Total Recall

The two people pictured above are my dad, Adrian Mirvish, and my mom, Lissa Rechtin. My dad’s a philosophy professor at CSU Chico, and my mom’s a child psychiatrist at Kaiser Permanente. Their jobs cumulatively pay pretty well, and the 5 of us in my nuclear family are acutely aware of how lucky we are; nonetheless, the family does have many sizable drains on finances. As regular readers know, I’m a student at UC Berkeley; as the enormous percentage of those few and (hopefully) proud readers who are also close friends of mine know, my older brother, Ezra, is a medical student at the University of Pittsburgh, and my younger brother, Asher, is set to enroll at UC Davis. The price of having 3 kids living away from home while enrolled in institutions of higher learning is, as comedians with no original material will tell you, significant. My family also lives in a house big enough for 5 in San Francisco, with a correspondingly expensive mortgage. We are in the process of paying off two cars. Taxes are significant on a doctor’s salary. My dad, lamentably, has to pay for fairly regular dental work; I, as the inner circle will already be aware, am on a bevy of fairly costly ophthalmic medication; my mom takes an expensive osteoporosis pill. We also all like to own warm clothing and indulge in some food on a fairly regular basis. My parents pay for all of the above and much, much more.

An unusual election is taking place in Berkeley tomorrow and the day after, polling the student body as to whether or not to remove ASUC Senator John Moghtader from office. For the uninitiated, the ASUC is a worthless governmental institution, one which gets nothing done (as a dual result of widespread incompetence and constitutionally-granted power that doesn’t entitle it to accomplish much under the most ideal of circumstances), yet constitutes a very sizable drain on university finances. John Moghtader is a fully competent officer of this hopeless legal body, whose threatened removal from office stems not from illicit activity or conduct unbefitting a Senator, but from the personal vendetta of a small group of UC Berkeley students. The details on this are as follows:

Senator Moghtader also serves as the president of a student group known as Tikvah: Students for Israel, devoted to Israel advocacy on campus. On November 13, 2008, on an Eschelman Hall balcony overlooking a concert being held on Lower Sproul Plaza by the Zionist Freedom Alliance, an (in the eyes of this direct eyewitness) exceedingly minor physical altercation broke out between Israel and Palestine student advocates. The organization of this concert had seen significant effort and input at the hands of members and associates of Tikvah, and it was one of these, Berkeley alum Gabe Weiner, who was most actually involved in the scuffle. Moghtader himself was at the time in the area of the so-called “fight” but remained visibly uninvolved.

The recall campaign has been run by members and friends of the Palestine advocacy group most associated with the counter-demonstration that served as the basis of the fight, Students for Justice in Palestine. A number of these have been people involved in the altercation themselves, or else friends of participants, such as Husam Zakharia, the man who (as I can directly attest) started the “fight” by punching Weiner in the right cheek. They claim that Moghtader’s behavior in light of the event – which, as far as a number of eyewitnesses and the District Attorney of Alameda County can tell, was limited to being nearby – was unbefitting of an ASUC Senator, and that, for this reason, the democratically-elected official needs to be removed from office.

I almost wish there was any more to the charge than that, but there isn’t: the only ostensible reason Berkeley senior Yaman Salahi and his like-minded compatriots are seeking to have Moghtader removed from office is his demonstrably nonexistent participation in the events of that evening. This can only lead me to believe that the real motivation behind the campaign has less to do with anything Moghtader has done than with what he represents to Salahi and his fellow members of SJP: a political opponent, one whom they simply wish hadn’t found enough support to win office in the first place. My late, great friend Dan Kliman immediately diagnosed the campaign as a “witch hunt,” and he was right. Regardless of where one stands on Israel/Palestine or any other pertinent political issue, it should be clear from the evidence that Moghtader did not do anything to warrant removal from office – that this entire grandiose production is based on nothing more than petty resentment, and that the cause is a repugnant if magnificently-orchestrated sham.

Yet it gets a good deal worse: by dint of the evil miracle that is modern bureaucracy, the recall election is going to cost the University of California $25,000 – a bill which goes directly to the taxpayers. Admittedly, particularly spread across everyone who pays the University, $25,000 is not that much money (for scale, the projected California budget for 2009-10 is $135 billion.) Nevertheless, especially in light of the widely-acknowledged financial difficulties the United States and all its constituent parts find themselves in, any new addition is a crime.

