After 20 years, my cultural differences with my wife have softened considerably, and our own mixed, idiosyncratic culture is in the foreground of our lives, but tribal issues still arise. Two nights ago we were driving to Home Depot when she brought up an argument she was having (as an editor) with an entitled writer, and I asked if the person was Jewish, and of course she was, and because I struggle with entitlement issues, I asked if I shared qualities with this person, and my wife said, "Well, maybe her energy around a little question: her nudginess–"
I pointed out that my wife was using a Yiddish word, nudge, which means to pester or bore or nag (per Leo Rosten’s indispensable book on the meritocracy). My wife went on, "It reminded me of that half-hour argument you had with your mother about who gets all the stolen mustard."
I started laughing, but my wife said she wasn’t trying to be funny, and that she still doesn’t understand the incident.
I have a vague memory of it. It must have been 12 or 13 years ago. We had a family party at a restaurant on the Upper West Side, I think when my great-uncle was turning 90. There were a lot of coldcuts with toothpicks to carry away and we went back to my place on the Lower East Side and the stuff was divided. There were several little plastic containers of mustard of different type.
My wife says that we stole lots of little packets of mustard from the restaurant, and some bread too, but I don’t remember it that way. My grandmother used to grab packets of mustard all the time and stuff them in her pocketbook, but my mother and I aren’t that way. And I distinctly remember those little plastic containers sitting in my refrigerator, half-filled with mustard.
Anyway, my mother and my aunt and I had a conversation about… who gets the mustard. I think it went on for a minute. My wife says it went on for a half hour and she was called in. She says she didn’t get the logic of the conversation. "I don’t understand what it was about. I think it was about people trying to prove who was more generous. Your mother was pressing it on you, and you were pressing it on her. ‘No mother, you take the Gulden’s’"
"I never call my mother, Mother. You do that. I call her Mom."
"Well I still don’t understand it."
Looking back on it, I say there were two things going on. There’s way too much energy around things in my family. I relate it to insecurity, and to Kafka’s beautiful statement to his Catholic girlfriend, explaining Jewish anxiety: "The insecure position of Jews, insecure within themselves, insecure among peple, would make it above all comprehensible that they consider themselves to be allowed to own only what they hold in their hands or between their teeth, that furthermore only palpable possessions give them the right to live, and that they will never acquire what they once have lost but that instead it calmly swims away from them forever." Also, I’d quarreled a lot with my mother in the years before the mustard, in an entitled adolescent way, and now I was getting over that. I was patching things up, and I seized any stupid opportunity to engage her positively. I would have pressed the mustard on her.
Related posts:
- My wife offers her version of Kopechne’s death
- a dream about Jewish streetsmartness
- my wife and anti-anti-Semitism, a Thanksgiving story
- why I am secretly for intermarriage, though I shouldn’t proselytize
- Report on E J’lem arrests: ‘150 stand in the courtyard of the stolen house, double what we had last week’
{ 83 comments }
A home changes a key element of insecurity.
Not if you steal it, Richard. That’s not a home, that’s a hide-out.
Name one inch of land on the planet, that is not stolen in some respect.
Name one inch of land that you walk on, that you sleep in.
Including prior to Zionism in Palestine, at any moment, that you can state with confidence that origination of title resulted entirely from consent, and not from some coercion.
To make it personal. The land that I live on was corn and squash land below a ceremonial landmark overlooking another ceremonial center on a major river, that was the region of really horrid wars between Indians and settlers. My title to it is drenched in that blood, and at the same is entirely consented currently. Except for my mortgage, and the requirements of law, the land is “mine”.
The land that Phil resides is similarly the site of a forced occupation, probably a Dutch colonial grant from the king, on expeditions likely financed by Jews even (even as the expedition captains and owners were likely horridly anti-semitic).
At the time of American independance, that process of occupation was likely in the second generation of first-person memory (a grandchild being told by his grandparent of their grandparents’ experience).
