Alan Dershowitz, Republican: the Senate vote on Israel
I actually didn’t think Dershowitz would make an announcement that he’d become a Republican, although he’d already left the Democrats and become an Independent a couple of years ago. I thought he’d live out his remaining days as an Independent, but no:
Dershowitz announced his decision in a Wall Street Journal article, clarifying that while he maintains significant disagreements with Republicans on various domestic issues, his commitment to the State of Israel determined his final choice. According to Israel National News, the move marks the completion of a transition that began in 2024 when he initially registered as an independent.
The legal expert offered a sharp critique of his former party, describing it as the most anti-Israel party seen in the United States since he joined in the 1960s. He specifically pointed to a recent Senate vote where a majority of Democrats supported resolutions introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders to block arms sales to Israel. Dershowitz noted that only seven Democratic senators voted against the effort to freeze weapons shipments.
I’ve noticed a lot of negative response from the right, not just here (although some here) but on other blogs and other comment sections in news outlets. It takes various forms. The first is that he still is a Democrat and only did this because of Israel, and the second is, what took him so long? To both I say: change is hard and often incomplete. Big deal; I applaud him, because I know how hard it is.
Dershowitz has been a devoted Democratic his entire life until recently and a prominent and active one at that, and he’s 87 years old. He’s also been a principled Democrat, applying law evenly to both sides for the most part in his columns, which is highly unusual. He demonstrated bravery in speaking against the Trump impeachment in January of 2020, while still a Democrat. And yes, he’s an observant Jew to whom Israel does mean a great deal, and rightly so.
The third critique I’ve seen from the right goes like this: what difference does it make; his fellow Jews are still Democrats. I’ve dealt with that question (the politics of US Jews) many times before, for example here as well as here, here, and here. So no need to repeat myself.
As for the vote against arming Israel, with only seven Democrat senators failing to join, it’s another example – as though we needed more – of how morally bankrupt that party is. Morally bankrupt, but unfortunately not politically bankrupt. I shudder to contemplate the fact that they may do very well in the midterms.
Who were the seven? One you could almost certainly have predicted: John Fetterman of Pennsylvania. The others: Chuck Schumer, New York; Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut; Jacky Rosen, Nevada; Chris Coons, Delaware; Catherine Cortez Masto, Nevada; Kirsten Gillibrand, New York.
For a while now, Israel has realized it must free itself from any dependence on any country for its armaments. It’s too bad, because the US gets as much out of the deal as Israel does. But it needs to be done, because if the Democrats come to power they will stab Israel in the back when it needs help. This war is an existential one for Israel and it must depend on itself; that was already clear and now it’s even more so.
I am somewhat offended by analysis of this change SOLELY because Dershowitz is a Jew. As Neo points out, he defended Trump on solid logical and legal grounds that had nothing to do with his religion, or Trump’s.
My beef with Dershowitz saying he’s a Republican now, is because he explicitly said that he’s doing it to help move the Republicans away from the right (which he thinks he could not do as effectively as an independent).
Like I said in the other thread, he’s trying to stay in place on the part of the slippery slope that’s comfortable. That’s taxes, welfare, open borders, LGBT issues, abortions, etc. All the liberal Democrat positions as of ten years ago or so.
It doesn’t matter that Israel was apparently the last straw for him, from my perspective. Doesn’t matter what that last straw was. It’s that he isn’t joining us. He’s expecting us to join him. He’s joining us not because he changed, but to change us.
And this matters because 99% of what’s wrong in America is not due to anything Iran did or Russia or China did or might do. It is explicitly due to the people Alan Dershowitz agrees with who live in America and make decisions that negatively affect Americans. On these 99% of problems, Dershowitz wants if anything to make them worse and not better, and is hoping to get us to help him do it.
He’s not taking the position, “I see I’ve been wrong about some things and you have been right, so let me join you and help you and learn from you.” No, he thinks WE need direction from HIM.
I’d prefer to have a corps of Democrats who favor squeezing the pus out. I think such Democrats are demoralized right now, so they leave. Prof. Dershowitz is one example. Krysten Sinema is another.
==
Wow.
As a hero once shouted, “Welcome to the [P]arty, pal!”
So I intend to work hard to prevent the Democrats from gaining control of the House and Senate
As long as he does that I don’t care if you call him a RINO or a Vulcan.