I am unrepentant about my political stances: I am myself conservative (and just for the record, you’d do well not to equate that to “Republican”) and stand firmly in support of the State of Israel. This means that though I think that debates in Berkeley about the situation in the Middle East are a stupid and worthless enterprise – dividing a populace as they do and, let’s face it, having as nonexistent an impact on the Middle East as they do – I still believe it my duty to defend my political beliefs when they are assailed on campus. In essence, this means that when Salahi and company attack Senator Moghtader’s ASUC position because they disagree with him on grounds irrelevant to his post, I am both ideologically obligated and personally happy to argue the charges and do whatever I can to come to his aid. However, I am adamant that this responsibility does and absolutely should not extend to my mom and dad – both unflinchingly wonderful both as parents and as people – who sacrifice far too much for the good of the family already, and for whom ANY additional burdens are not only uncalled for, but also, I’m convinced, morally reprehensible.

My situation could not be further from unique: in all likelihood, there is no family out there that could not use any extra money they could get their hands on. Accordingly, there should be no one out there willing to outlay money that could – inevitably must – be used to pay mortgages, fund down payments, buy food or clothes or medicine, or even (heaven forfend) simply enjoy life to instead collectively fund an isolated case of puerile, narcissistic greed. That Salahi and co. are bothering the public to win that 3:15 fight at the flagpole on the proverbial schoolyard playground of life makes me angry; that they’re succeeding to do so at the expense of innocent people across the state makes me absolutely furious, and if, dear reader, you’ll forgive my forcing feelings upon you, it should do the very same to you.

Of course, as everyone is aware, it’s too late to stop the election: too late to amend the constitution to allow an ASUC Judicial Council to dismiss transparently frivolous suits; too late to stop the ASUC from accepting a laughably insufficient online petition; and much too late repair the abysmally-worded bylaws that allowed this entire monstrosity to take place after those first two failures had occurred. The $25,000 are already spent, and so in some sense, the outcome of the election itself is irrelevant. Yet I beg all who are entitled to vote to go out of their way into the wet, gray abyss of Berkeley to vote no on removing Senator Moghtader from office for two reasons:

First, simply, because a detached, discerning mind should come naturally to the conclusion that it’s the right decision. Second, because only by stopping this witch hunt where it currently stands can we, the students of UC Berkeley, assure that when, in the future, the University’s twin jewels of illustrious incompetence, the administration and ASUC Senate, fail to do anything/enough to prevent a similar event from recurring, history will have already shown that the student body is wholly unwilling to be party to such vainglorious horseshit.

For yourselves, for me, for our parents, for everyone - get out and vote NO on the recall of Senator John Moghtader.

(The online voting site can be found here. Thank you.)

This is 48% Off?

Today, an article in the Daily Cal (see here) reported that the ASUC Senate has decided that the impending recall election could follow less strict guidelines than a normal one, meaning a price tag of $25,000, instead of $48,000. Good tidings, no?

Admittedly, anything that saves taxpayers $23,000 is great news; still, I can't get excited when our Senatorial putzes are still wasting such a gigantic sum of cash. To put it in perspective by citing a few examples, with $25,000, I could:

(a) Buy a 1999–2002 Mercedes-Benz E55, according to Car and Driver; (b) legally purchase the entire discographies of my top-20 favorite bands and artists on vinyl, CD, cassette, and 8-track tape; (c) purchase a surplus eyeball on the North Korean black market for replacement surgery; (d) comfortably live and go to school in Berkeley for a year; (e) buy a catapult to protect my loved ones; (f) order a Slovenian mail-order bride and hire an idiot savant to teach her the fine art of counting cards, so she could earn me a modest fortune; or (g) redo my house's kitchen, among other things.

Instead, we're spending it settling a petty grudge, and regardless of whether or not Senator Moghtader is removed from office, the money will have already been wasted. Even more than to prevent the miscarriage of justice I've been writing about since November, then, Senator Moghtader needs to be kept in office to prevent setting a dangerous precedent - one which could pave the way for frivolous recalls for years to come. We already have to pay for one useless election a year; let's leave it at that.

It's decision '09... and for once, it means something. Don't just get out the vote, get the vote the fuck out - and vote NO on removing Senator John Moghtader from office.

Happy Happy Happiness is a Warm Gun

Yesterday, I found myself walking around Sproul Plaza with a distinctly unusual sense of contentment. The environment was delightfully calm, tablers and flyerers having already packed up for the day. I was wearing a newly purchased sweatshirt; this allowed me to enjoy the crisp air while feeling comfortably warm – and looking snazzy, if I do say so myself – and with the sweatshirt on, I was looking forward to donating the old one I had replaced it with to a homeless dude. (It was stained enough that a student couldn’t reflect well on his colleagues while wearing it, but still in pretty good shape for someone less image-conscious.) To top it all off, I’d just bought myself a Churro, and was lost in its sugary, doughy goodness. Truly, it was a happiness in which I felt secure. Berkeley’s response was so immediate and so perfect I had to stop and marvel.

