|
Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Double Standard Watch: Democrats diss Jimmy Carter Posted by by Alan M. Dershowitz
Comments: 43
It has long been traditional for living ex-presidents to be invited to address their party's quadrennial convention during presidential election years. The fact that Jimmy Carter was not invited to give the traditional address was no accident. Nor is it true, as Jimmy Carter has falsely claimed, that it was he who made the decision not to speak to the convention. The Democratic Party, and its leaders, made a deliberate decision not to invite Jimmy Carter precisely because they so fundamentally disagree with the bigotry toward Israel and its Jewish supporters that he displayed both in his mendacious book Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid and in his subsequent television appearances. They decided that they, as a party, did not want to be associated with Jimmy Carter's despicable views. This took courage, more courage than the Republican Party showed in 1992 when they invited Pat Buchanan, to deliver a prime time speech at their convention. Perhaps the Democrats learned a lesson from the Republicans' mistake. Buchanan's speech, which declared cultural war against non-Christian fundamentalists, may well have contributed to their electoral defeat. Had Jimmy Carter been allowed to speak, and had he chosen to repeat his bigoted views, the impact on voters might have been considerable. I must admit that I am not an unbiased observer. I played a role in seeking to persuade the Democrats to disinvite Carter. I made it clear that I could not support a party that honored a bigot like Carter. Many others - Jews and non-Jews - took the same position. Nor has Carter been denied his free speech rights, as some anti-Israel zealots have claimed. Carter says that he wrote his screed in order to stimulate a debate. But he has adamantly refused to debate the contents of his book, with me or anyone else. I have written extensively and critically about Carters book. In my soon to be published book, The Case Against Israel's Enemies - Exposing Jimmy Carter and Others Who Stand In the Way of Peace, I take apart his arguments point by point. His only response was, "I don't read Dershowitz." Well maybe he should read Dershowitz and the other critics who have demolished his arguments, disproved his facts and questioned his motives. His answer to his critics bordered on anti-Semitism. He claimed that, "book reviews in the mainstream media have been written mostly by representatives of Jewish organizations." He must know this to be a lie, unless he believes that all Jews are somehow "representatives" of Jewish organizations. The most critical reviews were written by Michael Kinsley, Ethan Bronner, Jeffrey Goldberg, and me. None of us are representatives of Jewish organizations - unless he believes that all Jews belong to some uniform and organized conspiracy. On NBC's Meet the Press, Carter claimed that the "Jewish lobby" was part of the problem, never defining what he meant but leaving a clear implication of dual loyalty against "Jewish" Americans. It is Jimmy Carter who has tried to skew the marketplace of ideas by refusing to debate. So let Jimmy Carter speak, wherever he chooses to - on college campuses, on television, at political events. But let others who disagree with him be invited to speak at the same time. That is debate, not the kind of one-sided propaganda that Carter insists on. So I renew my challenge to President Carter: Join the marketplace of ideas. Debate me--anywhere, anytime. On your turf or mine. How about a debate at the Carter center in Emory University? I will come at my own expense. Do you accept or will you continue to refuse to read your critics or to debate them? Alan M. Dershowitz is a Professor of Law at Harvard. His most recent book The Case Against Israel's Enemies: Exposing Jimmy Carter and Others Who Stand In The Way of Peace is being published by Wiley at the end of this month.
1 | Attila Shelley, Geneva, Switzerland, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Great posting Alan, and good luck with the forthcoming book.
2 | Yair, Minnesota, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Well said, Mr. Dershowitz. Your column succinctly demonstrates the sort of political hack that Jimmy Carter has become. That he clearly holds to ideas of a Jewish conspiracy also make him a laughable shadow of his former self. Truly, Mr. Carter, either agree to public debate, or go grow more peanuts and leave the Middle East to people who live there, or at least know what they are talking about.
3 | Larry -New Jersey, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
I don't know what channel dershowitz was watching but millions of American did see Carter address the Democratic Convention. I respect Dershowitz a lot, but why is he misrepresenting this? I guess the Dem leaders do not "so fundamentally disagree with the bigotry toward Israel..." and/or did not have the "courage" to disinvite him. And now Dershowitz, if he is true to his words, must not support the Democratic Party.
4 | Boaz D. Heilman, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
I am not sure to what extent the Democratic Party doesn't agree with Carter, so much as that they don't want to alienate potential Jewish support (read: money, votes). I know plenty of Democrats who think as Carter does.
5 | P. Brand, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Alan if you have such an influence over the Democratic party why is it that they went ahead and nominated Obama as their candidate. Surely you must be aware that Mr. Obama's associations are detrimental to the interest of the Jewish people. More specifically, and as it relates to Israel, you rightfully condemed Mr. Obama's choice of Zbigniew Brazezinski Carter's right hand man as his foreign policy advisor.
