction he’s been fighting with, if they support Greenfield, at least documents the use of the carrot rather than a dynamite stick. What can I say? I cannot find it in me to endorse either of these men. Both seem likely to be as tolerant as one can hope for under the circumstances, but they are both a repudiation of nearly everything I stand for. It is clear that Joe Lazar will be a competent and controlled plodder perhaps making a useful contribution on mental health issues, and that David Greenfield will be an aggressive and possibly even independent go-getter, who is likely to be a really substantive player in the legislative process. . Given the politics they both adhere to, I’m not sure that gives Greenfield the advantage. However, if I lived in the district, I’d likely feel differently. Seymour, where are you when we need you? [Probably in Long Beach]. to be able to come up with so many variations of my name. And halfway through your response I lost track of how many other vile personal insults of people ended up in your response. So continue the biterness. And I must say I am amazed that the great Gatemouth has been following me and who I support so carefully. I am flattered  ...for a person who told so many baldfaced lies. You are surely an expert in L'shon hora. and bitterness has two Ts, "Rabbi" ...fertilizer? The bag. As I said in part one, there are probably few Room 8 readers in the 44th Councilmanic, mostly Yuppies in Kensington and Flatbush, so I have have no illussions about influencing this race, and if I did, I'm not sure which way I'd want to influence it. I think the fact that a semi-retiired piece of Dov Hikind's furniture like Lazar is less likely to be a player in the legislative process than an aggressive young guy like Greenfield may be a point in Lazar's favor, given both candiates' right wing views. A friend of mine recently emailed me about this race and said the following: what has been bothering me so much about this race is the lack of any self-awareness across the board tho’ I’d suggest more on Team Lazar’s part…it all is what it is, but Lazar’s folks think it’s year zero and they get to say whatever and have it be taken as true…nothing happened before this race in Borough Park or Broonklyn politics. Except apparently for the fact that I've defended Vito Lopez in some instances when attacks on him were untrue, and have SOMETIMES supported his candidates. That apparently is forever in the eyes of Yeech Silber. But Yuckles, it was you (and Hikind and Lazar) and not I who supported Vito's Public Advocate candidate, Bill DeBlasio. I proudly and loudly backed Mark Green (and also backed Green against Vito's choice Andrew Cuomo). I proudly and loudly backed Karen Yellen for Judge against Vito's (and Hikind's and Lazar's) choice Noach dear. WTF where you in that race, Yecheleh? I also supported Rock Hackshaw for City Council last year--wasn't Vito (and you Dov and Joe) with Matt Eugene? Vito had two priority candidates for City Council, Steve Levin and Maritza Davilla. I backed neither, voted for Jo Anne Simon against Levin, took mucho abuse for it, and criticized Vito in the fall for backing Davilla against the winner of the Democratic primary. When was the last time you stuck your neck out like that Yuck? Further, in the 39th, I eventually endorsed Josh Skaller, the candidate Vito least wanted to win. Not only have you (and Lazar and Hikind) been more loyal to Vito lately than I, but Lazar's capaign manager, the phony reformer Gary Tilzer, helped Vito in his two priority Council races last year, by running candidates whose sole function was to attack the real anti-Vito candidites, and split the anti-Vito vote. I know for a fact, that one of those candidates, Gerry Esposito, the former President of a Regular club allied with vito, ran because Vito urged him to. You and Tilzer have a lot of chutzpah calling me a shill for Vito. Marty Connor? He's my friend. But last year he backed DeBlasio and John Liu--I backed Green and David Yassky. He backed three Coucnil candidates (Gerson, Zuckerman, Simon)--I endorsed none of them. Matt Eugene was his client. I endorsed Hackshaw. I also endorsed Paul Newell, candidate of a club which voted to support Connor's opponent, for a District Leadership. Further to say I have been critical of Lazar because he is the candiate of those who scrwed Connor is not quite accurate. Shelly Silver backed Connor. Bill DeBlasio stood up to his friends in the Working Families Party and backed Connor. Diane Savino, Jim Brennan, and Kevin Parker (if one counts him as a Lazar supporter) backed Connor. John Heyer backed Connor. Peter Abbate? Connor