I for one am happy to have him on board. I’m a big tent Republican. The first order of business is to keep the Bolsheviks at bay, and they’re closer than you might think. We’ll worry about the internal stuff after we’ve got that nailed down. Plus he’s good for the brand. Smart people are Republican, you know, like Musk and Dershowitz.
ps. I saw him on the Sean Spicer show last night – I think that was the show. Can’t believe he’s 87. Sharp as a tack and full of energy.
When it comes to applying the law evenly to both sides, Dershowitz is indeed a principled Democrat. That said, Niketas Choniates argues persuasively that on the social issues he remains a committed liberal. A perfect example of Ronald Reagan’s famous observation; “The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much… that just isn’t so.”
Dershowitz is a living example of the ancient adage, “There’s no fool… like an old fool”
If one is honest and principled, one cannot be a Deshowitz- bright, informed, able.One cannot live a lie, Alan.
See also https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/425850
Cicero:
One cannot change?
Our hostess has been writing for more than twenty years that one can change, but it is hard, and has costs.
@Mike Plaiss:The first order of business is to keep the Bolsheviks at bay, and they’re closer than you might think. We’ll worry about the internal stuff after we’ve got that nailed down.
This is how leftists take over all the institutions. They put leftism first, we put something else first and then let leftists “help”. Then we wonder how they ended up in charge of everything.
This is what Dershowitz explicitly said he changed parties in order to do. We don’t need to slap his face, but we don’t need to cheer either. I think the appropriate response is, “welcome aboard but you start at the bottom. It’s your ideas that got America in this mess, so make yourself useful while you learn from the people who were with us from the beginning, and then maybe we’ll listen to your ideas later after you’ve unlearned some things and if they’re not bad ones.”
Niketas:
Dershowitz should “start at the bottom”? I don’t think he’s running for office or expecting to “start” at any particular place. He will write and speak as he has done for many decades, and people are free to listen to him and agree or disagree, or ignore him, as they have for decades. He is quite aware of that.
And no, it’s not Dershowitz’s ideas that “got America into this mess.” He was never a leftist – just a more old-fashioned type of Democrat. If Democrats were still like him, we wouldn’t be in “this mess.”
Well with the vote now in Virginia approving the Democrats gerrymander, Dershowitz has his work cut out to keep the Ds from taking the House.
We all have our political journeys. And people do change.
Though not necessarily enough to please others.
@neo:He was never a leftist – just a more old-fashioned type of Democrat. If Democrats were still like him, we wouldn’t be in “this mess.”
The more old-fashioned Democrats are the ones who enabled the new ones to get to where they are now. That’s the problem with the slippery slope, you can’t stay in one place.
@huxley:And people do change.
Some do, but I see no evidence Dershowitz has. He’s stayed the same, and is changing party affiliation in order to continue to work for what he has always worked for.
Niketas:
Moderate Democrats are not responsible for the far-left turn of the party. You might just as well blame all Republicans, too, because they couldn’t stop the leftists from winning either.
Israel is not the only issue Alan Dershowitz has found disagreeable with the Democrat party. He also has been horrified at what the ACLU has become – a group he worked with frequently. He actually is a very nice man. He lives in my (old) neighborhood in NYC and I once saw him walking shortly after the Oct. 7 massacre in Israel. I don’t ever stop celebrities as a rule (I usually don’t recognize them!) but I had seen him on FNC speaking about what actually happened on that day in Israel when many were in denial or downplaying the horrific attack. So I just told him I appreciated what he had said and he was so welcoming and asked me to walk several blocks with him and we discussed the topic. Clearly, Israel is extremely important to him, as it is to me. I am Jewish, was raised Reform, but Zionism was definitely emphasized at my synagogue in the 60’s and 70’s when I was growing up, and I remember well all the Arab countries wanted Israel gone. We’re a long way from that, fortunately, but if not for people like Mr. Dershowitz, many would have no idea the existential threat Israel has faced since it’s establishment, and what it means to the Jewish people. Even more so in this time of anti-Semitism that most of us thought we’d never see, having been raised on “Never Forget!” What has taken place on college campuses is horrifying. The indoctrination and the ignorance and misinformation among a large part of the general public is, as well. There was an incident on the street where I live two days ago where someone I considered a neighbor and casually friend stopped a Latina housekeeper driving by to go to work (for what reason I’m still not sure) and kept her for 20 minutes ranting and raving. Included in that rant was how Mexicans and Jews are ruining this country.” She isn’t even Mexican and is a citizen. My point is that he’s an ignorant racist and now the rest of us neighbors know. I don’t think he would physically hurt her or me, but the fact that he paints such a broad brush based on ethnicity says a lot about these times. And why an Alan Dershowitz feels it is so important to make known his feelings. He is well-known for a long history of his work, but has had friends and colleagues turn their backs on him based on politics. That says a lot about these times, too.