Hasbara Point #4 Mister Witty brings into service in behalf the theft of some mustard packets. Adolph use to always trot out the American Indian model for his policy regarding lebensraum and non-Aryans. He devoured the romantic Old Shatterhand novels as a kid.
Everybody steals, so why pick on me? I guess we can ignore Witty’s usual rule of law theme from now on.
Thou shalt not steal. This command points to the present and future.
Citizen, Thanks! Yes, No.4 it is! And in record time!
Cit, you have rung the bell, hit the bulls-eye, and are entitled to cigar or coco-nut, according to the winner’s choice!
ha!
And, you mean by that?
You are describing the phenomenon of walking apology for being Jewish. Some still walk in it. Some walk in its pendulum swing (the attitude that Jews are in danger and must over-protect). And, some walk in confidence.
For the third generation of sabras, more walk in confidence, than in the walking apology, or over-reaction.
They are just non-compromising about that. There are many that demand that Israelis walk in a state of apology for existing.
IF a permanent home place gives Native Americans meaning. IF a permanent home place gives Palestinians meaning. THEN, a permanent home place has the prospect, that is in the process of being learned, of giving Jews and Isrealis meaning.
“HA” is an open interview question. I get to spout my prejudices.
Why leave that comment so undefined?
I again don’t understand why you would willingly belittle your mother publicly.
Maybe you didn’t across what you were attempting to convey.
By the way, I think you probably nailed the description of insecurity that led to the phenomena of “saving string”.
But, your insistence on compulsory assimilation, rather than a choice of whether to associate (in Israel), or to assimilate and to degrees (in the US), is insulting.
Witty, I think it’s the other way around. Why do you keep nagging Phil to buy your line on the horrors of assimilation? His fishing line is way out there, a fisherman’s delight; yours is rolled in a ball at your feet like that hoard of string.
The choice to assimilate is an individuals. Its not a horrible choice. I easily could have done similarly.
But, the implied rejection of the choice of Jews to self-identify as Jews, and in the nation Israel, is something that is dogmatic.
It is a different assertion than just criticism of policies, or insistence on the application of law to determine status of title of land.
RE: “But, the implied rejection of the choice of Jews to self-identify as Jews, and in the nation Israel, is something that is dogmatic.”
You implied this, not Phil. A self identity is composed of many facets, including ethnicity, cultural background, religion or lack of it, alternate spirituality, tribal and national assumptions, etc. Individualism requires more effort. It’s not necessarily a matter of either/or; but rather a matter of degree, of a pattern of sequential Hegalian synthesis. Phil self-identifies as a Jew all the time on this blog; it’s one of his moving characters or characteristics. And as to Israel, ditto. He’s hard on himself, and he’s hard on Israel precisely because he reaches beyond the conventional Jewish box these days. He is striving to be fully human and realizes Jewish perspectives are a small part of the full human perspective. He is not dogmatic, you are, despite your attempts to mask it by borrowing from humanistic vocabulary. His priority is to be human first in terms of what that means, and its wide; you are a Zionist, and that’s narrow. You can’t be a Jew before you are a human. Phil recognizes this. You don’t. I’d say he’s therefore more spiritually Jewish than you are–and so is, e.g., Mooser, and many other regulars on this blog.
It is a different assertion than just criticism of policies, or insistence on the application of law to determine status of title of land.
citizen,
It is an “irony” that your description of what I don’t believe, is exactly what I DO believe. I believe that a Jew is a unique flavor of human.
You bear the dogma that Zionism and humanism are mutually exclusive. Its false, a failure of your application of humanism.
Zionism is a new transition from Jews as a people without a place, to Jews as a people with a place.
Not every Jew, but now half of us. Undeniable.
I believe that
a Jewan Aryan is a unique flavor of human.Fixed it.
Witty, why are you talking ice cream? Humanism is not the same as human. And the same with Zionism, or Nazism.
Germans still have a national home, even after killing 6 million Jews genocidally, other millions of other minorities genocidally, another 15 million in war.
