June 26, 2019--Aunt Tanna

I've been thinking this week about my Aunt Tanna, my mother's second oldest sister who became our extended family's matriarch after my grandmother died.

This meant that all ritual occasions such as Passover and Rosh Hashanah dinners were under her auspices and occurred around her always-ladened dining room table. 

In my life I do not recall any warmer times.

Aunt Tanna was also the even-more-extended family's guardian angel. 

My earliest childhood memories were of distant cousins, who had survived Nazi concentration camps, who she somehow, at the end of the war, managed to bring to the safety of America. That "safety of America" was the security and love she provided to those who had literally been through Hell.

When they were liberated those emaciated skeletons were placed in DP camps, often tent camps, displaced persons camps, which were much less than ideal facilities, where they needed to wait, often for more than a year, before there was a place of refuge to which to send them. 

Much of Europe was in ruins and there were few places to locate freed prisoners. The United States, which sustained no direct damage, was only reluctantly welcoming. 

In America there was a long tradition of official antisemitism and our State Department, which was charged with managing the quotas that severely restricted the number of those who could be admitted to the country as refugees, was notoriously known to be unfriendly to anything Jewish. 

For example, before World War II erupted the Secretary of State ordered that ships packed with asylum seekers not be permitted to disembark them. The ships and their passengers were turned back and as a consequence many thousands were then sent to concentration camps where they were slaughtered by the Nazis. 

Aunt Tanna somehow found ways to locate scattered family members and one-by-one, occasionally in small family groups when more than one cousin miraculously survived, she managed to bring them to her apartment in Brooklyn where she arranged places for them to sleep, frequently for months, frequently three to a bed, while she searched for more permanent places for them to live and jobs so they could support themselves.

They spoke no English and I no Yiddish, the lingua franca, and so we communicated mainly though shrugs and gestures. As might be imagined I was especially drawn to the occasional young cousin survivors, who my father said, looked like "little old men." What they had been through, I came to understand, had literally left its mark on them.

And of course I could not take my eyes off the blue numbers they all had tattooed on their forearms.

I have been thinking about this recently because Portland Maine continues to be in the news as it struggles to welcome a few hundred Congolese refugees who have been granted asylum in America. There was another article in the New York Times Monday about how welcoming Portland is attempting to be. And how Portland and the State of Maine continue to be the only places in the U.S. where public money in combination with privately raised funds are being used to help defray the cost of their relocation and transition.

This, as I have written, has unleashed a storm of protest from some Mainers who feel that while citizens are struggling we should not be using taxpayer money to defray the costs associated with admitting refugees. That it is better to require that family members "sponsor" anyone seeking to live in America. The Aunt Tanna approach.

This seems to me to be worth considering.

March 9, 2019--Saturday's Rats

This past week saw heated competition for Saturday's Rat. Who among Trump's closest people tried to push their way to the top of the gangplank in a panic to get off his sinking ship? 

First there was House Minority Leader, Kevin McCarthy, whose anti-Semitic trope last November claimed that Jewish money provided by George Soros, Mike Bloomberg, and Tom Steyer was being deployed to "buy" the midterm elections. He tweeted this anti-Semitic canard and then a day later deleted it--

"We cannot allow Soros, Steyer, and Bloomberg to BUY this election! Get out and vote Republican November 6th"

McCarthy had been on a campaign to cultivate Trump in the hope that he would allow the California congressman to ascend to and keep the House leadership seat abandoned by Paul Ryan.

But McCarthy could take only so much. Especially after seeing the disastrous results of the midterm election and then sensing Republican members of Congress acting friskier and friskier, wavering somewhat in their blind devotion to Trump.

Fearing for his own fate, McCarthy screwed up what little courage he has to squeak out a statement that though he agreed that Trump has the authority to declare a national emergency wouldn't it be better not to do so. 

Trump smacked him and as with the Jewish-money allegation he quickly backed off. No profile of courage here.

So McCarthy was a contender, but there were other Republicans who showed a bit more independence. Senator Rand Paul, for instance. He led the effort in the Senate to reject Trump's emergency declaration, speaking more forcefully and not willing to back off even if it meant no more visits to Mar-a-Lago. 

Paul sounded genuine and it was clear that establishing a few degrees of separation from Trump is perhaps a good strategy for him if he intends one more run at the presidency. 

Here is a little of what Paul said--

"I think he’s wrong, not on policy, but in seeking to expand the powers of the presidency beyond their constitutional limits.”

Moving quickly down the list of aspirants, there are a couple of others scrambling for the title--Mat Drudge in the Drudge Report declared Trump "swamped" after the Cohen testimony and the collapsed summit with Kim Jong-un; and Trump fave, Lou Dobbs who excoriated the president for his failed immigration and economic policies. He said Trump and the White House, "have lost their way."

Runner up though in the rat race is Ty Cobb. Not a household name, he was among Trump's first small group of lawyers hired to deal with the Mueller investigation. He is one of Washington's most esteemed attorneys and some wondered why he would want to sully himself by association with the likes of Trump. 

A fair question but one with an easy answer--even the most reprehensible individuals are entitled to strong legal representation. 

But Cobb, after leaving Trump, seeking to reestablish his reputation among the Washington establishment, in an interview with ABC News, felt the need to clarify why he agreed to be involved with Trump.

Among other things he said-- 

Mueller is an "American hero" and the probe he is leading is not a "witch hunt." He rejected the president's repeated characterizations of the Russia investigation and the man leading it.

This week's Saturday Rat, though, is Matt Whitaker. 

Remember him? Trump appointed Whitaker acting Attorney General after he finally tortured Jeff Sessions enough that he quit. At the time, as Whitaker was so obviously unqualified, it was thought that he got the job because he publicly boasted that he, like Michael Cohen and others, would "take a bullet" for Mr. Trump. This led Trump to assume he would take the initiative to fire Mueller.

That even a dunderhead such as Whitaker refused to do, but he may have perjured himself when he testified before the House Judiciary Committee.

The Wall Street Journal reported--

"The House Judiciary Committee believes it has evidence that President Trump asked Matthew Whitaker, at the time the acting attorney general, whether Manhattan U.S. attorney Geoffrey Berman could regain control of his office’s investigation into Mr. Trump’s former lawyer and his real-estate business, according to people familiar with the matter."

