Nov 10, 2008

more impressions from the debate

The following is a bit long, but is well-thought out and well-written. A friend of mine sent me his thoughts from the debate....and who he thinks should be supported for mayor

Impressions from the debate


Like (almost) all the people that attended the debate last night at Beis Tefilah between two of the mayoral candidates, Shalom Lerner (SL) and Moshe Abutbul (MA), I also came with a pre-defined decision about who I would vote for (SL) and the debate did not change my mind, but rather only strengthened my view (not to vote for MA).

With that disclaimer in mind, I would like to share some of my impressions from the debate (also based a bit on the candidates' election material as well as discussions I had with other participants after the event).

I think that the issues can be divided into three topics: Blah-blah, irrelevant issues and the main issues.

1. Regular Election blah-blah.

Each candidate promised that, if elected, he will clean up the city, solve all the problems with the youth, the education system, the parking, Kvish 10, Olim, Vatikim, old BS, RBS, English, Hebrew, Hilonim, Datiyim, Haredim, the budget, the environment, etc., etc., etc.

There is not much difference between the candidates in these issues.

I do believe that both the candidates have good qualities, much experience and many accomplishments, and will actually improve the city services for the good of the residents.

2. Issues that differentiate the candidates (that I think are irrelevant)

There are a number of issues that were mentioned (by the candidates, in their literature, etc.) that are totally irrelevant to the suitability of the candidate to function as a good mayor.

- English – I don't think that SL's English (or MA's lack of) will make either one a better or worse mayor. It may be more convenient for an Anglo new Oleh to speak to SL, but in Israel the language is Hebrew. Both agree that there is a need for some English speaking customer service in the Iriyah.

- Similarly, MA's being a "native" Israeli doesn't make him any better at dealing with the "Israelis" in the Iriyah. SL has been in Israel 2 decades also "speaks the language" just as well.

- MA's background in education, as well as SL's background in finance, are both fine qualities that will help them both in their jobs, and I'm sure they will have a slightly different way of working because of their different professional backgrounds, but once again, it is an issue that is not relevant in differentiating a mayor with a staff of professionals that will deal with the various departments. (Although I do feel that SL's financial understanding is more important to run a big organization than MA's background in education – as our incumbent mayor Danny Vaknin who also was a teacher and principal proves.)

- MA's big plan to make a "Minhelet" in RBS (some sort of mini city hall department specifically run by RBS residents) is also nonsense. If the sewer in front of my house is overflowing, what difference does it make if I call the maintenance department in the Iriyah in "old BS" who sends someone to fix it, or if I call the RBS-resident secretary in the RBS minhelet offices in RBS, who will then call the maintenance department in the Iriyah in "old BS" who sends someone to fix it? I do not understand what the minhelet will accomplish? The Iriyah can (and should) upkeep RBS, as well as all neighborhoods in the city, without having to open new offices. It won't give RBS any bigger budget and definitely not (and shouldn't) give preference to one part of the city over another. In today's day of telephones and automobiles, there should be no difference where the offices are physically situated. (Also, I understand that there was one some sort of similar Vaad Shechunah years ago which was similar to MA's minhelet which actually didn't do much and was disbanded after realizing that it was not needed.)

- There were also a number of other small issues that many of the participants noted that seem to may make one candidate better/worse than the other, that also may or may not be too relevant to running a city, and is more a matter of "style".

Many participants seem to think that MA was a better speaker than SL. (although there were some of the women that were quite upset that MA did not even once look towards the women during the entire speech – that may or may not show something about his personality).

I also was impressed by his method of speaking and his use of rhetoric and also think that he is a better public speaker than SL, but I also think that it is not so much of an important issue. You shouldn't elect a mayor (or a US president for that matter) just because he is a better public speaker than his opponent. Everyone will agree that Danny Vaknin is a speaker that would have outdone both of them – and we see what type of mayor he has been.

MA started the evening with the fact that it was the "yarzeit" of the murder of Yitzchak Rabin (as well as Rachel Imeinu) and mentioned 3 times! during the debate that "words can kill". Some people felt that saying that was very inappropriate. I also am not sure what he was insinuating and do think that it was a very stupid and inappropriate comment.