@Niketas: Some do, but I see no evidence Dershowitz has.
I don’t believe Dershowitz could have written what he just did ten years ago or even five.
Therefore he is changing… though not necessarily enough to please others, such as yourself.
I say welcome aboard, Prof. Dershowitz, we need every vote and voice we can get! But if you try to pull the G.O.P. to the left, I quote Al
SharptonCharlatan:“Resist we much; we must resist!” 🙂
@ Neo > “Moderate Democrats are not responsible for the far-left turn of the party. You might just as well blame all Republicans, too, because they couldn’t stop the leftists from winning either.”
Judging from all the recent news “explosives” (which aren’t surprises to anyone really following the news, but are welcome confirmations), the reason the moderate Democrats and the Republicans (at least those who might actually have wanted to) couldn’t stop the leftists from winning is that they didn’t have the ghost of a chance against the scope of the multiple frauds perpetrated by the Left.
Dershowho? His time is long past.
Israel really needs to kick into high gear its already impressive arms industry.
Dershowitz another brick in the wall!
— neo
I’m gonna have to go along with NC on this one, or mostly so.
Yeah, the old-fashioned Dems were a different breed than the ones we have now, if by ‘old fashioned’ we mean pre-1968/72. But they (the Scoop Jacksons and Harry Trumans) are long gone. ‘Moderate Democrat’ today means the same breed that more or less invited in the McGovernite faction and let them take over the Party in the 1970s.
Jimmy Carter got electedf as a Southern ‘moderate Democrat’ and then proceeded to empower the left all over the place for the next four years. Even when Bill Clinton was talking about triangulation and ‘the era of big government is over’, he was quietly and steadily laying the groundwork that Obama built on later.
There’s an argument going on in the Party right now that there’s a difference between ‘liberal’ and ‘leftist’. On paper, that’s true. In practice, the ‘moderates’ have pretty much invariably laid the groundwork for the advancement of the lefties, every time they’ve been in power.
I’m not sure it’s intentional, or just a side-effect of their worldview and attitudes and cultural background. Probably a mix of both, but we can see the results on display, over and over and over.
Fetterman gets praise for the stuff he’s saying, yes…but he votes to empower the radicals, too. Maybe he’s sincerely frustrated with them, but the outcome is precisely the same. Joe Manchin criticized his Party regularly, but out of either connivance or naivete (I could believe either one), he failed to do the stuff necessary to restrain them.
For ex, he extracted concessions on a funding bill before voting for it. Of course, once it was passed and out of his hands, the Dems took out the language he had put in and passed it the way they wanted it, breaking their promise to Manchin (if they ever really made one).
Back in the day, Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Michigan), a pro-life Democrat (at least supposedly) led a block of Dem votes who refused to let the Obamacare bill out of the House without language affirming the Hyde Amendment. Of course once it was passed, Obama did exactly what he promised Stupak he wouldn’t do, i.e. try to make it cover abortion (albeit by a bit of chicanery). But it was too late for Stupak’s ‘moderation’ to matter at that point.
Several years ago, Clinton’s former pollster, DIck Morris, commented that in today’s world, ‘there’s no such thing as a moderate Democrat’. He was right.
HC68:
I thought it was clear that, since we were talking about Dershowitz – a private citizen and not a politician or an officeholder of any type – that was the group we’re referring to rather than for example Democrat members of Congress who profess to be moderate when running for office but vote with the more radical leftist bloc. The Democrat “moderate” members of Congress (or other officeholders who do the same) are absolutely to blame for going along.
Moderate Democrat voters are not to blame, except for being gullible and trusting them, or being ignorant and not paying attention.