After the next Attorney General, Robert Barr, was confirmed and took office, Whitaker was given a no-show job at the DOJ. But after just a few weeks, under cover of darkness, like Omarosa, he departed. No one seems to know where he is and what he might be up to.

My favorite speculation, which I am attempting to promulgate is that he is in a safe house somewhere, spilling what he knows to Mueller's investigators in the hope they will grant him immunity from prosecution for lying to Congress. 

Wouldn't it be confirming if he could provide corroborating evidence that Trump did in fact try to get him to assign a Trump-friendly U.S. attorney who would back off from investigating Trump and his family's nefarious business dealings in New York City?

Therefore, though there are other strong contenders, Matt Whitaker is this week's Rat!

March 7, 2019--How to Lose In 2020

Right now, in real time, House Democrats are busy tearing themselves apart and working hard to lose the 2020 election.

The Washington Post is reporting that House Democrats erupted into a full-scale brawl Wednesday, challenging leaders over indirectly sanctioning freshman Representative Ilhan Omar for alleged anti-Semitic remarks amid an outcry over party inaction to President Trump’s divisive comments on race. 

In a closed-door session, Democrats protested plans to vote this week on a resolution condemning religious hatred, a measure prompted by Omar’s comments last week suggesting supporters of Israel have “allegiance to a foreign country.” 

House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) said Wednesday there may not be a vote this week on any resolution. “We’re discussing what is the best way to address it." 

Many of those speaking out Wednesday were members of the Congressional Black Caucus, who bristled at the notion that Omar would be targeted for a rebuke--even an indirect one, as Democratic leaders had planned--while lawmakers remain silent about Republican behavior, especially that of Trump. 

“I think there’s a big rise in anti-Semitism and racism, and that’s a bigger conversation we need to be having,” said Rep. Cedric L. Richmond (D-La.). “But it starts at 1600 Pennsylvania. It doesn’t start with one member out of 435 members of Congress.” 

It is my view that also at issue is what is implied by the "indirect" rebuke to Omar in the resolution which, originally spoke only about anti-Semitism but subsequently, to broaden the criticism and take some of the onus off Omar, was redrafted to include condemnation of anti-Moslem, racist, and homophobic behavior. 

It is just this kind of identity politics that will ironically fuel the great divider's, Trump's claim that Democrats are about dividing rather than unifying people and how this exposes that Democrats will pander to any interest group in a desperate search for votes.

It also will contribute to making it more difficult for Democrats to nominate a moderate, which in turn means it will be more likely that Trump will find a way in 2020 to secure 270 Electoral votes.

We need to keep our eyes on the prize--winning in 2020. After winning, we can get back to struggling with legitimate and productive disagreements about social policy.

June 11, 2018--Ladies of Forest Trace: President Grump

The phone rang as we were in the midst of preparing dinner. 

"Who would call us at this time?" I asked. "Anyone who knows us knows we have dinner about this time."

"Maybe it's a robocall," Rona said. "Check the caller ID."

I did and said, "It's from an unfamiliar area code--123."

"Pick it up. Maybe an actual person is placing the call. Not a computer. We've had an increase in the number we've been receiving. Maybe you can get them to take us off their caller list."

"Forget that," I mumbled. I was just about ready to add the spice mix to the vegetarian chili that was simmering on the stove. 

Rona said, "I thought no area codes are allowed to start with a 1."

"With telemarketing and hacking," I said, "I assume anything goes. So maybe I shouldn't answer it. We don't want to get drawn into anything that will take over our computer or phone."

"Now you have me curious," Rona said, "I wouldn't worry too much about that. I'll add the spices. You answer the phone. Let's see what this is."

"You would think I have all day." On the phone it was a woman's voice that sounded vaguely familiar."

"Who is this?" I asked tentatively.

"Have I changed that much in three years?"

"Who is it?" Rona mouthed.

Shrugging, I shook my head.

"Well, in fact I do have all day," the caller chuckled.

"Tell me what this is about. We're in the middle of preparing dinner. Chili." I was poised to hit the phone's Off button.

"How can I be at rest while that Grump is making himself a king?"

"Is this . . . ?" I began to tremble.

"Who else calls you when you're hiding in Maine?"

"We're not hiding . . . " I couldn't catch my breath but finally said, "Mom?"

"This is not the time to be hiding away. It wasn't easy, but if I could get permission to call you between now and November the least you can do is put down your potholder."

"Is it really . . .?"

"The girls and the people who run this place are very concerned with what is happening."

"In Maine?" I didn't know what to say. My heart was thumping and I thought I was about to pass out or have a stroke. 

I collapsed in a chair and Rona rushed over to see if I needed help. I signaled that I was OK. Just overwhelmed with emotion.

I mouthed, "I think it's my mother."

"How can that be?" Rona said so loud that my mother or whoever was on the phone could hear her.

"Tell my darling I love her and not to worry about me. They take very good care of us here. Even better than Forest Trace. Especially the food. Last night we had flanken with horseradish. It was delicious, I could chew it, and best of all it didn't give me gas."

Rona reached for the phone but I pulled it away. So she ran into the living room and snatched the other one from its cradle.

"Mom?"

"It's so good to hear your voice. I miss you every day."

"I think about you all the time. What an inspiration you have been and continue to be. So now you're here to . . . ?"

"Help with the election. We don't have newspapers or cable so I can't listen to Wolf or read Maureen Shroud. It's been difficult to keep up with the news. But we do know who was elected and can't believe what his people are doing to our  country. The same country that rescued so many of my family who fled the pogroms before the Nazis took over. Today, Grump would want to arrest us and send us back to Auschwitz."

"It isn't that bad," I said, and then after a pause added, "Yet."

"That's what they said in Germany. Things are bad but we will be safe. All we have to do is not make trouble. We're Germans, yes Jews, but we have always lived side-by-side with gentiles and they won't allow the worst to happen." She took a deep breath and said, "And then the worst happened. More than the worst."

"And so?"

"So, we have to make trouble. That's why I got permission to call. To make sure you and your friends--not just your Jewish friends--make trouble."