In 1976 87% of the Jewish vote went to Jimmy Carter. Mr. Dershowitz it's time for you to take a stand against a repeat of this mistake.
6 | Ruben Misrahi, Beachwood, OH, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Well done as usual. Expose the bigot and challenge him, but don't raise your expectations.
Carter is not only a bigot, but a coward. He doesn't expect respect or deference, but consent. And if he doesn't find it he runs.
Looking forward to read your new book!
7 | Mark, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Sadly, although the party was intelligent enough not to let Carter have a soapbox from which to spew his ignorance, there are many Democrats who do fall in line with the peanut farmer's views on Israel and Middle Eastern politics. Anti-semitism is on the rise in the United States, and it isn't confined to one party or another, but my observation has led me to believe that it is more prominent in the party of Truman and LBJ than in the party of Eisenhower and Reagan.
8 | Tim Atlanta, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Dershowitz calling Carter a bigot is the pot calling the kettle black. His style of advocacy is to simply deny the facts and hope, if he says it long enough, people will believe it. He had made every effort to shut people, with whom he disagrees, out of public debate by mischaracterizing their positions.
Read some of the criticisms of his advocacy books.
9 | James, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
I thought Carter is doing us a favor that we do not fall down to his level to debate the inadequacies of his putred mind. What is there to be gained from such a debate? The Arab oil money will suddenly flow into the pockets of Derschowitz and not Carter? The state of Israel will be admitted into the league of the Arab States? In the Torah, there was Bilaam who tried to curse the Jewish people, like Mr. Carter. Did the Jewish people debate with him? NO. A war was declared and Bilaam was slaughtered. Mr. Carter should have the same expectations.
10 | Adele & Victor Galindo, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
I passed this around with the title : 'Democrats diss Jimmy Carter-Rpublicans Heil Buchanan" Thank you professor.
11 | Howie G, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Mr Dershowitz..keep after the anti_semite Carter. How I voted for that schmuck has always haunted me. Carter will never debate you...he knows you would knock the drek out of him. He hates us Jews because we haven't accepted his Yoshkie...and that to me is the whole truth. We Jews gave them Jesus and they hate us for it...go figure. Be well.
12 | David Groton CT USA, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Jimmy Carter will never debate because he remembers the last time he tried to debate. It was right before the 1980 election and the whole country saw what a terrible president he was. He was swept out of office in a landslide. He gave the country hostages, gas lines, double digit interest rates and double digit unemployment. Carter had to balme somebody for his loss so he did what bigots do. He blamed Jews. Typical Carter.
13 | J Cady USA, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Maybe he was abducted by aliens, and had portions of his brain removed?
14 | La Salle, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
If there was a prize for equivocation, the Jimmy Carter purported anti-Israel discourse would have to be the most meritorious winner. It surely does not escape Carter that anyone with a half brain will be able to refute him decisively. Carter is no enemy of Israel. He simply plays one on TV. The demented ideas that he makes a show of advancing obviously aim at nothing short of sapping a much more cogent and salient set of objections to the Israeli position, and Mr. Dershowitz knows it.
15 | Teddy Jacobson, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Git g'zuct, Mr. Dershowitz! I'm with you 100%.
16 | Fred Maroun, Canada, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Alan Dershowitz is brilliant as always. I can't wait to read his upcoming book.
17 | Ruth I. USA, Thursday Sep 11, 2008
Why is Mr. Dershowitz publishing this piece today? The Democrat Convention took place weeks ago. I believe Mr. D wrote this story to bring up the name Pat Buchanan and revive the false rumors about Sarah Palin once supporting him (when in actuality she was never a Buchanan supporter, she backed Steve Forbes). The Democrats disinvited Carter. Therefore, that makes up for their giving us a presidential nominee who is associated with anti-Semites like Wright, Ayers, Khalidi and Al-Mansour and anti-Israel advisors and supporters too numerous to name - including Carter? Obama is a Carter clone.
18 | Jozef, USA, Friday Sep 12, 2008
As the matter of fact, Carter is right. Israeli occupation of the West bank and the settlement expansion is evolving into an appartheid-like situation. And Carter is willing to debate, but he does want to subject himself to name-calling which is Mr. Dershowitz favorite polemical technique.