Jews seek a national home, and very wrongly kill a few hundred civilians (after their civilians were shelled) and are equated with nazis.
YOU give Phil a bad name by this.
You bear the dogma that Zionism and humanism are mutually exclusive.
You talk of philosophic theory. It is irrelevant whether theoretical abstractions of Zionism and humanism are mutually exclusive or not. Perhaps Zionism didn’t have to be a racist ideology. I have no doubt that there are some Zionists who are personally not racists. Every movement has variation of belief amongst its adherents. However, the reality TODAY is that by far and away most active Zionists are viciously racist. The dominant expression of contemporary Zionism is racist, and arguing that it doesn’t have to be is a waste of time. It IS. What is worth time discussing is what to do about it. If you want reality to move closer to your ideal, then work to change contemporary Zionism into something more humanistic, instead of trying to whitewash it.
Zionism is a new transition from Jews as a people without a place, to Jews as a people with a place.
This reminds of the ‘land without a people for a people without a land’ myth. The land already had a people. Now it has two peoples. Zionism may be “a new transition from Jews as a people without a place, to Jews as a people with a place”, but it is also a transition that is occurring through ethnic cleansing and colonization, murder, torture, humiliation, oppression, vandalism, lawlessness, etc. These are, needless to say, not consistent with any notion of humanism.
“I easily could have done similarly”
Hysterical, Witty! Say, how is it living in the ghetto, the Pale of Settlement, the Jewish Quarter? I bet you get the best bagels, and the pastrami-and-corned-beef-with-cole-slaw-and-liverwurst-on-rye-bread is to die for!
But gee, Witty, how do you think Phil did it? I mean, why wasn’t he arrested and sent back to the ghetto, if not Siberia or internal exile?
Well, nice talking to you, Witty, America’s sole surviving un-assimilated Jew!
Look, I have a little bit of information which may very well shock the Gentiles here, and even some of the Jews. And if you don’t believe me, you can look it up!
Here it is, and try not to plotz or get apoplexische: Jews did not live in ghettos, the Pale of Settlement, or the Jewish Quarter cause they wanted to, so they could make life one long “Milk and Honey Meets the Fiddler on the Roof Revue”. No! Shocking as it may seem, as hard as it may be to believe, Jews lived in these places because other people made them live there, and the Jews, by and large, did not want to.
Now sure, when you got a mass of dirty, low-class Jews stuck in a ghetto or Jewish quarter, well, they need a clean(er) better smelling Jew to deal with the Gentile elite, and rule the Jews in the Ghetto. I’m sure those people were big fans of the ghetto system, and probably still are.
When the Jews came to America, we most certainly could have formed a “Jewish Community” which mimicked these ghettos. Sure, could have bought land, and even lobbied the Gentiles for official recognition of these Jewish communities, with their own marital courts and financial laws and customs. Hell, we might have been able to get an entire state for ourselves, like the Mormons. But gosh-a-rooney-what’s-wrong-with-Jews-these-days, we almost completely refused to do anything like this, so we lived as individual Jewish citizens of America, and we seem to like it.
So all the talk about “assimilation” is pure BULLSHIT! That train left the station, and went all the way to the end of its run, long time ago. Like it or not, except for cultural and religious things (which everybody has) we have been assimilated, in any terms which have any reality.
When Witty joins up with the Lubavitchers and the chabd gang, I’ll start to think he’s maybe worried about assimilation. And I’m sure he got permission (not a blessingpermission) to take the unusual and very un-Jewish step of marrying who he pleased, from his Father and the Cheif Rabbi in charge of his ghetto.
The only way to top the ridiculousness of the “assimilation” discussion would be for Afro-Americans to pool their money to buy a plantation on which they would be slaves, and hire white “masters” and “overseers” to whip them. So they can derive all the spiritual benefits of slavery, don’t you know.
