Apparently, Barack Obama told a visiting contingent of Conservative Jewish rabbis that he probably knows more about Judaism than any other president—on the same day that he referred to “Polish death camps.” For that last remark he apologized, but the one about Judaism is far more telling. In the first place, the claim is transparently absurd. We can quickly pass over the fact that John Adams and James Madison, among the most educated men in the world at the time, knew Hebrew as well as Latin and Greek and just say that the president is, to put it mildly, punching above his weight here. So let’s move on to the fact that every president until the modern era knew more about Judaism than Barack Obama because the Bible was the one book every literate person knew, and the Bible includes the books Christians call the “Old Testament,” and a working knowledge of the Old Testament certainly is the best introduction to “Judaism” there is.
Earlier presidents did not learn the Talmud, of course, but if Barack Obama ever has, that would come as news to me. There is no indication from Obama’s own writing that he is especially Bible-literate, and we can presume that his notorious pastor of 20 years used the Bible primarily as flavoring for his political duck soup. I have no doubt that, among presidents closer to our time, Jimmy Carter was far more conversant in the lore of Biblical Judaism, for all the good it did his corrupted soul when it comes to the Jewish state.
Perhaps what the president meant is that he’s known more Jews than other presidents. This too is an absurdity, as Ronald Reagan spent 30 years in Hollywood and had Jews coming out his ears. In fact, chances are Barack Obama knows less about Judaism than most presidents, except that he knows a lot of liberal Jews.
What the president does, without question, know a great deal about is the act of preening.
I see. The guy who sat at Rev. Wright's feet for 20 years, and attended Louis Farrakhan's Million Man March has a yidisher kop.
You certainly wasted no time at taking yet another opportunity to take another swipe at the president by seizing on isolated statements. You were not at the meeting and as far as I know, you have no transcript or recording. You've made it abundantly clear over the past few years that you strongly oppose Barack Obama, which of course is your right. You need not add more slime to the discourse.
How is that "slime"?
"isolated" statements"? please provide a context in which "some of my best friends are Jews" sounds ok. I'm guessing that if Romney had said some of his best friends were black, people like you would be having a fit.
The Prez creates his own 'slime' with no help from any of us! Don't get your panties in a wad because commentators take the time to point it out so that we don't get any on us.
apparently Obama would be fine if the Jews where pushed into the sea by the non-nuke PLO or Hamas … so his deeds speak volumes …
Barack Obama may mean well regarding his concern for Israel. Good intentions, however, are simply not enough. Obama believes that peace with the country's enemies can be achieved via appeasement policies. Mitt Romney rejects such naive sentiments. He is on the same page with his friend Benjamin Netanyahu. n nThere's too much talk about the true intentions of the Obama administration. Why go down this road? It is a secondary matter. Does Obama have his head on straight? The answer is no! This is the only thing that should be of concern.
Absolutely agree – it's absurd to even ask whether Romney would be better than Obama. My dirty sock would be better than Obama. Romney would be much better than Obama.
The best friend of Rashid Kalidi does not have Israel's interests at heart. Sorry, there is an exception to this. He has Israel's interests at heart when he needs Jewish votes and financing to get re-elected.
Good intentions are just that, intentions. I have an aunt who told me one time a preacher that she heard preaching at a revival she attended said and I quote" hell is paved with people with good intentions". The same applies with our dear president and many like him, intentions don't mean a thing, don't count for a thing; actions are what counts and so far the ones I've seen out of him are not good at all!! n
If reading the "Old Testament" qualifies one to say that they know more about Judaism than the President, then would it not be true that every fundamentalist preacher who tells such blatant lies about our religion and its intent would know more than he? Once again, your obsessive drive to remove this man from office is causing you to let your ends justify your means at the sacrifice of your credibility. I doubt that in the end, even if you are successful, you will find the trade off worth the cost.
As pointed out regarding Jimmy Carter, a working knowledge of Judaism through the Old Testament does not make one necessarily sympathetic to Israel. There are sects of Jews that are not sympathetic to Israel. Like it or not, Holy Books are open to interpretation. The point of this piece is that once again, the president is claiming superiority over those who came before him, a marker of misplaced "pride"–a subject of which the aforementioned Book has much to say.
Amen! n
oldlefty: your "-24" rating from this crowd is a badge of honor. So far, I'm only ahead (or behind) you by 4 for a "-28"!
