Shmuley Boteach Wins Republican Primary

Round one to the Bobblehead Rav:

Rabbi. Celebrity confidant. Sex therapist. Voters in New Jersey’s 9th Congressional District will have a chance to elect a representative with all those qualifications and more after Shmuley Boteach won the Republican primary Tuesday night.

Boteach is known for his role as “spiritual adviser” to the late superstar Michael Jackson. The Hasidic rabbi recorded a series of conversations with the King of Pop that he published after his death as a book, “The Michael Jackson Tapes: A Tragic Icon Reveals His Soul In Intimate Conversation.” He has been a frequent fixture on daytime and reality TV, hosting a radio show on Oprah Winfrey’s network and a TLC show, “Shalom In The Home.”

As an author, however, it’s hardly his only notable release. He also put out a series of Judaic sex advice books, with titles like Kosher Sex, The Kosher Sutra, and Kosher Adultery: Seduce and Sin With Your Spouse. One of his causes behind his campaign is a desire to spice up the Republican party’s puritanical reputation with some wholesome family sex.

“We don’t believe that sex is for procreation,” Boteach told The Daily Beast in an interview. “We love children—I have nine kids. And yet we believe in great sex, passionate sex, electrifying sex. Sex is for intimacy, and the Bible makes that absolutely clear.”

He’s considered a longshot in the Democrat-heavy district, which was also the site of a heated primary between incumbent Reps. Bill Pascrell and Steve Rothman, who were pitted against each tother through redistricting. Boteach recently made headlines by publicly offering to moderate their dispute in the tough campaign via a web video.

Oy vey.

Update: The battle between Bill Pascrell and Steve Rothman has gotten really ugly. As in Jew hatred ugly (hat tip: Norm)

Today’s Democratic primary in New Jersey’s Ninth Congressional District — which, due to redistricting, is a contest between two incumbent congressmen, Steve Rothman and Bill Pascrell — has developed into an ugly fight over Israel. Pascrell has courted the local Arab and Muslim community, and Rothman, who is Jewish, has faced attacks over his support for the US-Israeli alliance — and they haven’t been confined to policy disagreements, but have included shrill charges of dual loyalty, a staple of anti-Semitic discourse. From a disturbing report on the race by the Washington Free Beacon’s Adam Kredo:

“One side says, ‘We want this Jew out of office’ and, frankly, it’s pretty unsettling,” Ben Chouake, president of NORPAC, a pro-Israel political action committee based in Englewood Cliffs, told the Free Beacon. “They emphasized [Rothman] is a Jewish congressman.”

It gets worse. Some of the people and institutions that Pascrell has cozied up to are rather sinister:

Pascrell also has embraced Imam Mohammad Qatanani, a controversial Passaic spiritual leader who stands accused by the State Department of hiding a conviction in Israel for having ties to the terror group Hamas.

Update: Pascrell defeated Rothman, meaning he now faces Boteach.

Which means, believe it or not, I would endorse Boteach.

36 thoughts on “Shmuley Boteach Wins Republican Primary”

  1. Jim from Iowa

    If successful, Mr. Boteach would become only the second Jew currently serving as a Republican in the House along with Eric Cantor. This out of about 230 Republican House members. I think he’d have better luck if he made aliyah and ran for a seat in the Knesset.

      1. Jim from Iowa

        While over time the makeup of American political parties does change, Jews historically have felt more at home in the Democratic Party. For at least the last 60 years, progressives have been an integral part of the Democratic Party while conservatives have moved toward the Republicans. This dichotomy would explain secular and Reform Jews tending to be Democrats and the comparatively smaller number of Orthodox Jews in America, if politically active, have tended to join the Republican Party. Additionally, it has been my experience that Orthodox Jews are more likely to focus on the needs of their own community and be less likely than secular and Reform Jews to seek public office to implement broader public policy objectives (although this may be changing).