As I reached the corner of Telegraph and Bancroft, I heard and then saw something I’d been dreading for months: the triumphant return of my first mortal enemy, The Happy Man.

As reported in the Daily Cal some 3-and-a-half years ago (see the article here), Happy Man is J.J. Chin, a native of Taiwan and graduate of the University of Utah – I daresay the second most unloved one in the Bay Area, behind 49er “quarterback” Alex Smith. The near-septuagenarian stands on a precariously balanced bucket all day long, holding up a sign featuring the messages he receives from god while chanting that ubiquitous, obnoxious mantra, “Happy, happy, happy,” on an infinite loop.

Back in my first semester at Berkeley, the only thing that would get me through my morning chemistry classes was the thought of an eventual lunch break at Subway, across the street at the same intersection. This son of a bitch ruined that for me every time, shouting just loud enough for me to hear it faintly over the sound of “My Heart Will Go On” on the radio and my chewing. It wasn’t just that he was interrupting my lunch that pissed me off, though: it was the shit he had written on his signs.

It turned out, Happy Man doesn’t like white people or Jews. His signs usually contained some rant about the satanic George Bush and his rouges’ galley of associates, but they made it bitingly clear to anyone who actually stopped to read them that his main problem with the man was his being white. His constant criticism of Israel worked in the same vein, complete with allegations of Jews everywhere running the world. That blood libel charges never made it into his repertoire was a blessing that can only be attributed to his apparent inability to speak the English language, despite having lived in America for 45 years. That the man’s never gotten into any trouble despite his racist diatribes can only be attributed to the Berkeley Doctrine, which firmly establishes that prejudice against white people is both moral and fair.

With H. in the Oval Office, the name has changed on the sign but the sentiment remains the same – proving once and for all that this is a man with no particular political agenda, rather just an urge to spread his unflinchingly racist prophecies to everyone unfortunate enough to be within a sandwich-eating radius. The only thing more repugnant than the asshole himself is the fact that so many people get a kick out of him.

I’d like to get a kick out from under him.... I need a Churro.

Hendel's Messiah

An important part of the hostility of Berkeley that has to this point been neglected in blog coverage is antagonism to religiosity, stemming both from haters’ internal conflicts about religion and the glib self-satisfaction endemic to academia. On that note, let’s explore Professor Ron Hendel.

I encountered Hendel this morning in Jewish Studies 101, a course that offers an overview of the various professors associated with Jewish courses by having a different one give a lecture each week. Today was the first such lecture, purportedly centered around the topic “The Hebrew Bible and its Historical Contexts.” As it ended up happening, the lecture had little to do with the Hebrew Bible itself, and equally little to do with its historical contexts; instead, it was little more than a 40 minute session explaining that nothing described in the early parts of the book of Genesis ever happened, which we can be sure of for the scientifically credible reason that Hendel and Co. say so.

Now, I have no problem with non-believers, but I maintain that they have no more proof that god doesn’t exist than I have that he does, and I absolutely oppose people who dismiss religion out of hand. As the talk progressed, Hendel went on to say that the Bible’s fictitiousness is irrelevant, because of the “cultural memory” it provides to those who believe in it (in this case, giving a moral compass and communal identity to Jews). Yet he did not explain of his own volition why we could be certain that the 7 days of Creation were a crock, nor did he provide any such insight – knowledge that has eluded man for millennia, but which he evidently has access to – when prodded by his audience.

As a consequence, I ended up learning more about the man himself than I did about what he was supposed to be teaching. I learned that while his wife was in labor and asking why it hurt so much, he answered by quoting the line in Genesis that deemed it punishment for the disobedience of Adam and Eve in Eden. I learned that when his kids came home from school excited about the Pilgrim-Indian cooperation on Thanksgiving, he explained that Pilgrims were actually an extremely “intolerant” people, and that only by his strength of will did he refrain from continuing that had his children been at Plymouth in 1621, they would have been burned at the stake as heretics.

Hendel’s dismissiveness of his students spoke to a man disdainful of his religious heritage; his treatment of his family spoke to a man unkind to the people that surround him (I can only hope the image isn't representative) and indignantly sure of the credulity bestowed upon him by his PhD. Yet it wasn’t a stuffy professor unflinchingly faithful to the work done by him and his colleagues that gave us a lecture this morning. Instead, it was a geeky young boy who’d been beaten up because of his fondness for school and his corrective orthotics, taking revenge on his tormentors the only way he could – by getting paid to attack the religious beliefs he’d never agreed to sign up for, under the protective umbrella of academia.

If smarmy childishness is what Professor Hendel’s gotten out the “cultural memory” he’s allegedly an expert on, he’s missed the point entirely. And those of us who found that out this morning were not impressed.