“Germans still have a national home, even after killing 6 million Jews genocidally, other millions of other minorities genocidally, another 15 million in war.Jews seek a national home, and very wrongly kill a few hundred civilians (after their civilians were shelled) and are equated with nazis
Richard Witty
Yeah Rich, we got took, damnit. We should have negotiated a better rate! Why, that’s not even a fraction percent what those lousy Nazis did!
There’s only one answer Richard, of course! We need another Holocaust, it’s only natcherl! I mean, we didn’t do to bad out of this one, got a state and all that, but next time we are gonna hold out for “the full Nazi”.
Do you have, Richard, any idea how disgusting and, dare I say it, unJewish your remarks are. So the Holocaust is just something we can leverage to get permission to kill some more people?
Well, I take it back. A few months ago I would have argued quite vociferously that it was “un-Jewish”. But Richard, you are doing a good job of convincing me I was wrong.
Witty, what does any land have to do with Humanism?
Yeah, I get you resent the Germans still have a homeland after the atrocities they committed. The Communist do not and they murdered more people. The Roma do not have a homeland and they never committed mass murder–just petty theft. And the Palestinians never committed mass murder, were kicked off their land, now
live as penned cattle on what’s left of it–and, again, why is that?
Again, what does Zionism have to do with Humanism? It’s in the implementation
of any ism that marks its character any realist would agree. Spiritual Nazism or Communism without adopting evil means to the ideal end never hurt anyone same as no religion or ideology per se. Tomorrow in Jerusalem never harmed a soul
until the Zionists invaded the Mandate Land to make it their own–like the Crusades and Christianity.
Colin,
If you believe that some form of Zionism (as a state, I assume you meant) could also be democratic, then your criticism is NOT of Zionism (an ideology), but of the application of it.
In a word, you would accept a humane Zionism, just not an expansionistic one.
If you really read my posts, and if I summarized your views accurately, then we agree.
That was a wonderful post, Phil. Thanks for sharing.
Brilliant story, Phil, absolutely brilliant! Sandy Stine ( errrr Colin) doesn’t exagerrate a touch, and it’s no surprise with all its characters (greedy Jews, decent uncomprehending shiksas) it roused Sandy from his Gumdale retirement.
OJ, did we read the same post? Where exactly do you find greed? The story is about fear and understanding between both individuals and groups. The latter is implicit through the suggestion that the incident reflects a generalized Kafkian “Jewish anxiety”, the misunderstanding of which by gentiles could be an impediment to their understanding of Jews.
You are seeing and hearing what you want to see and hear, instead of what is. You might find some common ground with people if you actually listen to what they say.
Isn’t the Yiddish word noodge and “nudge” a good old English word, whence from wherever it cometh, as the Bard said?
“and I asked if the person was Jewish, and of course she was, and because I struggle with entitlement issues, I asked if I shared qualities with this person, and my wife said,”
Phil, this is absolutely none of my business, but your wife seems like a lovely woman with tons of forbearance. I absolutely shudder to think what my little help-meet would have said if I asked the same question! She’d turn me into kosher pemmican!
For God’s sake, Phil, stay hitched! You’d be mincemeat (That’s a traditional dish for an important Jewish holiday) in the hands of anyone else. But then again, wouldn’t we all?
I think the word nudge is Scandinavian in origin and comes with the adjective/adverb
gentle, as in X gently nudged me with her elbow.
OTH:
noodge in Yiddish:
1. to annoy with persistent complaints, criticisms, or pleas; nag: He was always nudging his son to move to a better neighborhood.
–verb (used without object)
2. to nag, whine, or carp.
–noun
3. a person who nudges; pest.
What are your entitlement issues, Phil? You think you are entitled to any bad qualities any other Jews has? For G-d’s sake, Wiess, don’t be so selfish! Try to accept yourself as you are.
Look, I have those fweelings too. But I just tell myself “Whatever you are, whatever you have failed to accomplish, even tho your ties are never the right width, and Sam made the pants to short and you have vast shortcomings (it’s ripped in back), take heart, AT LEAST YOU DIDN’T GROW UP TO BE RICHARD WITTY!
