POST JIBS

Q Jew explains why the JIBs are even dumber than we first thought.

(Yes, I recognize this looks like a change of course. Previously, I was whoring for votes like everyone else; now I am saying that not only are the JIBs dumb, but dumber than we first thought. Deal with it.)

Update
No, it's not sour grapes. I am doing as well as I could have expected, and currently stand to medal in three categories.

That makes me glad, and happy and proud, of course. But it isn't like I wasn't away that the JIBs are of questionable significance, given how they boil down to not just a glorified popularity contest, but a popularity contest capable of being skewed by an outsider with a very large audience (and the fact that I was one of the prime beneficiaries of this ought to give me some credibility here.)

Now it turns out that a hacker could also skew the totals, making the results even less significant.

Update Again
What we really need is something to augment the JIBs. Here's what I propose. I think the medaists in each category should serve as judges in a contest that rewards not blogs, but posts. Let them choose the best humor post, the best advocacy post, the best Torah post, and so on.

Your thoughts below, please.

Miracles amazing wonders... NOT

Edited Feb 2, 2006

Today's post discusses the Chartumei Mitzrayim, the Egyptian court magicians who attempted to duplicate Moshe's miricales. According to the Sages, these men tapped into legitimate black magic, forces that God built into creation, and manipulated it to create wonders. For a time, these wonders deceived Pharoh into rejecting Moshe's demands.

Except, some Sages says it's all nonesense. Notably, the Abarbanel writes that the court magicians were never able to replicate a single miracle. He says they either used David Copperfield-type illusions to trick Pharoh, or simply spread false rumors of their abilities. (My hunch is that Hasidic-miracle workers operate the same way, and I eagerly wait a James Randi expose of their methods.)

The strongest argument that the Egyptians magicians were frauds is made by Samason Rephael Hirsch and it is a textual argument.

R' Hirsch points out that the Torah never actually says that the magicians were able to turn water to blood, or produce frogs, rather it says "And the magicians of Egypt did so with their enchantments [v'yasu chen... b'latayhem]" According to Hirsch this doesn't mean that the magicians were successful, only that they imitated Aaron, ie: After Aaron hit the water or the dirt with his stick, the magicians copied his action with the powerless tools of their own impotent trade.

He also asks (I'm paraphrasing)"Why would the magicians want more frogs and more lice? Wouldn't it make more sense if they were trying to remove the plauge?" And, in fact, the word the Torah uses to describe the intention of the magicians(l'hotzi) can mean both to "bring up" and to "remove."

Here then are the relevant passages as Samson Rephael Hirsch understands them with my own interpolations in blue:

Frogs:
6 And Aaron stretched out his hand over the waters of Egypt; and the frogs came up, and covered the land of Egypt.

7 And the magicians copied Aaron's with their magic charms, [nontheless] frogs covered the land of Egypt. [How do we know the magicians were trying to remove the frogs, and failed? Because right away Pharoh calls for help. See next verse.]

8 Then Pharaoh called for Moses and Aaron, and said, Intreat the LORD, that he may take away the frogs from me, and from my people; and I will let the people go, that they may do sacrifice unto the LORD. [Doesn't sound like someone with much faith in magicians, does he?]

Lice:
17 ...Aaron stretched out his hand with his rod, and smote the dust of the earth, and it became lice in man, and in beast; all the dust of the land became lice throughout all the land of Egypt.

18 And the magicians copied Aaron's action with their magic charms to remove (l'hotzi) the lice, but they could not: so there were lice upon man, and upon beast. [This verse is the best proof of the magicians intentions, if you, follow SRH, and read l'hotzi as "remove": Immediately after we're told that the magicians could not "l'hotzi" the lice, the text says they were everywhere.]

Underwear Ads

Ads in the A section appeared even more modest than usual today: I saw no kissing, no hugging and no bare shoulders. Someone let Eytan know it's safe to start reading the paper again.