"Which means?"

"Working every day to make sure good people get elected. If he wins in November I fear for the future. It will say the American people agree with what he has been doing. What a message that will be to the world. And how it would encourage him to continue doing all the things he is doing. What will this mean to young people? I was a teacher and a mother all my life. My heart breaks when I think about what the future will be like for young people. They will lose hope. For the young, that would be the worst thing. Not to look forward to the future."

"That would be a tragedy," I agreed, "But young people are activated and it seems are eager to vote in November."

"They didn't vote two years ago. Not enough of them. They wanted Burning Sanders and when they couldn't have him they didn't vote. And what about women? I remember when we couldn't vote. I was 12 years old when they passed the Amendment. My sisters were suffragettes. They marched and marched and marched. In the heat and the rain and the snow. But now too many women didn't vote for the first woman running for president. Hillary. Not my favorite but better than him, no?"

"Much better," Rona said, "Especially as we see what he is doing. At least with her things wouldn't be this bad. But more than 50 percent of white women voted for Trump. So it was white women and young people more than anyone else who helped elect him. But we are organizing and demonstrating. Just last week we did well in primary voting in California."

"I hadn't heard about that," my mother said, "That is good news but unless Democrats won by big numbers it may not be good enough. And when I think about the demonstrations I am not impressed. How long has he been in office?"

"About a year and a half."

"And what did you have? Two marches? One right after he was sworn in, the Pussy Cat march (I'm old fashioned and hated the name), but it still was good and then there was the one organized by the Florida children after 17 of their friends were killed. Also very good. But I didn't make all this effort to be able to talk with you to pretend to feel good about two marches."

"What would have made you feel good?" I asked.

"A march every week or at least every month. That would be at least 18 marches already. I know the news people would stop talking about it but if it went on and on they would have to pay attention and it could make a difference. It would keep the drum drumming  It would also show that people, including young people, care about the future of America and the world. Their country, their world. Not mine and too soon not yours.

"What do you mean 'too soon'"? I asked, fearing she knew something I didn't.

"Time. Time is marching even if Americans aren't. Time doesn't need to do much or really anything to keep moving along. Time and tide. Look out your window up there and pay attention to the tide."

I glanced at Johns Bay and was about to ask about the tide since it ebbs and flows, first north and then it swings around to the south. I wasn't sure why this was significant to her. But before I could enquire, she told us she needed to pass the phone to one of the Forest Trace ladies who was waiting in line. She promised, until November, to try to call every few weeks. Maybe, she said, on her birthday, June 28th, when if she were still here she would be 110. Not, she said, that they make a big fuss there about birthdays. Or that 110, considering where she is now, is a big deal.

But before yielding the phone, she asked "Doesn't chili give you gas?"

The Ladies of Forest Trace (Mom Standing)

May 17, 2018--End Times Come to Jerusalem

I've written about this so often that I wouldn't blame you if you moved quickly to something else.

The subject of this is the real reason Christian Evangelicals are obsessed with Israel and the Jews. We got a glimpse of that obsession the other day when Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner presided over the opening of the new U.S. embassy in Jerusalem. 

The real reason this is a big deal not just for Jews but for all Americans is because Evangelicals have an inordinate amount of political power in America now that Trump is president. He shamelessly panders to them as they constitute the heart of his base.

Hint--the real reason is not because Evangelicals are concerned about anti-Semitism. Quite the contrary. One could argue that the ways in which Evangelicals view Jews is in its essence anti-Semitic.

Evidence for this is the fact that Trump arranged to have Texas televangelist John Hagee deliver one of the prayers at the embassy's dedication. 

Hagee is well known in Evangelical circles for having said that Hitler was doing "God's work" when he slaughtered six million Jews. It was God's work because to millennialist Evangelicals such as Hagee to bring about the Second Coming of Jesus Christ and the millennium all Jews must emigrate to Israel to participate in awaiting his return.

According to Hagee and his millions of followers, when the Messiah appears, Jews will be given one final opportunity to convert to Christianity. All those who do not will be killed and relegated to an eternity in Hell.

In this mad scenario Jews who go along with Evangelicals' apocalyptic assignment for them will be the ultimate dupes. According to the Hagee crowd millions of Jews needed to be murdered during the Holocaust to motivate or scare the rest of us to flee to the safety of the Promised Land. Safety only if we convert to Christianity. 

What an unholy bargain.

At the very hour the embassy was being dedicated, those watching on live TV, via split screen, could witness another slaughter taking place just a few miles away--Israeli solders killing scores of protesting Palestinians and wounded well over a thousand more.

On the left side of the screen, at the new embassy, glamed-up yiddisher maidella Ivanka Trump was unveiling a plaque on the wall by the entrance, a plaque on which Trump's name was emblazoned in typeface at least as large as that identifying the embassy itself. In effect--not unlike Trump Tower, The Donald J. Trump Embassy in Jerusalem.

And on the right side of the screen we could watch young people from Gaza, living in apartheid Israel, being murdered by the dozens in cold blood by Israeli security forces using live ammunition.

Meanwhile, U.S. ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, said those killed and wounded along the walled border between Gaza and Israel brought it on themselves. They deserved what they got. 

What they got was killed and wounded.

Then there was Evangelical minister Robert Jeffress, head of one of the largest megachurches in the South, who delivered the opening prayer at the opening of the new embassy. He is highly regarded among Evangelical for having said repeatedly that unconverted Jews cannot be saved. He claims that this is confirmed by the words of Jesus, Peter, and Paul, who he misquotes as saying, "Judaism won't do it." Only faith in Christ.  

This is why for all Americans, not just Jews, this is a very big deal.

August 16, 2017--Donald Trump's Hostage Tape

Does anyone believe that the statement President Trump finally made on Monday, two days after the violence, murder, and deaths in Charlottesville, came from his heart?

If so, everyone should now know better.

In his initial comments on Saturday, after failing to call out by name the Ku Klux Klan, white supremacists, and neo-Nazi thugs, he was excoriated on all sides, by some Republicans (kudos to Marco Rubio) and most Democrats, for his unwillingness to do so and especially for striking the absurd, moral equivalent comparison when he condemned violence "from many sides."