Works every time, self-respect mended. You know, you would feel really great if you banned the little prietzteh
Phil seems to say he was just trying to show his mom he wasn’t so self-centered anymore; I have no clue why his urging his mom she should have the mustard would turn into a half hour battle, the proverbial mountain out of a molehill. Perhaps his new generosity was perceived by his mom as an attack on her identity as a martyr for her lovely son, hence it turned out a battle of control? Must be tough to free oneself
from being spoiled? From one’s sense of self-entitlement?
Right, Mooser.
I am a pariah on the planet.
No, but your mode of pernicious, carping, nit-picking banality is–you are in the mainstream. You’re a martyr for the status quo. Happy?
“Right, Mooser.
I am a pariah on the planet”
I know, Richard, it’s awful! But maybe that’s the price you pay for not assimilating, huh?
“consider themselves to be allowed to own only what they hold in their hands or between their teeth,”
Finally, I understand the Jewish attitude about sex! Thanks, Phil, and I’m gonna go count my possessions!
OK, I got to admit, your second line was funny. But do you ever notice that while you argue about others over-generalizing about Jews, you engage in it yourself quite a bit? ” Finally, I understand the Jewish attitude about sex!”
He’s entitled in the same sense that blacks (only) are entitled to say the N word?
tree, if i was just a few points further away from sub-normal intelligence, I might try to use those points ironically or as a parody or in a satire on those things. But since I’m so stupid, it’s obvious that I say these things completely seriously.
But, hey, you got me there, fair and square! I will never understand the Jewish attitude about sex, and I shouldn’t have indicated that I did. You caught me!
And after all, what on earth could hands and (oy Gevalt!) teeth, have to do with Jewish sex?
Well, I can think of one thing! What was the worst thing Alex Portnoy ever did (by his own admission)? As you might remember, it involved the hepatic organ of a calf?
Portnoy f***** his own family’s dinner, if I recall–been a long since reading that book, but I remember the constant babble about, and conflation of, food and sex.
Citizen, I never in a million years thought you would be the one to answer that question! For God’s sake, don’t ruin your mind (it’s such a fine mind) with awful Jewish pornography, which it is just a part of their Bolshevik, what’s-yours-is-ours, mongrelise the culture plot. For God’s sake, Citizen stay out the whorehouse where the japes of Roth are stored! (Oh, Lord, I just kill me, sometimes! “The japes of Roth”, get it?)
I suggest Bennett’s “Book of Virtues” or “The Lives of the Saints” depending on what kind season those payets are having this year.
RE: ‘No mother, you take the Gulden’s’
MY COMMENT: I think this would make a great ad campaign. It would “beat the pants off” that Grey Poupon ad!
Followed by the line: Gulden’s – The Family Mustard – Since 1909. /Cut.
RE: Followed by the line: Gulden’s – The Family Mustard – Since 1909. /Cut.
MY COMMENT: Bravo! I like it. “Thats a wrap.”
Let me try that again. “That’s a wrap.” I seem to be having a problem with apostrophes (and a lot of other things).
DICKERSON, that’s hysterical, I can just see the scene, at a Bar M.. no, a wedding, sleazy band, and here’s this not-so-svelte Jewish matron engulfing packets of mustard from the buffet as she palpitates at the end of the conga-line. She backs into her son, who is doing the same thing from the other direction (while simultaneously trying to cop a feel from a tipsy Gentile brides-maid) They both grab the same packets, and their eyes meet, recognition, and then the line “No Mom, you take the Guldens”.
That kind of Jewish filial self-sacrifice just grabs the Gentiles deep down in their kishkes. They would have to put on extra shifts at the Gulden’s plant!
“this not-so-svelte Jewish matron”
As far as I know, Phil’s Mom is an elegant, stylish and svelte sophisticated New Yorker. Of course she is, to have had such a smart son! I was just looking back to the central casting of my youth.