Today's results
Underwear ads: 0
Other ads picturing women in their skivies: 0

Score
DovBear:6
Eytan Kobre: 0

[Background]

There is strength in numbers (JIBs)

Today's Lesson: There is strength in numbers. For proof, look no further than the JIB voting where outstanding solo blogs like Godol Hador, OrthoMom, and RenegadeRebbetzin are being trounced by collaborative projects. Out in front in multiple categories are JewSchool (7 writers), Jewlicious (7 writers) and the fake-Torah blog (11 writers, though we think Sarah Schmidt, the Alan Colmes of that group, probably voted for us.)

Anyway, today's the last day of voting, so here's what I want you to do. First, go to the fake-Torah blog and let Yaakov Mencken know that you think its really cool that he was awake between 12:20 and 1:00 am this morning monitoring the votes. Tell him you don't think that's pathetic at all. (You also may want to mention that accusing Gil Student of cheating, even in the most backhanded of ways, is despicable but I leave that to your discretion.)

Next, head over to the JIB voting page. DovBear could use a push in this category, and a nudge here and here. I'd also really like to see Gil Student win here. (I'd really like to see GH win that category, too, but he's been numerically eliminated, I think)

I AM... crazy?

Some poor crazy man went off his meds and fired off a letter to AOL protesting their new AIM messaging system:

This new marketing idea is bad corporate policy," he said. "I implore you to change the name of your programs and rebuke the marketing team who came up with this vile idea. I will stop using AIM and urge all of my colleagues to convert to your competitors, if this is not changed very soon."

My, my.

So what was the vile idea? Animal sacrifice? Ritual circumcision?

Not exactly.

AIM's new slogan is "I AM" as in "I AM... instant messaging" or "I AM... voice chat." The above crazy person feels very strongly that "I AM" is God's name:

AOL would never think of using – or misusing – the names "Allah," or "Buddha" in its corporate marketing efforts

Blashphemers!

How DARE they use a common term like "I am" in a grammatically correct sentance when there are mentally damaged people out there who think those words refer to God.

And of course, World Net Daily which, like Eytan Kobre, never misses an opportunity to lie about ding the media - deserved or not - for being insensitive to religion has piled on.

A thought experiment by REReader

Referring to the Ann Coulter's little joke about a Supreme Court Justice, my new friend REReader asked us to "imagine the Republican response if a liberal pundit made such a "joke" about, say, Alito?"

Ha. That's easy. Suggest that Alito needs to have his hair cut with, say, a weedwacker and Bill O'Reilly would go on a long and viscious offensive. And anyone who dared to remind Bill that he once made a similar joke about the whole entire city of San Francisco would be added to the enemy list.

No sence of humor, those Rethugs.

Note to trolls (especially the London troll with the Chabad blog who attempted to "ding" me on this point earlier):

No, it isn't ok when liberals are obnoxious and cruel. But..... if it makes you happy, please feel free to fill up my comment thread with indignant accusations using this formula:

"Oh yeah? Well what about when [Some liberal guy] said [something mean]"

...and I will be happy to reply, "Hey: That was also mean." to each and every one of them.

Note
All non-indignant accusations will be deleted.
All indignant accusations using a different formula will be deleted.

We have no mercy

Republican Humor

Ann Coulter:
"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee. That's just a joke, for you in the media."

HaHa! Isn't that great? No wonder the GOP-Convention is always such a thigh-slapper. It's a wonder no one has thought to put Ann on Comedy Central.

The real scandal, of course, is not that Coulter, an evil lunatic, is coddled, defended and enabled by the right wing. No, no. We all know that those people are full of it when they congratulate themselves on their morals and integrity. No. The real scandal is that the so-called liberals in the MSM are reporting the Coulter death-threat as a "joke."

Water, water, everywhere, Nor any drop to drink (repeat)

First, those of you joining us from the yeshiva world are probably wondering about the quote we used to slug this latest entry. It is a line from a famous poem by Samuel Coleridge, and if you stick around you will see why it was chosen. A poem, for those of you joining us from the Hasidic world, is a vivid and imaginative way of conveying experiences, ideas, or emotions. Yeah, just like a Nigun.