got a member of his club a job as a law secretary. And Eugene payed Connor a retainer. I actually think there are more Connor enemies among Greenfield's supporters. Marty Golden's victory probably cost Connor his leadership. Carl Kruger was a strong supporter of David Paterson against Connor for leader. Kruger and Mike Nelson both backed Golden's Senate race, which costed Connor so dearly. And let us not forget the guy backing Greenfield who funneled thousands of dollars through his firends to Connor's opponent: Mike Bloomberg. You might be better off ignoring Connor and Vito and looking at my own enemies. As I've admitted, I dislike Hikind intensely. On the other hand, if you bothered to read my writing over the years, you would know my own personal Moby Dick is actually my obsessive hatred of Carl Kruger. In addition, i will not soon forget the laughing out loud schadenfreude of wife of City Councilman supporting Greenfield when she found out that I lost my job in the Senate at a time when my wife was seven month's pregnant. As to Brad Lander, my problem with him is twofold. Most importantly, his campaign put out a piece of hate lit of the kind which inspired murder in Israel. And when the malefactor, Yitzchok Fleisher, was revealed Lander refused to do anything about it. Were it not for those events, I probably would have ignored that race. The proof that my Lander animus is not what motivated me is that I wrote both earlier and harsher about the other candidate who engaged in hate lit, John Heyer, who happens to have been a Connor supporter. The fact that you brag that your candiate is backed by both guys who engaged in blood libel may be the best argument against your guy. The other reason I dislike Lander is because I am a Zionist, and Lander clearly believes in his heart of hearts that Jews should not have their own nation. While I do not think this is relvant to a Council race, I think the voters of the 44th think otherwise. Further, I think the lying Lander engaged in when the issue was raised is relevant, as it raises questions about his integrity. But most importantly, the fact that Joe Lazar was willing to suppress his deeply held right-wing Zionism and distort the truth about Lander's position on Israel, because Dov Hkind asked him to so, raises questions about both Lazar's integrity and his independence. Thank for visiting Officer Yuchpie. And Officer Yuchpie, Yuch you!  Here are some arguments pro and con regarding orthodox education I have heard from within.
On the one hand, I have had conversations like this: "No disrespect, but we separate, and protect orthodox education as a means of preserving our culture." My response: "I don't blame you, considering the anything-goes aspects of Black subculture. No offense, but when Minister Louis Farrakan called for Blacks to separate in order to preserve the culture, he was castigated." "Hmmm. Understood."
On the other hand, I have been told that there is a direct co-relation between orthodox education and pockets of abject poverty among orthodox communities in Boro Park, Crown Heights, and Williamsburg. According to American Community survey data, one upstate orthodox community, Kiryas Joel, has the highest poverty rate in the country, due to in part to insular private education and few who leave to attend college.
As the beneficiary of an exceptional private, but not orthodox, grade school education, I have no firsthand knowledge of this. (I do thank my mother everyday for sacrificing to pay for that education.) But from the outside, if what insiders say is true, I wonder: How does such an education help a people survive economically? And what role does education tax credits play in that survival?
Is the implicit goal 100% tax-payer funded orthodox education? Would 100% public funding for private education (if that became possible) come in a Pandora's Box full of interference with orthodox education? SCOTUS has already denied the carving out of a public school district specifically for religious education in Kiryas Joel v. Grumet. Just how far will tax-credits for private schools go? Is there a demand for Priority 7 vouchers to pay for all orthodox education? To what end?
On a related note, how independent is Greenberg when he all but begged Bloomberg to endorse him? The same Bloomberg who manipulated the community with emotional warfare by threatening to cut funding for precious Priority 7 vouchers, then just days before the general election, rode into Boro Park on a magic carpet and guaranteed funding.
And, how valuable would an endorsement from the U.S Senate's accidental independent, Joe Lieberman, be for Greenberg?