He tried to clean it up on Sunday by having a White House spokesman release a statement that most still felt did not go far enough because it failed to mention white supremacists by name and included criticism of violence allegedly perpetrated by "other [presumably liberal] hate groups."

Still under immense pressure, on Monday, sticking close to the text on his teleprompter, he called out hate groups by name and restrained himself from making any reference to those from the many sides--

Racism is evil [he forced himself to say]. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the K.K.K., neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.

If he had uttered these words closer to the time of the act of domestic terrorism, he probably could have retained at least some credibility. He could have made reference to his claim on February 16th when he boasted--"I am the least anti-semitic, least racist person ever. [My italics.]

Of course, that would have been suspect based on things he actually said and did for at least the past two years.

On July 8, 2015, less than a month after announcing he was running for president he, defamed Mexicans--

When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. . . . They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problem with us [sic]. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some I assume are good people.

He also has failed to explicitly mention Jews even when recalling the Holocaust. On February 27, 2017, for example, critics say, his failure to do so "generalizes" one of the worst genocides in history.

And, of course, his rise to political prominence was based on his five-year racist assault on Barack Obama's citizenship and thus the legitimacy of his presidency.

The list goes on. Stating a version of, "Some of my best friends are (fill in the blank) doesn't work. In fact, it makes his denial sound even hollower.

Monday morning, on Morning Joe, marketing expert Donny Deutsch told it like it is. He said--

He is a racist. Can we just say it once and for all, when we look at his history? When we look at the housing issues [in 1973 Trump was sued by the Justice Department for discriminating against African American renters], when you look at what he said about reverse discrimination against whites, the birther movement. We have a racist as a president who is a man who cannot stand up and condemn the Ku Klux Klan and Nazism is a racist.

From Trump's facial expressions and body language on Monday as he read the comments prepared for him by those trying to "handle" him, it looked as if he was delivering a hostage tape. And he was.

He is a hostage of his own devising. How many more bridges will he burn as he becomes more and more desperate to hold on to his dwindling base of supporters?

Three days ago, David Duke, former head of the KKK and fervent Trump supporter told the truth. He said, "We are determined to take our country back. We are going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump."

Trump continues to repay that scabrous debt.

And by yesterday afternoon he again reversed himself, saying the counter demonstrators were "very, very violent."

From his fury we knew he was unscripted and speaking from his heart.

It is time to consider implementing the 25th Amendment. He is not fit to be our president.

February 22, 2017--Milo Yiannopoulos

More evidence of implosion--

General Michael Flynn is gone, fired as National Security Council Advisor, replaced by an adult, and with him goes some of the paranoia and conspiratorial thinking that pervades the West Wing.

Many on both sides of the aisle are hoping that chief strategist, Stephen Bannon and his protégée Stephen Miller will soon follow. Kallyanne Conway has already been marginalized. Have you seen her recently? Is she still being "counseled" and reeducated for hawking Ivanka Trump's schematas? Is she the next one to be jettisoned?

If so it could be that there is some low-wattage light flickering at the end of the very long Trump tunnel.

More good news--

The ever-hypocritical Conservative Political Action Committee (CPAC) has just withdrawn its invitation to senior Breitbart editor Milo Yiannopoulos to address their upcoming convention.

Greatly "admired" by Bannon, according to the New York Times, for his alt-right orthodoxy which includes dollops of racism and anti-Semitism, Milo has been in the headlines recently for having been driven away from speaking at Berkeley where protesting students proclaimed with some violence, forgetting the free-speech history of their institution, that there is "no free speech for hate speech."

CPAC made a big deal of this, totally enjoying the irony at Berkeley and, mounting their high libertarian horse, invited Milo to address them as evidence that conservatives are less politically correct and more constitution-minded than liberals.

They were OK with the hate speech part of Milo's repertoire but when it leaked out that he also has spoken positively about man-boy pedophilia, including among Catholic priests, that was too much even for CPACers. They pulled the plug on him and made frantic rounds of the morning talk shows to try to explain away their hypocrisy.

They are for free speech but not when it "crosses certain lines." Clearly one of those lines doesn't include forbidding a CPAC speaker to hint with winks and nods that it's all right to be a white supremacist or anti-Semite.

Does this foretell Stephen Bannon's fate? With Yiannopoulos on the loose and CPAC at a boil, Bannon's presence, whispering in Trump's ear, may embolden Bannon's White House enemies (Reince Priebus and Jared Kushner among others) to put pressure on Trump to do a little more house cleaning.

June 23, 2016--Creme de la Phlegm

"I don't know how to put this," our friend Bob said the other day, "But every time we have morning coffee together both you and Rona are coughing and sneezing and constantly having to blow your noses."

"It's true," I said. "Sometimes it's allergy season and though neither one of us really has allergies when there's so much pollen in the air . . . Well, you know."

"You never hear me coughing and wheezing."

"Good for you," Rona said, with a tincture of annoyance. She was having a rough respiratory morning.

"By midday, generally, we're both fine," I said, "It's mainly true in the morning. You should hear what we sound like at home. Before we head for the diner."

"Well, at least you have each other," Bob said. This time sounding slightly compassionate. "To tell you the truth," he continued, looking out the window, "I was wondering if something else is going on."

"Like what?" I asked.

"As I said, it's a little delicate."

"I've never known you to be delicate," Rona said, "That's not your forte. You're more the tell-it-like-you-think-it-is type."

"Go on, Bob, we can handle it. What's on your mind?"

"You won't take offense? Promise?"

"It depends," I said, "But give it a try."

"It's no secret that you're Jewish, right. Both of you." Now he was leaning on the window sill with his back half to us.

"What does that have to do with anything?" Rona asked, not sounding happy.

"You know."

"I don't know," I said, now also a little agitated. "Spit it out. Forgive the figure of speech."

"That you're Jewish."

"We established that already."

Now turning to face us, he said, "Is it true what they say about Jews being phlegmy?"

"Phlegmy? And who's the they?" I said, increasingly annoyed with him.

"You know me well enough to know I'm not one of those anti . . . anti . . ."

"Anti-Semites," Against my better judgement I helped him.