You are living in a fantasy world, which of course is not a surprise since you are a self described leftie. Traditionalist Christian groups are among the most supportive of Israel and Jewish people in general, unlike the left which is loaded with anti-Semites.
He must know a lot about Jews, he's certainly managed to fool them twice.
“What the president does, without question, know a great deal about is the act of preening.”r nr nExactly.
This incredible President Impersonator, aka HRH King Obey, The 21st Century Greatest Impostor, is nothing more than an empty suit and a laughable caricature of what the leader of the free world should be. Simply amazing. Why would any Jewish individual or any objective observer of the hyprocrisy of King Obey would vote for him in 2012 is mind boggling!! More befitting, YGBSM!!
He learned everything he knows about Jews from David Axelrod, Emanuel, and Wasserman Schultz, proud Zionists all.
Obama and the crew you mention are hardly "zionists" nor are the Jews that support them. This Jew will be voting Romney in November, and yes, I fully support Israel.
Someone should collect all these egotistical statements like this one that he "probably knows more about Judaism than any other president" n nAmong others that come to mind is that his mission to kill Bin Laden was "the most audacious in 500 years." n
How about his pronouncement that he "would put our legislative and foreign policy accomplishments in our first two years against any president — with the possible exceptions of Johnson, F.D.R., and Lincoln." n nWe could write yet another volume entitled "The Audacity of Mendacity: an Incomplete Compilation of Obama Whoppers."
here are two to add to yourt list: n n"he saved the country from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression" n n"he had to deal wityh a more dangerous world situation than any other president has had to do"
More than Warren Gamaliel Harding, named after the Great Sage of the Haggadah? More than Chester Alan Arthur, apparently named after three jews?? More than ABE Lincoln?????r nr nMy parents spoke yiddish, often said something that sounds like “kenya horror” to call off a maleficent presence. Now I know what they meant.
The Occupier-in-Chief is no stranger to ludicrous, double-facepalm-worthy boasts. The man simply thinks he knows more about everything than anyone: "I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors." He's also claimed "I'm a better speech writer than my speech writers," and "a better political director than my political director." n nMy only surprise about his latest claim to brilliance is that he restrained himself from saying he knows more about Judaism than any Torah scholar. He's truly a moron with a size 12 ego in a size zero brain. This media-branded Most Brilliant President in History™ has instead proved to be a ginormous dullard.
Par for the course. He thinks he knows more than anyone else about any given subject, so why not Judaism? And besides, I would bet that most of the Jews he pals around with think that Judaism is just about social justice, which is his preferred area of expertise.
Yea, and he also wrote the code for Facebook, invented the iPhone and cracked the human genome… nWith every passing moment it is getting harder to tell the difference between Obama's hubris and that of Kim Jong-un.
There's a word which describes people like Obama; Grifter.
At least with Professor Henry Hill you coud conceivably end up with those 76 trombones.
Another day–another Obama mistake. These mistakes just keep piling up. Does it make a difference? Every day Obama doesn't get his act together is another day his political opponents take advantage of him. Karl Rove already sees Romney winning a close election. How soon will it be before most Americans see it the same way Mr Rove sees it.
I'm beginning to think that Obama does not know much about anything. Thus, his tethering himself to a teleprompter. Now, with a tough reelection fight that obliged him to start campaigning six months ago, he has no choice but to wing it more and it turns out that he's not so smart.
So – when I say "alot of my friends are Blacks" I am being a racist bigot. But if Obama says "alot of my friends are Jews," he is being an enlightened, aware, educated friend of Jews, informing his lessers that he knows MORE about Judaism than any president in living memory. n nHave I got that right?
Please explain your charge that Jimmy Carter is a "corrupted soul." Your animosity towards Obama is obvious to everyone. Why bring in Carter at all? Can you not make your political arguments without character assassination and personal defamation?
er…Obama's animosity to Jews and Israel is what's obvious to everyone. there is no need for anyone here on commentary to carry any bad feeling toward the president; we just see him for what he is: a not-very-good president, and certainly not a friend to the Jewish State.