3. With keeping in mind that both SL and MA are good, qualified, dedicated and competent candidates for mayor, and either one will, as mayor, work hard to fix up the city for the benefit of the residents – as should be – there are a few issues that differentiate them and that should be that main issues when deciding who to vote for and what type of city you want for the future. In most of these crucial issues, I must admit that I was very disturbed by what I heard from MA and will therefore vote, and urge you all to vote, for SL.

- When SL brought up the issue of the Kanayim (the flag-burning, rock-throwing, women-assaulting anti-state neturei karta etc. residents of RBS B) creating a chilul hashem and that have made Bet Shemesh infamous (rightfully or not) in the "outside" world, and that MA has sided himself many times with these kanoyim, MA's response was some ambiguous statement that he is "for" everybody and that we "can't fight violence with violence" etc.
I do not know if MA has any back-room deal with these kanoyim or what his opinion is about the state or segregated busses etc. But I was fittingly upset with his response.

- MA made coalition agreements wit many of the non-religious (anti-Vaknin) parties in BS. In all the non-Hareidi newspapers (i.e. Temurah) MA is shown as the one single religious person surrounded by all the Hiloni leaders of BS. The promises (i.e. to give place of "biluy" for the youth etc) seem to me that he is trying to show himself as a big supporter of a non-religious BS. He of course doesn't mention that he is of the Shas party, and of course has very, very different ads in the religious RBS advertisements. This is in addition to the "rumor" that there is an "understanding" between them that he will let BS be "taken" by the non-religious and RBS by the hareidim.
In addition, MA has been known to say (refer to the "famous" resido video) that each "group" should have their own area. The hilonim should not come into the hareidi area and the hareidim should not have to go to the hilonin area (this was in reference that the government offices (i.e bituach leumi) should be separated fro hilonim and hareidim). Is this the way he plans on running the pluralistic, mixed city?
Any religious non-hareidi (and I do also include American yeshivish who are significantly different than Israeli hareidi) should be worried about this.

- Another point that bothered me is when SL talked about that after he becomes mayor to work with "everyone" and to give out jobs, resources, etc to every group fairly, (while MA already gave out all the jobs to the parties that signed with him already and has nothing left to offer anyone else). MA answered (to me it seemed like a very condescending way) that whoever joined him now will get "rewarded" and whoever did not join him will not ("will have to take the bus" were his words.) What bothered me more that MA's remarks were the "hooting" of the crowd who seem to like what he said (or really hate Gur).
I don't think that the purpose of this election is just to change the city government with a similar model that rewards his friends and punished those that didn't vote for him!

Finally, and not the least important, has nothing to do with MA or SL as individuals. It is not an issue of which candidate will be a better manager of the city departments. BS/RBS is at a point in the road which may decide the "style" of the city for many years to come. Shas is poring millions of shekels into MA's campaign. It is very, very important to Shas (i.e. for the national Shas party, not important to BS) that BS gets a Shas mayor. Also, all of the more right-wing hareidi leaders and Rabbis (i.e. national Agudah/UJT/Gimel) are pushing MA since it is very important to them also that BS gets a hareidi mayor.

Many dati-leumi, as well as American and more modern, working hareidim (see the TOV party) are worried that RBS will become a "ultra-Hareidi" city following the path of Beitar (which also was once a "mixed" city) Telshe Stone and Kiryat Sefer. Some people may surely think that that may be a good thing and vote accordingly. I myself do actually prefer to live in a religious neighborhood and think that it is very beneficial to me and my family (that being one of the main reasons that I moved here), but I am worried that in the current political situation (in BS and the entire country) that (with all due respect for MA) if Bet Shemesh gets a Shas, hareidi mayor (with connections to the most right-wing ultra-hareidi and kanoyim groups) it will not have a good impact on the future of the city.

Shalom Lerner, whom there is absolutely no disagreement that he is fine, bright, dedicated, accomplished, and honest, as well as religious and learned, and knowing the importance of keeping and helping RBS as a strong Torah-focused neighborhood will be a much better mayor for Bet Shemesh.

Vote accordingly.

11 comments:

  1. Can we get a post with the drasha that RAYLS said today in the GRA shul, in the presence of the rabbonei ha'ir, including RCM?

    If you need a copy, there is probably one in your shul right now.