"That's not me. You know me how many years? Have you ever heard me say . . ."

"I know, some of your best friends are Jews." Now it was Rona's turn to turn her back to the table.

Defending himself, Bob said, "All I was wondering about was your mucous. Not your religion."

"So why did you link it to our being Jewish? You may not have intended it to be anti-Semitic," I said, "But it sure turned out to sound that way."

"If so, I apologize and promise to be more careful in the future."

"That's all I could ask," Rona said, sounding forgiving. Bob really is quite a good guy and isn't really prejudiced. Not about anything. In fact, he's very tolerant of people's differences and a genuine Libertarian.

"So if I'm a little forgiven, what about what I was asking you about? But please don't get mad again."

"About the phlegm business?" Rona said.

"At the risk of sounding anti-Semitic myself," I said, "I think there's some truth to what you were saying. There are physical, even genetic conditions that are more common among certain racial and ethnic groups. Like Sickle Cell among black people and yes, in addition to Tay-Sachs disease and my favorite, Maple Syrup Urine disease, there are, I'm not making this up, about 100 conditions  that are prevalent primarily among Jews. So I think it may be fair to say that by nature we're phlegmier than some other groups."

"And maybe that's why there are so many Jewish doctors." Rona was now smiling.

"You said it; I didn't," Bob said. Then added, "OK, having established that," Bob was feeling totally off the hook, "What about the Jewish language?"

"Yiddish?"

"Yes, Yiddish. Isn't it true that it helps to be phlegmy to pronounce certain words?"

"That's a new one to me," I said. "Can you give me an example or two?"

"Maybe one since I'm not too up on my Jewish, I mean my Yiddish." For the first time he beamed one of his characteristic smiles. "How about 'hot-spur?'"

"Hot-spur? Never heard of it."

"You've used it a number of times. It's one of my favorites. Means being assertive or, trickier in ethic stereotyping terms, pushy." He maintained his smile.

"I get it," Rona said, "Chutzpah. Not 'hot-spur,' though I like you're version. It's right out of Shakespeare and a wonderful malaprop."

Bob then said, "Look at the difference in the way each of us pronounced it--chutzpah. With all your phlegm you made it sound so authentic, so rich. It's a word made for people who produce lots of mucous."

Getting into it, I said, "Here are some others for you. Yiddishisms that sound better with phlegm flowing--Mishpocha (family), yenta (a gossip), kvech (to complain), gonef (a thief), boychik (a young boy) . . ."

"That one, boy-chick, I could have figured out. I love these!" Bob gushed.

"There are more," I said, on a roll, "Kishkes (intestines, like punch him in the kishkes), bubkes (meaning nothing, as in he has bubkes), nachos (a pleasure), and even kosher. With these it does help to be phlegmy"

Bob was having a wonderful time. And by then so were we.

"And let's no forget all the Jewish foods," I said. "Mainly what I call the K-foods because they start with the letter K--kugel (or noodle pudding), kasha varnishkas (buckwheat with bow-tie noodles), kreplach (the Jewish version of wantons), of course knishes (potato or kasha filled), kichel cookies, and even kishke (cooked beef intestines)--not my favorite."

Rona made a face and said, "But there are hundreds more," Rona said. "And like most of these even if you don't understand them, they sort of sound like what they mean. Kvech is a perfect example. Complaining just sounds like kvetching."

"What about choch-key?" Bob asked.

"That's another new one to me," I said.

Rona said, "He means tchotchke--a knick-knack."

"I have a whole lot of those," Bob said, "A barn full of 'em. Sally's always after me about them. She says, 'Can't you get rid of those tchotchkes.'"

I said, "Think about how much better that would sound if you had a mouth full of phlegm."

Some of Bob's Tchotchkes

March 16, 2015--Post-Racial America?

To many, the election of Barack Obama signaled that America, at long last, was becoming a post-racial society.

Lost in the euphoria was the fact that Obama lost the white vote to John McCain by 12 percentage points, 55-43, and to Mitt Romney four years later by even more, by 20 points, 59-39. And many of us feel that the personal and vitriolic disdain for Obama shown by Republican lawmakers has as much to do with his skin color as his policies, which, in truth were and are quite middle of the road. Very much including his signature program, Obamacare, a name applied to the Affordable Care Act by mocking opponents who hoped it would fail and that Obama would thereby be eternally stigmatized.

Yes, the same people resented Bill Clinton and tried to bring him down (largely because he was successful and triangulated his way to stealing much of the GOP agenda), but with Obama it has been harsher, more hate-filled.

Even among many young people--Obama's initial natural constituency--racial animus has spilled out into the headiness. Very much including overt racism by over-privledged college students enrolled in elite colleges and universities.

At the University of Oklahoma, for example, a video that went viral shows members of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity chanting racial slurs--

There will never be a nigger at SAE. There will never be a nigger at SAE. You can hang him from a tree.

Though the First Amendment will protect them, the university president, David Boren, closed down the frat house within 24 hours and at least two students were quickly expelled. SAE has deep roots in Southern racism. One of its principles calls for the restoration of Ante Bellum traditions, traditions that before the Cicil War included legalized slavery. It appears that that tradition among some is sadly still alive.

Then at even-more-elite U.C.L.A., members of the student council were caught on video recently discussing what would usually be a routine matter--the confirmation of a second-year student to the university's judicial board. A student who happened to be Jewish.

She was asked by a Student Council member--

Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view?

After doing her best to answer, she was asked to leave the room and for 40 minutes the council debated whether her Jewishness and affiliations with organizations such as Hillel would bias her dealing with "sensitive governance questions."

She was voted down and it wasn't until a faculty advisor intervened and more discussion ensued that a second vote was taken and she was confirmed.

Negative feelings toward Israel on liberal campuses is fueling these kinds of reactions toward Jews. A sad conflation of Jewishness and Israeli government policy.

I have had this experience and thus needed to draw a distinction between myself as a nonobservant Jew while at the same time being a harsh critic of current Israeli governmental policy.

Jews are not by definition Israelis and being Jewish does not require one to support Israeli government policy.

But such is the state of things in post-racial America.

More work needs to be done and a great deal more change is necessary for us as a people to get there.