Not a friend to the Jewish state? You mean he's not enough of a friend to the Jewish state to suit Commentary and its audience. The fact that JP has to go back to John Adams to refute Obama's claim is laughable. n ni love Israel as much as anyone here. My motto is Kahane was right! And I say, Obama is far more pro-Israel than George H. W. Bush and his Arab-schmoozing James Baker, which everybody here conveniently forgets. n nNo, you are disingenuous when you say there's no animus here. The Obama-bashing here is pure animus. People here do not like Obama, period, and they base their contrived polemic against Obama based on this fundamental animus. n nPerhaps Obama isn't pro-Israel enough to suit Bibi or the right wing here. But that does NOT make him "not a friend to the Jewish state". Obama's problem here is simply that he's not your kind of guy. It's just that petty. And if you were honest, you'd admit it.
I bow to no one in my distaste for the anti-Israel George H. W. Bush and his budddies. But mah inyan shmittah etzel har sinai? (Why are wediscussing the shmitta year in the context of Mount Sinai?) If GHW Bush were running again, I might have a tough choice to make. But he isn't, and the choice is clear. n nPlease pay attention. The discussion is not whether other presidents were more anti-Israel than President Obama. The discussion is his absurd claims to know more about Judaism than any other president, his own less than sterling record on Israel, and his condescending assumption that having had Jewish friends and knowing a lot about Judaism is a good reason for Jewish Americans to vote for him. n nAnd if he really knew anything about Judaism, he'd realize that his attack on the [cont'd]
[actually replying to Ibjack, cont'd] religious freedom of Catholics is also a threat to the religious freedom of Jews, and particularly those of us who know and care enough about Judaism to elevate it over social acceptance, convenience, and cash. You know, those fanatics who don't eat chametz on Pesach even at the White House seder, and don't drive on Shabbos even to go to a Democratic (or Republican) Party event. Your role model Kahane had some pretty harsh words for Jews who choose the other way. n n"No, you are disingenuous when you say there's no animus here. The Obama-bashing here is pure animus. People here do not like Obama, period, and they base their contrived polemic against Obama based on this fundamental animus. " n nWhat you are doing in that paragraph has a name. It is called projecting. n
Thanks for the reply. n nDon't know how you relate "projecting" to the paragraph you cite. n nPlease note, that my reply is under the previous poster's assertion that "Obama's animosity to Jews and Israel is what's obvious to everyone." n nNo, it is not obvious to everyone, at least not to everyone outside this echo chamber. Echo chambers are places for reinforcement not edification. (I understand that right has no monopoly on echo chambers.) The notion of Obama's animosity to Israel and Jews is a canard that no serious participant in the discourse takes seriously. n nTo repeat, it's fine to say Obama is not doing enough for Israel. But to assert, based on Obama's irrelevant gaffes or insufficient obeisance to your lobby, that he's hostile to Jews and Israel, is either stupid or malign, and one reason I subscribe to Commentary is to listen to intelligent conservatives. Thus, since I must rule out stupidity as the explanation for the patently absurd claim that "Obama's animosity to Jews and Israel is what's obvious to everyone." the only other explanation is animus. n nAnyway, your response begs the question. Actually, it makes my case, since all that forums here offer are snarky comments about Obama without making any factual case that he's actually hostile to Israel and Jews rather than merely not measuring up to your expectation of perfect support, using presumably as your benchmark George W. Bush's laissez faire israel policy, which may have had something to do with his being engaged elsewhere. n nAs a matter of fact, Obama's only shortcomings in his support of Israel are polemical. in terms of actual policy and action, right-wing claims of Obama's perfidy are asinine to the degree that NO ONE in the GOP primaries, aside from this incestuous bunch, made a claim of Obama's "hostility" to Israel. Simply because such a claim is laughable. n nAnd repeating the slogan that "Kahane was right" doesn't make him my role model any more than agreeing with Newt Gingrich that we need to colonize the moon makes me his role model. n nAnd underneath this stands the equally childish, self-indulgent and stupid epithet "Liar-in-Chief". With that I rest my case.
Hardly pettiness, my good man, just reality. Forget about Commentary and its readers, just ask the Israelis. Aside from those on the Left seeking a one-state solution and putting Bibi in the dock for war crimes, most Israelis are not Obama fans.
If, as you say, Obama has Jews coming out of his ears, he surely knows more about Judy that other Prezzies.
I just wonder how many of you would dare make the insulting comments you have if you had to put your names to them. If the shoe were on the other foot, and someone was being as meanspirited and ugly as you are to a Jew, you'd be the first to denounce them. As I pointed out in my earlier comment, you are all letting your ends justify your means, which, of course, is expressly forbidden by Torah. So now, you have the opportunity to do the same to a fellow Jew, by telling me what you think of me. I don't doubt you will have some juicy comments. Pseudonymously, of course….