19 | Michael Gorinsky, Friday Sep 12, 2008
Jimmmy (Howdy Doody) Carter, the infamous bigot against Israel, was denied speaking rights at the Democratic Convention. Good ridence.what AlanDershowitz has forgotten this "self proclaimed genious on the Middle East will Never know". He is afraid to debate Alan or any spokesman of the cause of Israel because He knows his lies will come out and He will be made to look the fool that He alredy is.It is a pity that America had to put up with Him for four years.The American Hostages were rotting in Iranian Prisons for approximatyely a year.Reagan comes in as President and they are immedialey letgo
20 | Truthteller, Friday Sep 12, 2008
"and had he chosen to repeat his bigoted views, the impact on voters might have been considerable"
If Dershowitz were honest, which he has never been, he would say instead "... the impact on Jewish bribers and extortionists (AIPAC) might have been considerable"
21 | Jo Ellen Davey Cohen, Friday Sep 12, 2008
Jimmy Carter is an American pariah. He has managed to alienate many democrats and most republicans with his bigotry and ignorance related to Israel and the Jewish people. His labor for Habitat for Humanity has been greatly diminished by his championing of the Palestinian-Hamas cause.
Ex-President James E. Carter will not advantage you in an honest debate, Professor Dershowitz, as
he is consumed with righteous indignation, and maintains a holy corner on the truth; he is aided by the
radical-left Nakba churches [First United Methodist Church] running interference for his anti-Israel agenda.
22 | mireille mechoullam, usa, Friday Sep 12, 2008
Carter is a coward because debate will be puting on the spot . Also remember he gets some good money from the Saudis for his "Habitat for Humanity" and this be cut off. In prospect he can't angered the guys who are paying the bill.
23 | Tod Zuckerman , San Francisco, Friday Sep 12, 2008
Great column . However, if Obama is elected, it will be as if Jimmy Carter were back in the White House . Most of Obama's "experts" think as Carter does concerning Israel . And Obama himself ? Watch out ! He was against the security barrier , and has al;ready announced that he prefers not to see a Likud govt. - an Obama administration will roll over a weakened Israel . The result ? An Oslo II type of appeasement that could spell the end of the Jewish state. The Iranian mullahs and Hamas are not Obama crazy for nothing.
24 | Maya, Sweden, Friday Sep 12, 2008
Kol HaKavod, Alan! Great work you're doing! For me it's immediately obvious why Carter used the term "representatives of Jewish organizations." He must have put a good deal of thinking into it, desperately looking for a vague, seemingly neutral expression that would direct readers' thoughts in the right direction without him having to write (following his first and primary impulse): " Book reviews in the mainstream media have been written mostly by Jews." This (honest) wording is still not acceptable (again) for the mainstream, and he knows it. - Shabat shalom!
25 | Ger---Raanana, Israel, Friday Sep 12, 2008
Alan Dershowitz is voting for Obama/Biden. It doesn't seem to bother him that Obama's foreign policy advisors (Brzezinski, Power, Farley, and Susan Rice) are all anti-Israel. It doesn't seem to bother him that Rita Hauser, a Jewish Republican who has endorsed Obama, just loved Arafat (does she have any reason to believe that Obama would be tougher on Israel?). It doesn't bother him that Obama sat in an anti-American, anti-Israeli church for 20 years. It doesn't seem to bother him that Biden offered Iran $200 million dollars, voted against the Kyl-Lieberman amendment. Wish I could say more.
26 | Seva Brodsky, Jerusalem, Israel, Friday Sep 12, 2008
Are we to take this as Dershowitz's endorsement of Obama? I'd much rather see Carter speak at the Dem's Convention precisely to minimize Obama's chances of being elected. After all, what Jew in his right mind would vote for Obama, anyway? Why does Dershowitz, whom I respect a lot, always have to insist on his liberal credentials, which he invariably does in public? What's wrong with just being a Jew and speaking as one? For all his wit, erudition, and sharp mind, Dershowitz is still unable to shake that liberal monkey off his back. Enough already! If Obama wins (God forbid), woe be us all ...
27 | Ger---Raanana, Israel, Friday Sep 12, 2008
The Kyl-Lieberman Amendment designated Iran Revolutionary Guard as terrorist--Biden voted against it.
Biden led the fight in Congress to deny confirmation of John Bolton as Ambassador to UN. That doesn't seem to bother Dershowitz, either.
I
28 | David Plummer, Los Angeles, USA, Friday Sep 12, 2008
Jimmy Carter is a "Christian" from the Rev. Jim Jones school of Christianity. Which is to say, he is increasingly a Marxist who uses Christianity as a fig leaf for his Marxist views. Even so, the whiff of anti-Semitism is getting so strong that I half expect to hear at any moment that he has converted to Islam and we may capture him on a battlefield in Iraq or Afghanistan soon.
|