January 15, 2015--Fanatics All

Do you know what happened to Angela Merkel?

I mean, I thought she was in Paris last Sunday to participate in the Je Suis Charlie march, joining governmental leaders from 40 or so other countries. (As a sidebar--not including the United States which sent the ambassador.)

I may have been hallucinating, but I thought I saw a picture of the front row of marchers with Francois Hollande, president of France in the center, locking arms with Palestinian president Mahmond Abbas on his right and Chancellor Merkel on his left.

But then when I picked up my copy of HaMevasar, the Israeli newspaper of the ultra-Orthodox, there was that same picture but no Angela Merkel.

So either I'm confused or losing it.

Before I could see if the New York Times had anything to say about this, I spoke with a friend who knows a lot about neurology to see if he thinks I'm losing it (yes and no, he said) and about the possibility that the image might have been doctored.

"Send me a link to the HaMevasar picture," he said, and within 15 minutes of my doing so he called to report, "It's obviously Photoshopped. I mean, the editor of the paper had Merkel crudely deleted from the photo. And also a few other female world leaders who were in the first two rows, making it look as if the march was an all-male affair. Just like a . . ."

"Just like an ultra-Orthodox Jewish wedding," I interjected, "where the men and the women attend and participate separately, including dancing with each other."

"Exactly," he said, "And here are a few ironic thoughts. First, they cut out the picture of the chancellor of the country that spawned the Nazis and perpetrated the Holocaust, but the country that now stamps out any manifestations of renewed anti-Jewish behavior and still pays reparations to Israel. Then the paper, HaMevasar, ranted about how the whole Hebdo massacre was about Islamic anti-Semitism, ignoring the fact that the initial victims were mainly French Christians. Finally, they completely ignored the fact that the march in Paris was about defending France's essential freedoms, very much including the right to free expression. And though HaMevasar does mention that the attack was on freedom of the press, it is in a journalistic context that is self-contradictory since by cropping the photo as they did it gives the lie to the very freedom this massacre was planned to stifle."

"Then there was Benjamin Netanyahu's reaction," I said. "On the day after the massacre he sent the French an impassioned letter of condolence that claimed, to quote him, that 'Israel is being attacked by the very same forces that attacked Europe.' As if the arrack on Charlie Hebdo was about Israel rather than about France."

"And he followed it up the next day when he linked the Paris suspects to Israel's enemies, likening the killings to the rockets fired at Israel from the Gaza Strip."

"Talk about chutzpah."

"And can you explain to me how the four Jewish victims of the kosher supermarket shootings all wound up in Israel for a ceremony and burial?"

"As I understand the situation," I said, "only one of the four had any direct connection to Israel. I think he had two chidden living there."

"The other three are either from North Africa or born in France and had no family in Israel. I don't want to be overly cynical," he said, "But it feels as if the Orthodox forces there have co-opted the situation and are representing the attacks in France as being about Israel and anti-Semitism. That is not to say that there isn't a reemergence of anti-Semitism in Western Europe, including France, though mainly from nationalistic forces, and so what Netanyahu and HaMevasar are up to is shameful."

August 7, 2014--Israeli (Jewish) Exceptionalism

The outrage and debate continues over civilian casualties in Gaza and Israel. More accurately, about what has been happening in Gaza. There have been relatively few Israeli civilian causalities and, even if there were many more, the outrage would, by comparison, be muted.

Hamas and the Palestinians are not just the underdogs in this fight--improvised rockets versus jet fighters and smart bombs--but they are also not Jews.

This must be said--being not-Jews means less is expected of the Palestinians.

More is expected of the Jews (and I mean Jews as distinguished from Israelis) because of the Holocaust. Because of it, it goes, Jews should know better when it comes to inflicting harm and worse on innocents--people who are killed or wounded not because they are enemy combatants but because of who they are.

Jews were rounded up and mass murdered in Germany, and in much of the rest of continental Europe, because they were Jews. Not soldiers, not resistance fighters. For this reason, Jews should know better. But they also know that the world stood by largely silent. And thus were complicitous. This complicates matters.

By this logic Israeli Jews, and the rest of us who are Jews, should be very careful about setting upon anyone just because of who they are. We should know that if we allow this, worse perpetrate this, "they" will come for us next. As they have for millennia.

This is the Jews' patrimony. Mine as well.

So here we are today seeing the slaughter of innocents in Gaza. Carried out by Israelis. By Jews.

That is not our patrimony nor the lessons we should have learned from our own history.

All right. Point made.

But there is another, related point to make--

To expect Jews, Israelis to act as if there is something often referred to as Jewish Exceptionalism is to apply a higher standard to them than to any other nation or people.

Where is the equivalent outrage about the United States being responsible for hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan? Yes, a few human rights group keep that tally and attempt to grab an occasional headline. But beyond that there is, again, silence.

How much "collateral damage" (that hideous euphemism that means killing of innocent people), how much has there been in South Sudan or Eastern Ukraine? How widely reported has that been? And what martial etiquettes have been assigned to the Russian-backed forces or the Sudan People's Liberation Army? Certainly not the same as those imposed on Jews and Israelis.

But stories about the 1,400 Palestinians who have thus far been killed--admittedly at least half of them noncombatants--have been on the front page of the New York Times for days. Including yesterday, explicitly, with multicolored graphs distinguishing among different categories of the dead, "Civilian or Not? New Fight in Tallying the Dead in Gaza."

This has the tincture of anti-Semitism.

It is no coincidence that anti-Semetic rallies and confrontations have been erupting in many places in Europe, horrifyingly also in Germany. This derives not just from a long history of festering hatred but from the conflation of Israel and Jews--of a nation with a people.

They, we are not one and the same. Many Jews, including me, though we recognize the existential threat to Israel that Hamas and its tunnels and rockets represent and Israel's right to defend itself, not all Jews support a separate state of Israel or the current reactionary, repressive government.

And thus to expect us to be any better than other people is unreasonable. And since it it expressed so one-dimensionally, and leads so quickly to condemnations and worse, all Jews are wise to have their radar tuned to high. Danger of the old sort is lurking.

June 30, 2014--Ladies of Forest Trace: Alive and Kicking

It was the day after my mother's 106th birthday and I called to run an idea by her.