    Can someone please ask RCM who is the ideal candidate and party to vote for, taking into account what the rosh yeshiva said today about those who dont vote "the right" direction?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I was just looking through some of the recent comments on the debate. It seems that you Rafi and Alon Frank and maybe one or two others were impressed by both Lerner and Abutbul and feel that which ever one gets in, there will be a change in Beit Shemesh for the better. However you both ended off that you will be voting Lerner.
    Now I can understand the people out there who take absolutely no heed of the Rabbanim or Gedolim on any issues, why should they start now by the elections? But I know both of you guys to be G-d fearing jews. Doesn't HaRav Steinman even move you by 1%??? So many Rabbanim and Gedolim have instructed to vote for Abutbul. And you yourself aren't that against it either. You just prefer Lerner. Why wouldn't you want to make a Kiddush Hashem and be mekayem a mitzva of listening to the Gedolim to boot?
    (Don't answer that RCM supports them all cos we all know his approach is closer to abstaining than to endorsing everyone!)
    I am not writing to try to recruit votes for Abutbul. I am just genuinely baffled.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am not a talmid of Rav Steinman, and to me he is just as much a gadol as the Gerrer Rebbe who says to vote Lerner.
    I am following Rav Malinowitzs opinion, that if I was a talmid of Rav Steinman I would be obligated to listen to him. Since I am not, as a matter of fact he has never said two words to me nor I to him, I am not obligated to listen. Rav Malinowitz's "psak" was for his kehilla that we are intelligent enough to make our own decision.

    Being that I can make my own decision, you ask why I do not conduct myself like Rav Steinman says to? I say why choose him? Why not choose the Gerrer Rebbe?

    I did not make my decision base don the Gerrer Rebbe's opinion, but I see no reason to choose Rav Steinmans opinion over his.

    So I ask you, and I do not know who you are and maybe you are a talmid of Rav Steinman, but assuming you are not, why do you choose to follow him?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Another point I would make is that UTJ MK Moshe Gafni has said numerous times that his goal is to protect and fight for the yeshivas. Once a person leaves yeshiva, there are others he can turn to (he said it at least once in response to a question why he did not support a bill that would have helped haredi baalei batim with lower taxes - though I do not remember the details of the bill, and I heard him say it in regards to other things as well - another example had to do with post-yeshiva Haredim in the army) for that help. Degel's job is to help the yeshivas, that's it. Once you leave yeshiva, you are lower priority for Degel.

    That is perfectly legitimate in my opinion. They want to prioriize their work for one specific sector.

    No problem. But dont expect me to vote for you. I am not in yeshiva anymore. Unfortunately perhaps, but that is the reality. I find supporting yeshivas to be a very great endeavor. But I am nto in yeshiva. I work and have a [large] family, and I have personal concerns, and communal concerns that for me take priority over yeshivas.

    So if Gafni says he does not need to work for me, then I have no need to follow him, and vote according to his wishes..

    Oh yeah, one more thing - did you know that Greenberg is Gafni's parliamentary assistant? Did you know that Montag is his nephew? Do you really think the gedolim choose (as if they were actually involved in the process) the best reps for the haredi public or perhaps they just choose those that are the best connected?

    ReplyDelete
  5. another thing, look at Beitar as an example.
    the degel branch there recently had internal voting to decide who would be higher up on the list and get the Deputy Mayor position. The two candidates were a guy named Yossi Shitreet, and a guy named Yitzchak Ravitz. Yes, Ravitz is the son of the Degel MK.

    Turns out Ravitz surprisingly lost to Shitreet, and MK Ravitz is fighting to get Shitreet thrown otu because Degel is an Ashkenazy party and a sfardi shold not be there. He should be in Shas.

    So as long as he was just a voter, and a shlepper, it was ok for him to be in Degel. As soon as he beat out the "son of" for the paying job in city hall, then all of the sudden there is no room for him.

    I dont know if Ravitz won, or will win, his fight or not, but even if he loses it, he will just move his son to another city where he can put him at the head of Degel there.

    Degel HaTorah is a family business. I am not family, so I do not feel beholden to them.