Thanks for the background info, Gate. It has been edifying.
Independence: both guys have suspect endorsements. I don't expect either to cause Bloomberg much discomfort. As your example shows, Bloomberg is a manipulative SOB and it works. I think Greenfield, though far closer to Bloomberg, has more potential to be a thorn in people's sides because that's his nature (go see the debate footage Liz linked yesterday's remainder's column), he's ornery and creative, while Lazar thinks inside a small box. But I'm not sure Greenfield's contrariness would be in the areas either of us would like. Orthodox schools? Yeshiva of Flatbush is one of the best high schools in the City. On the other hand, some of the Hasidic school systems essentially educate kids to be religious school teachers living abject lives of poverty, and give off the message that they consider the secular portions of the day as the equivalent of gym class. Too many kids come out barely literate in English, let alone skilled in other basics. Orthodox education is a big spectrum (Orthodoxy is a big spectrum), but the worst of the Orthodox schools are not the cause of the problem, but rather a symptom of it. The problem is religiously based lifestyle choices among certain sects which resemble what conservatives used to call "the culture of poverty." Grown adults spending their time studying Talmud and tutoring part time, while having a dozen kids with a wife who is also a first cousin (with no amnio, and for the second or third generation in a row) is an open invitation to poverty, among other maladies. Some pioneers like the great David Niederman understand that technical and vocation education needs to be given greater emphasis, but they fight an uphill battle. How much funding do they want? It's like what Sam Gompers said about the labor movement's goals: They want more. You are correct. If they got the money, it should and probably would come with strings. He who takes the King's shilling, etc. Lieberman? In this district, Lieberman is like chicken soup--he might not help, but he couldn't hurt. What can I say, you may have noticed that chicken soup is pretty popular in this area. is flyers advertising GED education specifically targeted to Hasidic Jews - complete with separate classes for females and males. Elite institutions like Yeshiva of Flatbush aside, how does what goes on in Orthodox Jewish private schools lead to the need for GEDs? And they want my tax payer dollars? ...I would guess that most non-Haredi (ultra) schools maintain fairly high standards, though like most things, there are surely exceptions. I would aalso guess that those less engaged with the real world are more likely to have school which are also less engaged. I've raised this concern before, though to be honest, my constitutional objections remain regardless of the schools' quality or lack thereof. But Orthodox Jews and others looking for such financing should have a concommitant concern, even if they would gladly adopt and implelment stringent government standards. That is, as you point out, loss of control. We need only look to Britain where religious Jewish day schools which accept public money now cannot control such fundamentals as who is to be defined as a Jew. Jews may disagree on this among themsleves, but we are pretty unanamous in the idea that others should butt out of our business. But when you take the public's money, they sometimes think it is their business. I understand that our free exercise clause should protect against such nightmares (just as our establishment clause should prevent government funding at all), but as has been proven again and again, the Courts are no longer predictable on such issues. to avoid being called names and to demonstrate my openness to cultural diversity. I would never be so presumptuous as to try to define who is a Jew. WOW!!!! I would have never seen that debate in England coming. Anyway, the original post was designed to illicit debate -- which it did. By my count, you have written 3 separate posts since then. Here's one for you, Gate: Apparently Lazar's campaign is printing promotional material on the backs of "Rebbe cards" -- something akin to baseball cards -- that orthodox children enthusiastically collect. From what I am told, and I quote here: "In the spirit of Purim, the Lazar team has produced a series of business card sized “Rebbe-Cards”, which features pictures of prominent Rabbis with a Joe Lazar campaign poster on the reverse side." The candidate himself is said to be distributing these cards himself on Monday, Shushan Purim, at a location in the heart of the district. Any thoughts?http://www.r8ny.com/blog/gatemouth/hakoras_ha_tov.html (Read it, you'll laugh) As to the Brits, their laws allow publicly financed religious schools to discriminate on the basis of religion, but not ethnicity. An Orthodox Jew accepts as Jewish only the child of a Jewish mom. Other Jewish denominations do not necessarily agree. On the basis of its beliefs, a Jewish day school denied admission to a child whose one Jewish parent was its dad, even though the dad and the child defined the child as Jewish. The Brits said, you are not discriminating on the basis of the child's religious beliefs--the child believes in Judaism--you are discriminating on the basis of the child's mother's ethnicity. The Brits then said, "admit the kid or lose the money." He who takes the shilling of the king... the mom converts to Judiasm prior to giving birth? Conception? Marriage?