Ah, someday, I will post my Bar Mitzvah photos. 1966. To save money (?) my Mom asked Arthur Swoger (a cousin) to take the pictures. An artist, yes he is. A Bar Mitzvah photographer, no. The pictures are brilliant, and in B/W!
Mildly entertaining, Mooser–I can see the scene in a teen flick. But I don’t get your joke about how the Gentiles would react to Jewish filial self-sacrifice. Why on earth do you think they would they have a reaction deep down in their guts?
Citizen, after I got married, for some reason my Father-in-law could never rid himself of the expression “Jew him down”. Which is pretty funny, because my wife swears he never used it before she married me! But this isn’t about buying a used car, or a collection of discredited bargain ideologies, for that matter. This is more important! This is about families, and food. And as my FIL may told me many times, he only bought “National Hebrew” franks. Then he would wink and say “You know, the kind with the tips cut off”
I never could convince him it was actually “Hebrew National” He thought that was an Israeli soccer team.
What can you do?
Hey! Not fair! everyone who replied to Phil got a colored background!
Hey, Tuyzenflot, I’m sure I’ve got a colored background myself. At least, there are dark rumors swirling around the family. At the reception for my Bar Mitzvah, where I held forth on our Baldwin organ, I remember the Rabbi siging “If only he could davan like he plays the blues, he’ll be President of Israel someday!”
Of course, I can’t play the blues, anymore.
Their posts have a colored background Mooser -light blue colored, because of a html tag problem. The double meaning was not intended. Ah, another fine joke that’s gone totally wasted.
“Ah, another fine joke that’s gone totally wasted.”
No, absolutely not. In todays economy and with our enviournmental concerns, recycling is the way to go. So whether it’s just a little vintage niftie, a dozen stale puns, an old chestnut, an ordered gag, or a real sockdolager, what’s old is made new again! And sometimes in the very next thread!
Kafka was intellectually dishonest.
Everyone in inter bellum E. Europe was insecure — not least because of the Judeo-Bolshevik menace: Holocaust: Gentile Deaths Don’t Count!.
Jews are dishonest with themselves because their status and livelihood often depends on mendacious behaviors required to maintain corrupt social networks: Zionist infestation causes incompetence.
This dishonesty eventually pervades Jewish life: Example: Difficulty of Understanding Holocaust.
You should study the concept of overdiagnosis some day. There’s even a branch of psychology dedicated to making people overdiagnose themselves. Called psychoanalysis.
That’s right, Tuyz, but the man above us has added a new wrinkle, but an ancient practice, to the science and art of analysis. He’s looking for signs and portents in his own feces! And he may well find a clue in their coruscations and corrugations.
Actually Kafka was intellectually honest, which is why he chose to write abstract fiction–that bug could be any human, and that castle, any human political and social scenario. That he drew from his conflict being in the particular spot he found himself in is of course true. He tried to deal with the classical issues that confront all human beings who are born and slowly wake up. He’s not not Elie Weisel (sic?).
Kafka, like all important writers, was writing in the universal terms that you describe, AND more personal.
Citizen, try doing that in oral exams on existentialism and you cause an uproar with the faculty, I can tell you this from personal experience hehe
V, please elaborate on your oral exam experience. Thanks!
Insecurity and Deprivation
Shlomo and Yetta were getting ready to go out to dinner.
Yetta comes out of the bedroom and says to Shlomo, “Darling, do you want me to wear this Chanel suit or shall I put on the Gucci outfit?”
“What do I care?” Shlomo replies.
Yetta then asks, “Darling, shall I wear my Rolex or my Cartier watch?”
“Who gives a damn?” says Shlomo.
Yetta then says to Shlomo “Darling, shall I wear my 5 carat pear or my 6 carat round diamond?”
To which Shlomo responds “Hey, if you don’t get your act together, and soon, we are going to miss the Early Bird Special!”
hehehe
Brett and Jennifer were getting ready to go out to dinner.