"I have a theory."

"A what?"

"A theory, a perception I want to ask you about. It's something I've been noticing for the past number of years."

"How big a number? I'm trying to get used to big numbers. But before you tell me about your ideas, I have a related question for you."

"Shoot."

"Is this the way you talk to a mother? About shooting?"

"Sorry, please, ask me your question."

"How did this happen to me?"

"What's the this?"

"To get to this number."

"Oh, you mean your age."

"What else? What other numbers do I have to think about?"

"I'd say, primarily because of DNA."

"Dee-en what?"

"Genetics. You had two sisters who lived to about 102. So good genes run in your family."

"Good other things too."

"I agree with that. But your getting to 106 is about that and also that you had and have an active and stimulating life. They say that contributes to longevity."

"Longevity, short-gevity, they're all the same to me as long as I feel good. And now that my birthday's over--which I do not like to celebrate, I still have vanity about my age--I can get back to feeling as good as it's possible to feel at these sky-high numbers."

She paused to take a deep breath, which I was happy to see since her breathing has been shallow in recent months. "So, already, shoot." She chuckled at that.

"Here's my theory--Remember what years ago Rona and I said to you when you turned 85, about how  . . ."

"That I don't remember."

"Wait, wait, I haven't gotten to it yet. It's something we said to you about 20 years ago. How at that point in your life, rather than thinking always about other people and what they want and expect of you--something you did, devoted your life to to that point--that it was your turn. That if you wanted to you should say and do whatever was on your mind--not censor yourself or think so much about what others might expect of you--and that we would follow your lead. We would not put any pressure on you to think or say or do anything other than what you wanted and seemed right to you."

"This I remember. Rona said that when she got to be my age she'd start drinking and smoking again. That was funny."

"I'm not sure what we said influenced you at all, but it seems to me that since you were at least 90 you've been--how should I put this--feeling, acting more yourself. You speak your mind more, you do more things that feel as if they are what you really want to do than what you think others want. You speak your mind more forcefully. You seem willing to disagree more than in the past. You seem more focused on yourself than on others."

"And this is a bad thing?"

"No, no. Quite the contrary, I'm saying that this new, more assertive you is a good thing. You spent so many years . . ."

"Doing," she whispered, as if she didn't want anyone to hear, "Doing what other people expected."

"That's how it looked to me."

"Even voting the way your father told me to do. I remember that when we walked to the school to vote he would tell me to vote for this person but not that one." She chuckled again, this time it was mixed with a sigh. "As if I didn't know Republicans from Democrats. But, when I got behind the curtain, I did what I wanted."

"I'm glad to hear this. That curtain sums up what I'm trying to say--you could only be yourself, true to yourself, in private. Away from others' influence and expectations."

"I'll tell you something else."

"What's that?"

"All the women I knew did this." She paused, and I tried not to say anything, not to fill the silence. To let her thoughts flow freely.

"That's the way we were brought up. Not to speak our minds. Not to take the lead. Not to disagree. To hold ourselves back. I had sisters who joined the garment union and Bertha marched to demand the vote. But they were criticized for this. By their husbands and even by their father. My father, who said we should have a home, a husband, children and not work, not picket."

"That was how your generation of women was supposed to behave, but . . ."

"No buts. Though this is what was expected of us, still we shouldn't have gone along with it. Some didn't but most did." Again she paused, not to draw me in but to relive those memories and disappointments.

"This included me. And when later women began to talk about liberation and became feminists still, though I was working as a teacher and even was the acting principal of my school, at home I was a wife and a mother. I loved being a mother but being that kind of wife I didn't like so much."

"You were a wonderful mother and . . ."

"I followed in the news what women half my age were doing and demanding and, though I agreed with the ones who weren't shrill or man-haters, I was too old to join them and burn my bra." At that she laughed so full-throatedly she began to cough. "And if I did," she had quickly regained her breath, "burning my bra would have caused a bonfire." Again she laughed. As did I.

"Your father." Again I heard her inhale. "He was a good man. In his way. In a traditional way.  He worked hard, was responsible, accepted the family, which at first didn't accept or like him. He was born in America. All the rest of us came from Poland or Russia. I liked this about him. His being an American. I was proud of that. They thought he was arrogant for being born here and because his parents came from Austria. Can you imagine?"

"I can. Back then that was not uncommon."

"It's so different now? Where you come from? Not everyone is happy with immigrants. They forget where they came from."

"True enough."

"And your father was a strong man. A strong person. He made me feel secure. I still had fears from my childhood in Poland. From the pogroms. He protected me from that. Not the pogroms. Thank God we didn't have these in America. But places were restricted. Even in the Catskills. Some hotels had signs that said, 'No Jews-No Dogs.' In my lifetime I saw those signs. But they didn't bother your father. He felt as if he belonged and because of him I belonged too. And was safe."

"I know he also could be a difficult man. Severe and harsh at times. Actually, often."

"He was never successful enough for him to feel like a true man. He saw others, including in the family, doing better and it upset him. It made him angry and he took much of that out on me. As if it was my fault. I tried to protect you from his frustrations. But you know . . ." She paused this time to get control of her emotions.

"But you know, though I saw it as my role to do this--to let him be himself, to accept that and to protect you--though I did this, wanted to do it, saw it to be my responsibility to do this, it came at a price."

"I think I understand."

"But back to your theory," she had regathered herself, "which caused me to remember all this. Though my memory isn't what it used to be. You are saying that you are seeing something different in me."

"Yes. Definitely. To use a word many are using these days, you seem more authentic."

"You mean I haven't been?"

"Not exactly. But for some years now you seem to be more your true self. If that's helpful."

"I think I understand."

Though concerned I might be pushing too hard, still I asked, "Do you agree?"

"With?"

"That for the past ten to fifteen years you have been different?"

"I have to think about that for a moment. As I just said, there's a lot I forget. So it's hard to remember myself from so long ago." I sensed her struggling to recall the past. "Maybe, maybe . . ." She trailed off.

"It's OK, Mom, we can talk about this another time. I don't want to overtax you."

"You can tax me all you want. Everyone does. I just paid my quarterlies."