Reform? Conservaitve? If Orthodox, which kind? The Chief Rabbinate in Israel no longer even automatically accepts the conversions of the American Orthodox. The Syrian Jewish community in Brooklyn virtually accepts no conversions at all. Sometimes, I think it would be nice to have a Pope. Yes, Mary Alice, the Lzar jingle and Rebbe card. If only they ran camapigns like this in America:
How are you going to explain this away, Gatemouth? FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – MARCH 1st, 2010
FORMER STATE SENATOR SEYMOUR LACHMAN ENDORSES JOE LAZAR FOR CITY COUNCIL Former State Senator Seymour P. Lachman endorsed Joe Lazar for City Council today in the 44th Council District Special Election on March 23rd, 2010. Lachman, a Professor in Residence at Wagner College (CUNY) and former President of the New York City Board of Education, praised Lazar for his commitment to education and his experience in successfully navigating the bureaucratic channels of City and State government. “Joe Lazar’s decades of experience in government gives him a unique and valuable insight into what we need to do to improve our education system, so that every child in New York City can get the high quality education they deserve,” said Senator Lachman. “Joe isn’t going to need on-the-job training in City Hall, nor will he have to rely upon the others to tell him what to do. He’s the only candidate in this election ready to excel in the City Council on day one.” Lachman, the author of several books, including the famous exposé of Albany politics Three Men in a Room: The Inside Story of Power and Betrayal in an American Statehouse, also touted Lazar’s credentials against dysfunctional government. “What is particularly special about Joe is that he is a public servant who is running for City Council to serve the people, not himself.” “I am tremendously honored that Senator Lachman has chosen to endorse my candidacy,” said Joe Lazar. “Senator Lachman is universally regarded as an elder statesmen in our community and admired across New York for his record of delivering government services and fighting for good government. I look forward to tapping his extraordinary intellect for advice in education policy and governmental reform. Dysfunction in government leads to tax increases and cuts to services and programs. That’s we must find ways to fix New York City’s government immediately.” That, Lachman, the guy I thought was the least of four evils (as was apparant by my disparaging "endorsement" of him) has now picked a candidate in a race where I picked none? Are you serious, Gary? If I could not pick a favorite when people I respect like Jim Brennan (who prefers Lazar) and Lew Fidler (who prefers Greenfield) have made choices, why would the blatherings of Long Beach's professor of pomposity change my mind? I believe Seymour also endorsed Noach Dear for elected office, so why would I take his word on anything? Post new comment |
Hot Topics
Gov Wire
Political Update
Google AdsSearchRoom Eight Extras |
delicious
digg
Hey Howard, we are really sorry that you are not able to endorse in this race. After all the entire Boro Park and Midwood was waiting with belated breath to see which of these gentleman you would endorse so they would then be certain who to vote for.
And it's refreshing to see that your hatred of anything anti-Vito and anti your old boss Connor drives you to continue your attempted character assasination of Brad Lander who most likely earned your ire due to his strong support among those elements.
Well today he is COUNCILMAN Brad Lander and despite your repeated attempts to villify him, he has risen way above petty politics. Despite the fact that he lost Boro Park by a large margin, he has reached out and begun to work with those very groups that suported John Heyer. And those very same hasidic operatives that ran the Heyer operation in Boro Park, are now allied with Brad and working for Joe Lazar. (Full disclaimer- So am I - who worked on Brad's campaign).
So Howard, you can continue to spew your bitterness to your handful of readers while come March 23rd Joe Lazar will be joining Brad Lander in the City Council doing the business of the people.