Today we're off to ancient Egypt. Snap quiz: During the first plague (blood) what happened whenever an Egyptian touched water? It turned to blood, right? So the Egyptians had to buy all their water from the Jews, right? And the Jews got rich, right? But as soon as the Egyptians put their hands on the purchased water, it turned to blood, too, right?

This says, the Ibn Ezra, is seriously weird. Because (I'm translating his comment to Exodus 7:24) "if so, why wasn't this miracle recorded in the Torah? ...we should stick to what it says in the text [acharai hacatuv nirdaf]"

And in fact, the Torah does imply that the Egyptians had no trouble acquiring water on their own. Here's Exodus 7:24: "The Egyptians dug around the Nile for drinking water, since they could not drink any water from the river."

Unfortunately, this isn't a clean win for fans of pshat. One of the commentaries on the Ibn Ezra, Avi Ezer (written by R. Shlomo HaKohen of Lissa, 18th Century), disagrees with this entire approach. He will have none of the Ibn Ezra's reasonableness, and would perfer you look away from the words of the torah as they appear in Exodus 7:24. He writes: "Everyone knows that the Jews got rich during the plague of blood.. this Ibn Ezra comment is obviously the work of a wayward student [talmid to'eh] who is poor in knowledge."

A wayward student! What a great way to disqualify an idea you don't like. How long before someone says that whole mistake we call the Bill of Rights was actually the misguided work of some student of Thomas Jefferson? Will that work on anything?

Here's another possibility. Perhaps the Ibn Ezra's comment was changed by some sinister force. Paging Alexander Haig!

A-Section Ads

Today's results
Underwear ads: 0
Other ads picturing women in their skivies: 0

Score
DovBear:5
Eytan Kobre: 0

Sigh. This is getting boring. DovBear was right. Eytan Kobre was wrong. His post about the Times was a bunch of lies, based on adverts that don't exist, and now thanks to him, we have underwear ads on the brain, too. Yawn.

Hey. You know what would spice this up? A ground swell of reader animadversion. Are you up for a ground swell?

Here's what to do: Write to Yaakov Mencken demanding an apologiy and an explanation. Ask him to apologize for publishing Eytan Kobre's groundless attack on both the New York Times, and the rules of logic. Then ask him to explain how such a petty and foolish exercise in slander and misinformation found its way on to a blog that proudly calls itself a "well articulated perspective on Torah issues of the day."

If all goes according to plan, Eytan Kobre will be fired from his post at Crosss Currents. Immediately afterwards, we'll offer him a job here. Assuming he can do something about his vile politics, his brand of sarcastic, slandering half-lies would fit in well here, don't you think?

Eat it Jesse

Jesse Helms, the senator who famously deserted the Democratic Party over civil rights, was also famous for opposing the building of a Smithsonian museum to honor the black experience. "Every other minority will give thought to asking the taxpayers to pony up for a special museum for them," he argued in 1994.

Well, today that bad man, a Republican, is spinning in his grave.

Joseph Farah's Big News

According to World Net Daily, Joseph Farah is reporting in G2 Bulletin, his $99/year weekly intelligence newsletter, that Al Quada plans to attack the Super Bowl!

"There is a high likelihood of a major terrorist attack next Sunday, say international terror analysts and intelligence sources."

Ye Gods.

Except, before you cancle your plans, let's scroll down to the last sentance of the report, shall we?

"Despite the recent taped messages, authorities say there are "no credible threats against the Super Bowl."

Ethics 101

A liar is someone who denies the truth to someone who has a right to it.

Those who gave misinformation to the Nazis to protect Anne Frank and her family, for example, were not liars: they were denying the truth to those who had no moral right to it. Candidates for the Supreme Court, on the other hand, are now routinely expected to be liars as they deny the truth about their intentions on issues where citizens have a moral right to be informed.