          1. Jim from Iowa

            Joe Lieberman was also forced to become an Independent, after a significant falling out with fellow Democrats over his support for the Iraq War.

              1. Jim from Iowa

                I guess he’s the exception that proves the rule. Also, when he still did comedy, Al Franken did a great impression of Joe Lieberman. It reminded me of that hen-pecked mailman who appeared as a recurring character on the “Fibber McGee and Molly” radio program (the same guy who did Droopy the Dog).

        1. Indeed, in the States, many Jews, unfortunately, vote blindly for the Democratic party. Why? “My grandfather voted Democrat, my Father voted Democrat, thus I must also vote Democrat, it’s our minhag. I’m a Jew, therefore I’m a Democrat.” Many don’t even bother to find out about the views of the Democrats they blindly vote for, and many, primarily the secular, Reform and Conservative Jews, value their Liberalism very much more than they value their Judaism. Orthodox Jews tend to vote according to values, and since Democrats have no values corresponding to Torah values, they will tend to vote more politically conservative, which means Republican these days.

  2. Two Ply Koran Toilet Paper

    Pascrell beat Rothman so he’ll face Boteach in the general election. I fully expect storm trooper racist arson, mob violence and such at the behest of the Democratic Party. There is no longer any place in the Democratic party for Jews who aren’t insane.

      1. Jim from Iowa

        I am a life-long Democrat and I can solemnly attest to you, Ephraim, I do not have devil horns. You get held back a year for bad political analysis, as well.

        1. Jim from Iowa says:
          June 7, 2012 at 2:23 pm

          I am a life-long Democrat and I can solemnly attest to you, Ephraim, I do not have devil horns.

          Your avatar indicates you’re a vampire, most appropriate for today’s Democratic Party.

          Thanks for playing!

          1. Jim from Iowa

            As we all know, in modern life, you are what your avatar says you are. In your case, while perspective can be a crucial factor in analytical thought, you appear to be one of the wee people the Irish are known to seek out. That might be why we get along so well, Shy Guy.

    1. Jim from Iowa

      Are you kidding? Well, let me think about that for a minute….OK, it’s not the best of reasons, but I find that the Democratic Party is filled with people who are not Republicans. That’s good enough for me.

      1. Jim, if you cannot state any clear reason why you support a particular party, then you’re a blind follower. This may be an indication that you’re well aware of the Democratic party’s numerous failings and despicable track record, but are embarrassed to to support anyone else for fear of being ostracized by your friends, who, I’m guessing also support the Democratic party. Listen I know it’s hard to switch mindsets, parties, rational and such, but really, make a list of what you believe in and compare that list to what various candidates stand for. This, at least will give you an accurate representation of whether or not you’re on target. Personally, I’m an independent conservative. I’m not loyal to any party, but only loyal to the principles of conservatism, such as capitalism, self-responsibility, respect for G-d’s laws, preservation of borders, language, culture and currency of the nation, the constitution, etc. I’m against Socialism, Affirmative Action (state sponsored racism), homosexuality, illegal aliens, open borders, the U.N., Shariah law, and a number of other things as well. I can clearly state what I stand for and what I expect from a political party. If you cannot, then that’s a problem that you need to address, not for my sake – I’m just some guy on the computer, but for yourself and for your self respect. Wishy-whashyness is a sign of stupidity. Now, since I don’t know you, I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt, that you just didn’t feel like having to explain yourself to a stranger. Fair enough, but if you make a statement such as ‘because they’re not Republicans,’ that just smacks of the thoughtlessness and ignorance of a blind follower, and I hope you’re better than a blind follower. Come on, tell us some substantial reasons for your support of the Democratic party!

        1. Jim from Iowa

          Wishy-washy? Me? You really don’t know me. The Republican Party of 2012 tells people to pull themselves up by their boot straps even when they don’t have any boots. That, in a nutshell, is why I can’t support such a party. As bad as the Democrats are (and they ARE bad), they are still marginally less bad than the Republicans.