    If I feel like voting for them because I like certain things they do, I will vote for them. If not, not. If I wish to follow their recommendation for mayor, I will. If not, not. I am open to them just as I am open to every other party, as per my needs and concerns.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Do you know how many stories I have heard of Haredi baalei Batim who can't get their kids into schools? Do Gimmel people help? no. often, and I am aware of cases, where it is the gimmel askanim who were the cause for them being rejected, claiming they are not frum enough.

    Now those same askanim have the chutzpah to call these people and demand that they vote gimmel.

    ReplyDelete
  7. does any of this answer your question?

    perhaps I will make these series of comments into a separate post...

    ReplyDelete
  8. The Gerer Rebbe was clearly instructing Gerer chssidim. their intent was to vote differently to what the rest of gimmel are voting. They are doing the same in Jerusalem. Besides for this, no other Gedolim have endorsed Lerner. On the other hand, Rav Steinman, Rav Sheinberg, Reb Michel Yehuda, The Belzer Rebbe, Rav Eliyashiv, Reb Chaim Kaniyevski, Rav Ovadia Yosef, The Vizhnitzer Rebbe etc. have all instructed people to vote Abutbul. They didn't recommend. They instructed. I am not a talmid of any of them and am probably not obligated to listen to any individual Godol. However here, they are all unanimous. there aren't 2 sides to choose from and say I'm going with that godol.
    Anyway, that wasn't my point. What I was asking you is how come if it doesn't make that much of a difference to you anyway, why not go for the option that gives you a mitzva to boot?
    Besides for that, maybe I'll explain to you why I feel Daas Torah IS relevant here.
    At the end of the day, everyone has pretty much the same wish list for Bet Shemesh. We all want cleaner streets, better sewers, less arnona, more classrooms etc. the only question is in what order do we compile the list. The even bigger question is-how on earth DO you put these things in order? They are all important points. On the one hand I want to be sure my son has a classroom (if not, he may hate school and chas veShalom one day drop out). I want cleaner streets (it's a chilul Hashem for every chiloni that drives through a haredi area). I don't want sand in the parks. It's not safe. It causes diseases and worms. On the other hand I want cheaper arnona (will free up money somewhat and ease poverty a little). How the heck do we know what is priority? The only answer is to ask daas torah. The Gedolim and leaders receive a special dose of siyata dishmaya to decide these sort of questions. We all did aliya from chutz laaretz searching for an aliya in ruchniyos (each one for what he feels is his ruchniyos). Nobody came here for the gashmiyos. If so, the most important things on our wish lists should be the ruchniyos issues. How to decide what is the most pressing problem? Only by daas torah. I know you will refute this saying the haredi MKs do not refer to the Gedolim on every issue, but they recieve guidelines. And on the real important issues they do ask. So too is the case with the haredi councilmen. This will also explain why Ravitz will only help the yeshivos. There is a limited amount of times an MK can get up in knesset and be heard. The more he stands up, the less people take notice of him. It's all a matter of prioritising what is really the most important issues to us. Yashivos or taxes. True we have long left Yeshivos, however our children are going to be going there and we all agree that our children are definitely one of the more pressing issues to take care of.

    ReplyDelete
  9. why not go for the option that gives you a mitzva to boot?

    A mitzvah??!!! What mitzvah??!!!
    And don't say "Lo Sasur", it will merely reveal your ignorance in Torah.

    ReplyDelete
  10. 1. If you want cleaner streets, then maybe the schools should start teaching the children that littering is wrong instead of trying to cover up the fact that people in haredi neighborhoods litter by having the city clean up after them.
    But, it will be pretty difficult to get the kids to accept it when they see their parents throwing cigarette butts on the sidewalk.

    2. I don't think that it is very "ruchani" to ignore peoples physical and financial needs in favor of yeshivos. It certainly isn't if you don't have their consent. Although, that perhaps is a question better answered by a talmid chacham, perhaps, a talmid chacham who isn't politically involved and isn't worried about losing his job or what the public will think.

    ReplyDelete
  11. http://theyeshivaworld.com/news/General+News/25754/PHOTOS+-+Rav+Shteinman+Addresses+Ramat+Beit+Shemesh+Elections.html

    R. Shteinman said,
    Chillul Hashem which is worse than Avoida zoro(sic) to vote for Tov?

    Who is making the chillul Hashem here?

    What happened to the days when the rabbonim were also democratically elected?

    ReplyDelete