Jennifer comes out of the bed room and asks the exact same things Yetta asks.
Finally Brett says, “Wear what you want, take a cab by yourself, I’m outta here!”
v…, I fail to see how Prof. and Mrs. Sands social foibles have any bearing on his work. So they’re a little pretentious, a bit flashy, so what?
For what its worth, Phil’s stories of his mother, belong in his novel, not in his prose.
If we start with the mother stories on this post it will never end…lol
Sorry, I realized that the mustard collector was your grandmother, not your mother. I misunderstood.
Grandmothers are fine, mothers are off limits…lol
Phil’s mother is a personal friend.
Whom I see as frequently as Phil. Who knows if she is pissed at me for criticizing Phil, or happy that I confront him?
She is also a believer in speaking one’s truth.
Witty, by your attitude here I would say you are more tolerated, I would consider you a more of a pest by the contributions…than again that is just me, who knows Phil’s personal preferences.
Richard Witty November 14, 2009 at 9:23 pm
“Phil’s mother is a personal friend.”
Ah, that must be why you were so positive that Phil had been co-opted and corrupted by the Gazans. And I’m sure it was your friendship for the Weiss which made you say so, over and over. You did everything but call him, and his mom, a journalistic whore.
But then again, we can’t let friendship come between Israel and Witty, can we, Richard.
Besides, as we have noticed many, many times here, ziocaine addicts don’t know what they are saying when they’re high, and don’t remember it afterwards.
That’s your brain on ziocaine.
Is it bad that I’m content to watch the debate on this thread and not interrupt? It’s very vindicating just as it is, after all.
Phil’s “Ha” is his assertion of what he is against.
The $100,000,000 question is what is he for.
I am for a fair and viable partition resulting in two states that evolve to be good neighbor to good neighbor.
That will not happen by declaring that the other’s existence as surviving individuals, or surviving collectives, is invalid.
The assertion that “Jews don’t belong here, there, or anywhere” IS part of what is asserted when Phil answers “Ha” to the statement “having a safe home is a factor in the creation and resolutions of insecurity”.
It strikes me as horridly insensitive in construction.
The next question of “how does one do that?” IS a relevant question, but to dismiss the notion of security at all, permanent security, because some exagerate that need, is a cruelty in my mind.
“HA” is insufficient.
You might consider “ha” as insufficient Witty, I consider it all you’re arguments deserve.
Goering often couched his own defense of himself and his country in the same manner, Witty. I don’t know how a Roma, or a Kurd, for example would make your case.
And, you seem smart enough to distinguish, but don’t bother.
How safe have Palestinian homes been since the Balfour Declaration? Or their schools, hospitals, libraries, etc?
Okay seriously, I was going to try to leave well enough alone but this is just too funny. Phil posts one word, two letters long and look how crazed Witty is getting over it. One simple word, and Witty still tries to bend and twist and contort that into some sort of elaborate nefarious context on Phil’s part.
Mr. Weiss? You’re a genius.
If I post “HA”, I get an error message.
That’s your excuse?!? Richard, that ziocaine is really getting to the old cerebellum, baby. Please, quit while you’re behind. Way behind.
“If I post “HA”, I get an error message.”
Computers are getting smarter and smarter these days. Maybe Mondoweiss has hasbara detection software? After all, the technical problems concerning analysis are hardly insurmountable:
http://jewssansfrontieres.blogspot.com/2008/07/how-to-make-case-for-israel-and-win.html
I’ll say one thing for these posts of Phil’s concerning his intermarriage and family. He fearlessy and courageously plumbs the surface of assimilated Jewish life in America.
As if it was all about filching mustard packets, sugar packets, Nutra-sweet packets, relish packets, individual cream-cheese serving packets, Hershey’s Kisses, after-dinner mints… hmmm, I think maybe I’ve said a little too much here. I gotta go.
Comments on this entry are closed.