          1. You know, I agree that if all they do is to say pull yourself up by your bootstraps, but offer no plan, no cure for the problem, then it’s not much help. I guess that’s why I’m an independent conservative. Nonetheless, I don’t see any attraction towards the Democratic party whatsoever. They only offer higher taxes, larger, more intrusive government, anti white male racist policies, Israel hating rhetoric and pandering to illegal aliens and homosexuals. Really, I wish there were a plausible third party to vote for.

            1. Jim from Iowa

              I really don’t understand conservatives who say they want to get Government out of our lives, but are eager to invade our bedrooms to make sure we’re not doing anything they don’t like. That’s none of the Government’s business either. As a gay man, I, of course, do not share your negative views of homosexuality. I think an image is forming in your mind as to why I do not believe the Republican Party reflects my values.

              1. Jim, I really don’t believe that the Republican party has any interest in what goes on in anyone’s bedroom. To the contrary, it’s the Democrats who have brought these issues into the public sphere and pushed them into everyone’s face. That is what I find despicable and repugnant. There have been homosexuals around for thousands of years and certainly they’re free to engage in their activities in the privacy of their own homes between consenting adults, but what I object to is the notion that the government (Democrat party) wants to try and force me to consider this behavior acceptable, normal and in fact superior to us ‘normal’ people. The Torah clearly forbids this kind of thing, in no uncertain language. I’m not saying that the government should legislate religious law, but I do expect them to uphold certain basic values. Jim, I don’t know you, and I’m sure you’re a nice guy who just wants to be left alone, but the Democratic party, in forcing the glorification of homosexuality down the throats of the public, are really doing more harm than good, because there will be two possible types of backlash. First, if the Left gets their way and uses the homosexual community as tool to remove all morality and all religion and reference to religion from society, then they will become the source of laws and morality. Heaven help us if that should happen! With G-d out of the picture, there will be no good, or bad, except for what they tell you. The citizens will quickly become slaves. They’re working very hard at this as we speak. The other possibility, is that the Right, having been disgusted with the Left’s enshrinement of homosexuality, will go the opposite direction and suppress that kind of behavior more diligently than ever. Also a result that you would not be happy with. Best to leave traditional marriage as it is, not to give special privileges and rights to the homosexual community, and things will be better off that way. If two people who are homosexual adults want to engage in some sort of activity in private, no one will bother them, but bringing all this stuff out in the open and telling us that we had best accept it and like it will be very damaging to the entire society. Why do you think G-d forbids this kind of behavior? Believe me, the conservative way is to leave people’s privacy intact, and we’ll all be better off for it.

        2. I think that voting based on values is over-rated. Values are important if you’re choosing a prospective spouse. Values and personal beliefs may or may not reflect what they will do. Plus, you might like your guy’s values, but how do they allign with the whole party? Conversely, they may share your values but not display some of them, such as your views on homosexuals. There is a reason why the term is “POLITICALLY correct”.
          I think Jim’s reason is more pragmatic. If you don’t like either, why not use your vote to vote out the guy you like least?
          Personally, I think the decision should be this: who, out of the ones on offer, will run the country better? Your voting decision does not need to define you, or if it makes your social life difficult, keep it private. On this point, with respect to Jim, being a “lifelong democrat” isn’t something to be proud of. Really, each time you’re hiring them for a job. And, if you’re working, you are literally paying them. The decision needs to be less on values, and more on their qualifications, their track record, and what they are saying. Values make it personal, but really it’s business. Sure, it’s good if you can like the guy and socialize with him at a BBQ after work, but it’s not essential.
          I’m not American, so it doesn’t matter. I personally don’t particularly like any of them. I would feel more comfortable socializing with Obama, than Christian right, who say they are pro Israel, but there is the hint of their privately thinking that we owe them the second coming, since we killed him in the first place. For Jews especially, it should be a business, not an emotional decision – neither side likes us.
          On the other hand, I think Obama interview well on Oprah, but has ‘t done a good job. I would give him a second chance only if he admitted that he’s done a crap job, and outlined how he would do better. Since that’s not going to happen, I would vote for the other guy.