Solutions?

Help Wanted

If you've been reading and enjoying this free but labor-intensive blog, it would be an act of kindness to support it in the JIBS. (and an act of fantastic generosity to encourage your friends to support it, too, hint hint)

You're permitted to vote again every three days, so if it's been a while since your last visit to the voting page, please head back and click the link for DovBear.

Best Overall

Best Jewish Culture

Best Series (It was awsome)

Best Post (eh... It was ok)

Best Religion (!)

Best Current Events :)

Thank you.

Frog notes

Discovered this weekend that the Abarbanel translates "tz'fardaim" as crocodiles. Thus, according to him the second plague was not frogs, but something much worse.

In a way this explanation both fits, and doesn't fit.

Those of you who wonder why a swarm of frogs constitutes a plague can take refuge in the Abarbanel's explanation. However, you'll still need to tell us how the plague of crocodiles differed from "arov," the plague of wild animals.

Eytan and the A Section Ads (Day 4)

Still no underwear ads in the A Section of the Times, as Eytan's argument continues to look weaker and weaker.

If you're new, here's a brief summary: Last week, Eytan Kobre of Cross Currents attempted to discredit the New York Times with the following argument:

A: The Times runs lots of underwear ads in the A-Section alongside serious news items.
B: A good newspaper (ie one concerned with morals, the truth and so on) would not do such thing.
therefore
C: The Times is neither trustworthy nor moral.

From the begining I disagreed with premise "B," arguing that the fact that the business department might sell a few underwear ads is no reflection on the quality of the articles. But it never occured to me that premise "A" was an outright lie. Given that the Eytan's post was titled "Does the Truth Matter," and given that it apppeared on a site that bills itself as a place where you can find a"well-articulated Torah perspective on the issues of the day," I presumed Eytan was telling the truth about one of his argument's central premises.

Now, after four days of monitoring the A Section, it seems my presumption was wrong. Has Eytan strayed into the realm of dishonesty himself? We'll continue to monitor the A Section Ads, and let you know. But it doesn't look good.

Today's results
Underwear ads: 0
Other ads picturing women in their skivies: 0

Score
DovBear: 4
Eytan Kobre: 0

Rising Crescent

The people of Palestine have spoken! But do they want peace? Doesn't Hamas's overwhelming victory prove that the voters have embraced the Hamas charter and wish to destroy Israel?

Hard to say.

It must be pointed out that Hamas didn't win because it promised to destroy Israel. That wasn't one of their campiagn issues, as TNR pointed out last week, and as the New York Times explained today. Along with being a terroroist organization (which it certainly is: I make no apologies) Hamas is a social service organization. They've promised to deal with corruption and to improve services. That - not the destruction of Israel - were the issues that put them over the top.

It's is possible Hamas won the election not because they are a terrorist organization but because because they are more than a terrorist organization. Perhaps people cast their votes for Hamas not because they wish to destroy Israel, but because they are sick of the incompetance and corruption of Fatah.

Wishful thinking? Perhaps. But perhaps not.

And in any event, Israel should, by now, be used to neighboring states who are committed to its destruction. The great thing about Sharon and his policies is that those who wish to destroy Israel are on the outside, behind a wall, and not an occupied population. Previously, the Palestenians had a moral argument which they advanced using immoral methods. Thanks to Sharon, the moral argument has been answered. The Palestenians are no longer under military occupation, leaving them with their immoral methods and not much else.

Sidenote: Is George W. Bush , champion of democracy in the middle east, having a "be careful what you wish for" moment? Are our soldiers today dying in Iraq so that one day some Iraqui version of Hamas might stand for election and win?

A-Section Ads (Day 3)

Nope, not an underwear ad in sight today either, as Eytan Kobre's argument continues to disintegrate.

Today's results

Underwear ads: 0
Other ads picturing women in their skivies: 0

Score

DovBear: 2
Eytan Kobre: 0