T P O

T   P   O
The Patient Ox (aka Hénock Gugsa)

G r e e t i n g s !

** TPO **
A personal blog with diverse topicality and multiple interests!


On the menu ... politics, music, poetry, and other good stuff.
There is humor, but there is blunt seriousness here as well!


Parfois, on parle français ici aussi. Je suis un francophile .... Bienvenue à tous!

* Your comments and evaluations are appreciated ! *

Friday, August 5, 2011

" Tooth and Nail " - by Rabbi Naftali Reich







"Tooth and Nail"
-----------
By Rabbi Naftali Reich (*)




Moses knew he had only days to live. Standing on the Plain of Moab near the banks of the Jordan River, he felt the spiritual tug of the Promised Land only a stone's throw away, but he knew he would never tread on its hallowed soil. He called together the Jewish people and prepared them for a future without his leadership.

As he reviewed all the turbulent events that took place from the time of the Exodus until their arrival on the threshold of the Promised Land, Moses uttered a groan of lamentation. "Eichah?" he declared. "How can I bear it?"

The commentaries explain that as he contemplated the troubled past Moses felt a sense of foreboding about the future. In his mind, he followed the sequence of events to their logical conclusion, and thus, he foresaw the destruction of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem that would take place nearly a thousand years later. He foresaw the estrangement of the Jewish people from their Father in Heaven and their banishment from their homeland. In pain and grief, Moses uttered the word eichah, which is also the eponymous first word of Lamentations, otherwise known as Eichah, the book which was to memorialize the national tragedy. Therefore, we traditionally read this verse in the chanting style unique to Lamentations.

What did Moses see in the past and present that convinced him that a great national tragedy lay in the future? How did he discern the eventual breakdown in the relationship between the Jewish people and the Creator?

The commentators explain that contentiousness derives from a fundamental lack of faith. If a person has a deep and abiding faith in Hashem, he understands that nothing happens without Hashem's approval. Therefore, if he suffers at the hands of another person, he recognizes it as a test from Hashem. His first reaction is to look into himself and correct his inner flaws. His second step is to deal with the situation gently, ethically and honorably, just as Hashem would want him to deal with it.

If a person lacks faith, however, he is not convinced that Hashem is behind the injustice he has suffered. On the contrary, he is convinced that he alone controls his destiny. Therefore, when he perceives an attack, he has no time or patience for conciliation and the niceties of ethical conduct. He is prepared to fight tooth and nail for his rights.

When Moses considered the combative nature of the Jewish people, he realized that their faith was flawed. Sadly, he understood that these flaws would eventually widen into fissures and create a chasm between them and their Father in Heaven. This was clearly a road that headed for disaster.

A young soldier was assigned to a brigade commanded by a famous general. The soldier was excited about being in the general's brigade, but he came into serious conflict with his platoon sergeant.

Whenever the sergeant gave him an order, he would argue interminably and seek ways to extricate himself. The sergeant grew furious and punished the soldier every time he did not obey instantly.

Things went from bad to worse, until one day the soldier struck his sergeant in anger.

The soldier was arrested and court-martialed. The general presided at his trial.

"Young man," said the general, "you stand accused of gross insubordination against me."

"Oh no, sir," said the soldier. "You must be mistaken. I have nothing but respect and admiration for you. My problems are with the sergeant."

"I am afraid you are the one who is mistaken," said the general. "Who do you think gave the sergeant command of his platoon? It was me. Who do you think assigned you to his platoon? It was me. If you had brought your complaints to me, I would have listened. But if you strike the man I appointed, it is insubordination against me."

In our own lives, we find ourselves in highly litigious world. Everyone around us is concerned about his rights and prerogatives and is ready to go to war to defend them. It makes for stressful living conditions, because we always find ourselves contending with our neighbors and associates, with the insurance company, the phone company, even the grocer on the corner. And even when we win, we often find ourselves emotionally exhausted and frazzled. But if we could reach into ourselves for an extra measure of faith, we would recognize the vicissitudes of modern life as a test of our relationship with Hashem, and we would respond on a spiritual level. Instead of anxiety and stress, we would enjoy peace and serenity.
___________________
(*) source: http://torah.org/learning/legacy/5770/devarim.html

Thursday, August 4, 2011

A Thousand Cuts - by U.S. Rep. Barney Frank







A Thousand Cuts
--------
Barney Frank
OP-ED / July 30, 2011


In bits and pieces, conservatives attack Wall Street reforms.

SOME CAUSES are more easily sloganized than others. “Let’s Re-deregulate Derivatives’’ has a certain rhythm, but it doesn’t sell well politically. So the conservative ideologues who want to roll back the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and return to a time when there were fewer regulations to restrain the reckless behavior of the financial-services industry, avoid saying so directly. Instead, they engage in indirect assaults which, if successful, will recreate the conditions that led to the crisis and caused millions of Americans to lose their jobs or homes.

Conservative opponents of the law, with a majority of Americans against them - every poll shows that financial reform is broadly supported - hope that the public is too distracted by the showdown over the debt limit, a slow economic recovery, and two wars that it won’t notice the stealth attack on that law.

These opponents rely on collateral, but damaging, attacks to disguise their effort to undo the reform.

¦ Catch 22.

House Republicans have drastically reduced the funding needed by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to adopt rules to regulate derivatives - the financial instruments that made AIG a symbol of financial destruction and allow speculators to drive food and energy prices higher. They then say that because the rules have not been adopted it is impossible to create any rules at all.

¦ Defying the laws of physics. Opponents of financial reform argue that they must roll back regulation of American firms to put them on “a level playing field’’ with their foreign competitors. But European financial institutions also argue that they are the victims of a playing field which tilts in favor of American firms. These unlevel playing fields - if they exist - defy the laws of physics because everyone claims to be on the bottom.

¦ “I’m only doing this for your own good.’’ Those wishing to free large financial institutions of regulation argue that requiring banks to have sufficient capital will cause small businesses to suffer. Conservatives pretend to defend the little guy while they carry water for the big guys. They claim that an independent agency to protect consumers against predatory practices will actually hurt consumers by depriving them of products which - although they may appear harmful - will prove ultimately to be in their best interest.

¦ Throwing a temper tantrum. Senate Republicans, lacking the votes to roll back Wall Street reform, have blocked it by hijacking the constitutional provision that requires the Senate to advise and consent regarding nominations. They refuse to confirm anyone to run the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau unless the law is rewritten to substantially weaken it. Having lost the legislative battle over financial reform, they are throwing a temper tantrum in defiance of the Constitution. This is especially ironic for a political movement that claims that it is the most faithful defender of the constitutional spirit.

Those seeking to undermine the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act are in the difficult position of having to persuade the American people that our problem is not the reckless financial practices that led to the worst economic disaster in 80 years, but rather new rules designed to reduce the chance that it will happen again.

But they understand one important principle of debate - try to refrain from saying something that almost no one will believe. So they do not come right out and state that derivatives should be re-deregulated or that consumers need no protection. Instead, they are trying to induce mass amnesia while they try to recreate the conditions that led to the economic mess we are in today. But those of us who fought to adopt the law are determined to keep them from succeeding.
________________________________

U.S. Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts is coauthor of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.