          1. Jim from Iowa

            Perhaps stating that I’m a life-long Democrat is more an admission of guilt. Still, I can’t see how supporting a party which doesn’t want to regulate an industry which dumps “troubled assets” (there’s a euphemism if ever one was invented) on the American taxpayers as matter of routine is a good thing. While we Americans pride ourselves on having a more egalitarian society than Britain, I can’t help but think that the characters portrayed in Monty Python’s “Upper Class Twit of the Year” sketch describes Mitt Romney and others in his social circle perfectly.

            1. That’s the trouble with democracy. These people are going to have your money to spend as they see fit, and quite a bit of power, but to get elected, they have to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

            2. While we Americans pride ourselves on having a more egalitarian society than Britain, I can’t help but think that the characters portrayed in Monty Python’s “Upper Class Twit of the Year” sketch describes Mitt Romney and others in his social circle perfectly.

              Meanwhile, closer to home…

              Which one are you? If you’ve got half a neuron, you’ll answer “the CNN bus driver.”

              1. Jim from Iowa

                What do you want from me? The news account accurately reported the moronic behavior of a handful of disappointed Wisconsin voters. Just more evidence that our political system is broken, though. Do you think most Democrats lost any sleep over the Wisconsin results? Get real.

          2. Personally, I don’t think I would like to socialize with any of them. Nonetheless, values do indeed drive the decision making process, and the decisions they make are more a reflection of those values than the things they say. I abhor political correctness, I consider it the epitome of falsehood and cowardliness. If a person’s values are, for example, to the very far Left, they will make decisions according those beliefs, regardless of what they say in public. If a person’s values are to the far Right, they will make decisions according to the values of the Right, and so on. This is human nature. If someone consistently does things that are inconsistent with their stated beliefs, then they are not being truthful about their values and belief system. I would much rather vote for a jerk who makes consistent decisions for the good, than to vote for a nice guy who tries to please everyone, but makes stupid, destructive decisions that ruin the nation. I’m voting for them to do a job, not to be my friend. They are my employees, and I demand of them certain results, or they’re fired. If only I could fire them as soon as they start screwing up….

  3. Shmuely don’t care if it rains or freezes as long as he has his kosher Jesus ridin on the dashboard of his car,lol

  4. Morris the Katz

    I don’t care if Pascrell is the reincarnation of Osama Bin Laden. There’s no way in hell I’d ever vote for this crook and charlatan Boteach. In fact, I signed up to help defeat him.

    Michael Steinhardt is a big supporter. Doesn’t speak highly of Steinhardt, who had a fundraiser for Boteach and NORPAC at his house in Bedford Hills, NY. Among the attendees was one Eric Cantor. You know, the guy who almost caused the government to shut down last August, and whose actions sent stocks tumbling over 600 points one day last August. Guess Steinhardt was short.

  5. the dem primary happened as a result of redistricting…and the nastiness had more to do with rothman moving in to run, then it did with him being jewish…not one add noted his religion

    boteach doesnt have a shot in the district…the machine will eat him alive

      1. arab american pro israel, pro biz candidate that this site supported was running in another district…pretty much destroyed by the same machine

        people say they hate incumbents…then vote for them

        and shmuley is a joke…has been since he was a kid

        another long con artist…just like matt the singer

        1. This sites endorsement means nothing for the two voters from NJ that view it. I forget what I didnt like about Qarmout, but there was something. I cant find it on his site now. He had 3 opponents including the machine man. I voted for Joe Rullo, who got third. Qarmout got 4th. He was as much smooshed by the machine as by the field. Nobody had heard of him and I never saw any support for him. Turnout was really low as well.

          Youre right. Theres also the paradox of hating congress while liking ones on congressman.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top