"I meant . . ."

"Maybe I am different. How long ago did you say this was?"

"Ten, fifteen years ago."

"And when did your father die?"

"I'm not good at remembering dates. Maybe 15, 18 years ago."

"So you see?"

"The relationship between Dad and . . ."

"Me, as you would put it, coming into my own."

"That's interesting. Really interesting. What about . . . ?"

"That's just what I was about to tell you." I'm not sure how she knew what I was going to ask. "All the girls here. It's the same thing with them. Those who came into their own. It was after their husbands . . . . They may have loved them but . . ."

"I see where you're going with this. How after . . ."

"It's a terrible thing to admit," my mother said, again after not saying anything for a moment, "Sad how they had to  . . . before . . . I . . . we could . . . But yes . . . I . . . we . . ."

"So I need to amend my theory," I stepped in to interrupt those painful recollections, "To consider the reasons you became, were able to become an active feminist at an older, geriatric age," I opted for that euphemism, "I mean, not just you but some of the ladies."

"Many."

"Many?"

"Many of the ladies. They also are different and . . ."

"And?"

"And if you live long enough it can happen. Anything."

June 24, 2014--Cousin Henry-Hank-Henri

Cousin Hank ran out of lives on Sunday and his funeral is this morning.

He faced death so many times, including over the years being placed in hospice care but then reviving, that we came to take for granted every time he was sent to the ICU that this was just another example of Hank being Henry.

When he first joined the family, marrying Cousin Nina, he was introduced to us as Hank, a familiar form of his real name, Henry. But years later, when I came to know he was in fact Henri, these name variations made perfect sense. They were just another iteration of Jewish immigrant life--get anglicized so one could try to "pass," avoid quotas, maybe get into college, attempt to slip through life unscathed, and, if possible, eek out some measure of happiness.

Henry-Hank-Henri managed to achieve all of this while growing more in love with Nina over nearly 65 years.

To me, coming of age in post-World War Two Brooklyn, he was the only family exotic.

There were members of the family who came from Europe--my mother included--but they were Middle-European shtetl Jews, and we lived in a neighborhood among so many others that neither their Yiddishkeit, foods, customs, nor consciousness seemed out of the ordinary. Indeed, they and the lives they led were the ordinary.

Henry-Hank-Henri was to me anything but ordinary.

His English was German inflected, not Polish-Russian-polyglot English. He was from Austria, not an obliterated village "near Warsaw." He drank espresso black, smoked unfiltered French cigarettes, and during the din of family gatherings remained non-judgementally detached, puffing and sipping, taking it all in as if we were the exotics.

For a kid dreaming of getting away, of making something different of my life, I was not thinking about wandering around in the Pale of Settlement searching for my Polish-village roots but wanted something cosmopolitan. Not that I at the time knew what cosmopolitan was, but Henry-Hank-Henri had the aura of that difference and I spent a lot of time studying him.

Secretly, I tried black coffee (hated it) and, with candy cigarettes, practiced holding them between my second and third fingers as Henri did. I also took to ordering Compari and Soda--or as he would ask for it, "Compari-Soda," as an homage to him.

Sad to say, the last time we were together, for the first time I asked him questions about his earlier life, a life up to then I had only imagined and shaped for my own transgressive purposes.

What he shared did not diminish my own version of his life and genealogy.

He indeed was Henri.

October 23, 2013--Zwerg

It seems everyone I know has become interested in genealogy.

Up to now I thought that strange--what, after all, is important about knowing you had a great-great grandfather who was a colonel or general in the Civil War or (like me) a horse thief? What does any of this say about anyone? Does it make you more worthy if you had an accomplished ancestor or diminish you if a distant relative was "only" a scrivener?

I got the "Roots" thing. For people who were ripped from their homeland, put in chains, and shipped here as slaves where their history was stolen from them, to find connections to Africa and distant families and nationalities made sense to me. That was about identity, not a search for previous family accomplishments.

It felt fundamental, not an act of vanity.

That's cynical me talking. I'm sure for those who use ancestry.com there are all sorts of interesting and good reasons they root around in their family's past.

Then someone sent me an e-mail asking if a certain Lisa Zwerling was a relative of mine.

I said yes and yes. That there are at least two of them--my first wife who, after we divorced, kept Zwerling as her last name, and another Lisa Zwerling who is an executive producer for ABC.

When I checked out the link my friend sent about the Lisa's, there was another that offered to provide information about the etymology of family surnames. Without looking anything up, I knew Smiths descended from ancestors who were iron mongers and Coopers, barrel makers. But when it came to Jewish family names, when my people in the past were required to take on family names, those frequently assigned to them by anti-Semetic officials were often derogatory.

Sephardic Jews in what is now Spain as early as the 10th or 11th centuries took on last names but it wasn't until the 18th and 19th centuries that Ashkenazi, or German Jews were forced to have last names if they wanted legal emancipation.

I knew about how Schwartz was from the German for "black" or "devil." Or why there were so many Jewish Golds, Goldbergs, Goldsteins, and Goldmans--because one of the calumnies associated with Jews was (and often is) the claim that we were gold hoarders, jewelers, and usurers.

But then there are other Jewish names that are quite benign, even affectionate. Gorelik, for example, is the nickname for someone who had a house fire; and Geller the nickname for someone with red hair. Then Stein is for someone living near rocky ground.

But what about Zwerling? For years I have been curious about that--what is its etymology? I was told we were once Zwerdlings, but some Zwerdlings for some reason dropped the D and became Zwerlings. But then what does Zwerling or Zwerdling mean?

Someone once said, "pesky little sparrow"; but though this could be a good name for many Zwelings (me included), I could never verify it.

Then, yesterday, via the same etymology website my friend sent, I discovered that Zwerlings may actually once have been Zwerglings. The addition of that G made it quite a mouthful and I can understand my people jettisoning it.

But if in fact we were once Zwerglings, that means we were named for zwergs, which in turn was derived from the Old High German dwergaz--dwarfs.

So though my father was for his time a towering six-feet tall and my brother and I are six-three and then some, we apparently come from a family of dwarfs.

Not that I have anything against little people, but you get my point about this ancestry research?