I sympathize. Alas, despite the intellectual trappings, this place is just another echo chamber — where argument is tested not for merit but for ideological purity.
Ridiculous. The argument in question was handled in this piece appropriately -as asinine. Has nothing to do with ideology, has everything to do with the absurdity of his claim. It is called rhetorical analysis – and given O's flights in fallacy, it is easy pickings.
@oldleftie n nWhere is it expressly forbidden by Torah to "let your ends justify your means"? I am familiar with most of the 613 Mitzvot, but I don't seem to recall that one? What Trachtate of Gemorah is it in? n nI would dare to say directly to face of the demigod-in-chief that he is completely full of BS and tell him exactly why. His claims are patently offensive, completely untrue and show the condescending paternalistic attitude he has for his Jewish subjects. n nUnfortunately this forum is far too limited to give you a full list of Obama transgressions. n
One must ask: Why would he say that? What did he mean by it? He knows nothing about the religion that he professes to believe, and he knows even less about Judaism. Has he ever read the Bible or ever attended Sunday School? Both of his parents were outspoken atheists. There is nothing wrong with religious ignorance, but why tell an obvious lie?
I am not a “fundamentalist”, but I know something about them. I would like to know what “blatant lies” you refer to.r nr nThanks
Depends on the preacher. I can't answer for the above commenter, but he may mean the alleged christological references that preachers insist are in the "Old Testament." n nI would not say "blatant lies" so much as absurd misconceptions. I heard one radio preacher claim that we believe all non-Jews are going to hell. The same one took allegorical statements in the Talmud and actually thought they were literal. I've seen others take descriptive statements in the Talmud and think they were prescriptive, and also seen them make some pretty appalling transaltions. (I have in mind a preacher who claimed the Talmud commands Jews to despise shepherds because it says "No profession is so despised [better translation - looked down upon, held in low esteem, unpopular] as [being] a shepherd." That's a bit like reading a sociology study from 1955 and concluding that Americans were commanded to despise trash collectors. n nI've heard others say equally absurd things but can't recall any sort of definite list right now.
Well, given that his State Department can’t quite decide what Israel’s capital city is, nor his own White House state in what country Jerusalem is located, I think Obama’s sentiments are clear. Indeed, after Israel provided land for a US Embassy in Jerusalem, the US instead constructed a new Consulate there to serve … the Palestinians!
Come on now. Can you really say knowing Hebrew (if they in fact knew it well–I'll take it for granted that they did) or reading the Bible as a Christian is really knowing Hebrew? Now I do not know Obama's knowledge base, but it's fairly easy to exceed that fairly low bar. How, for example, does knowing Hebrew in and of itself constitute a knowledge of Judaism? Same for the Bible, in and of itself, which could be (and often is) read as a Christian text. Again, I do not know what Obama has read or what lectures or seminars he's attended. But, again, it's easy enough to rise above that bar with some modest, well directed reading. Obama is surely open to criticism, but this seems like caviling at its best.
What's absurd is your writer's obsession with nitpicking Obama. You are so venemous, so petty. Come on Commentary, Get a life! There are more important issues to deal with than an exaggerated claim the president made in an unguarded moment. Why don't you use your microscope to examine Mr. Flip Flopper, the spineless Republican wonder?
You (John Podhoretz) certainly wasted no time at taking yet another opportunity to take another swipe at the president by seizing on isolated statements. You were not at the meeting and as far as I know, you have no transcript or recording. You've made it abundantly clear over the past few years that you strongly oppose Barack Obama, which of course is your right. You need not add more slime to the discourse.
You do realize you post the identical cavil yesterday, and that your comment was just as silly then as it is now?
The second posting was not on purpose. As for "silly," you certainly appear to be an expert on that. And, your monicker is appropriate. (I understand why you would not want to post under your real name.)
Why would he not know his enemies?
John Adams wrote Thomas Jefferson a letter that showed that he (Adams) knew the Talmud to a certain extent. He was able to disprove some of the superstitions that people held (and still hold) about what is stated in the Talmud.
The article is spot on; ideology has nothing to do with it; and Obama's remarks are laughable to anyone with a pulse.