Good to see you back here Michael. What a strange campaign it certainly has turned out to be. I remember mentioning to a few friends before the election that my hope was (while still somewhat undecided) that at least a McCain/Obama election would elevate the level of rhetoric in presidential campaigns (especially considering McCain's own experience being run through the mud in 2000). And yet we have seen the level of discourse just drop and drop and drop as each month has gone by. In the process we never really had a chance to even understand the substantive differences between the candidates. 

Take heart though...the inevitable crashing defeat today could just stand to be a lesson in the ineffectiveness of pandering to the religious right. Or I could be entirely wrong and it will only push the GOP further right, framing McCain as never "one of theirs." Nonetheless it should be interesting to see what the long term implications are of this election.

I would take issue with the absolute statement that the Jewish community has been entirely silent (for example the Heksher Tzedek movement). But certainly it has been slow and not nearly enough. The Rubashkin affair of course just verified what many of us already knew/thought (umm, or read) that turned us to vegetarianism.

That said I also would have been intrigued to know Philip and Hannah's thoughts on PETA's useage of Shoah-parallels in ads. Many of PETA's methodologies ultimately hurt the very legitimate issues that the organization raises regarding animal welfare (and all of the other corresponding issues connected to meat consumption). Rather than depending on the veracity and legitimacy of their cause, the organization often relies on shock tactics rather than reasoned debate and argument. Such is the state of political conciousness these days I suppose.

And please tell me how someone can be "overeducated"? What bad thing happens when one learns too much?

Decades and decades of student loan payments?

You are correct in saying that it isn't any different than the view of some Jews. That doesn't make Hagee's view anymore valid or less offensive. All it means is that there are some rabbis who have views just as offensive as the bigot John Hagee (moving away from his Jewish tripe, please see his comments on Catholicism and homosexuality). I also think that it is a bit of an overstatement to say that it is a "widely held view" (certainly some strands of Hassidism).

Yaakov, re: your Cyrus parallel, I think it is a little unfair.  As far as my sense of ancient history goes, Cyrus would have had very little for the Jews to be wary of in the same way that we have much to be offended by from John Hagee.

as evidenced by their spiced pumpkin donut.

In other news, I am planning a protest of Mario Batali's wearing of a brown shirt.

There is, of course, also the irony that kaffiyeh-like headgarb has been worn by any number of peoples throughout history including...bum badda bummm...Jews!

Oy.

Malkin would have a heartattack if she found out about the zabhia halal KFC near me.

Aww come on Craig...I'm mildly sane. Though some have doubted my sanity upon leaving The Grande Apple for More Midwestern Ventures.

Oh, and in the time that this post has been up, Benny Morris has already changed his opinion and historical view three times over.

Goodness..reading some of the comments on here sometimes makes my kippah spin.

Good to hear from you as well, though your assumption is partially correct...I'm right now (somewhat) dutifully reading and studying for my major field exams.

So, in short, the answer to your questions are yes, yes, yes and...yes. Health related to be sure (was part of larger anti-masterbation and "cooling down of the body") crusades, ethics in the sense of "liberation" from a violent lifestyle (that they linked to abolitionism) and religious in that it touched on ideas of Xtian perfectionism and was originally formulated by a Presbyterian minister and had heavy links to the Church of Christ (is there a church not of Christ?) in Philly. Somewhere right after the Civil War it shifts though from being an entirely internally based philosophy of improving oneself to becoming more animal-focused and anti-vivisection based by about 1870 (based out of that bastion of leftism, Oberlin College). I guess I am partially trying to account for that shift.

I don't know Craig, all we can see is a headshot...

There are a few issues here...first--and one that I think is valid--is the issue of religious (though cultural-religious..but religious nonetheless) schools being funded by the public. I think that objecting to this is certainly reasonable, though as Ismail notes you must be consistent in those objections (the Jewish charter schools that have popped up in Florda recently certainly come to mind...non-religious, yet teaching Hebrew and cultural history). Though correct me if I'm wrong, but part of the point with the school was precisely that it wasn't Islamic per se, as much as it was Arabic.  Thus it is conceivable that it could teach about all different types Arab religious groups from a cultural perspective. Personally I am a little muddled on this topic as I don't think there is anything wrong with cultural schools anymore than charter schools like Bronx Science and the like. But I do think obviously some oversight is necessary to monitor religious and state separation.

But then there is a seperate issue that seems to be popping up here that is quite troubling; namely the idea that the school deseves to be under a finer microscope precisely because it is Arabic. And this certainly is scurolous and reeks of McCarthy-esque tactics at the least, and offensively racist at the most.  The idea that the NY City Public School system--with all its bureaucratic oversight--would unwittingly fund a radical madrassa is alarmist at the least. Our public school system for years have most certainly taught propaganda of any number of ways (anyone read a history text book about Reconstruction as a kid?).  The irony that our public school system is being held as the standard against such actions is fairly laughable.  Moreso it is this type of baiting that unfortunately marginalizes, angers and isolates those who are working for constructive dialogue.

Wait...the South is post-racial?? Look, the North certainly has had its fair share of horrible racial hostility through the years, and has often gotten a pass to be sure (living in uber-segregated Chicago the last few years has certainly hammered that point home for me). But really, the South is farther along in race relations?? Really?? I mean the thought that using "boy" towards an African-American in the South isn't a complete hallucination of us annoying Yankees.

Signs that I may, in fact, be getting old; I think I just got a headache reading the word arak...