For those who think only liberals want their BS in the classroom

[Samson]

Should I derail this thread to post about the topic?



Or should I post an opionion regarding McCarthy? The "Red Scare?"



Since I'm old fashioned I'm gonna stick to the topic, and then be ignored.

I taught in Texas, then moved to Colorado, and have been astonished at the difference between the school systems in each state.

Texas Conservatism doesn't allow Halloween to be MENTIONED in school.

In Colorado, there are school sponsored Halloween PARTIES!!!!

 

[Father Time]

Should I derail this thread to post about the topic?



Or should I post an opionion regarding McCarthy? The "Red Scare?"



Since I'm old fashioned I'm gonna stick to the topic, and then be ignored.

I taught in Texas, then moved to Colorado, and have been astonished at the difference between the school systems in each state.

Texas Conservatism doesn't allow Halloween to be MENTIONED in school.

In Colorado, there are school sponsored Halloween PARTIES!!!!

That's just sad, and rather pathetic.

I went to school in California, we had a costume contest on Halloween and that was about it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Question for Mccarthy's defenders

Do you think recklessly making accusations without evidence is immoral yes or no?

I understand the extent of the popular myth that Senator McCarty was "making accusations without evidence ..."

And, in fact, one of your supporters claimed that the Senator simply took names from the phonebook.

I would like to propose a simple experiment to test whether your dearly-held beliefs are, in fact, true.

My post #20 was fairly extensive, and, I hope, eminently readable.

If your beliefs are correct, it should be possible for you to compose a similar post showing, say, five or ten individuals who were provably not communists, and whose life was destroyed without evidence. By McCarthy.

I am not saying that the Senator was warm and fuzzy, nor that his methods were not tough.

I am saying that within the politically tinted landscape of the time, he was correct and in fact, a hero.

If you accept the challenge, and cannot gather said infomation, I suggest you should begin to question who and why ill-informed you.

It's not my job to prove they aren't communists it was his job to prove they were, and I all ready linked to the verona papers look at all those names Mccarthy produced that weren't proven to be communists. So yeah I'd say he was reckless.

Now, now... try to avoid obfuscation.

"...It's not my job to prove they aren't communists ..."

Bogus response.

The challenge is to provide the identities of those who were 'slandered' by Senator

McCarthy, and whose 'lives were ruined' because they were not security risks.

If this is not possible, then your allegations are weak, slanderous and ignorant.


To save you time and trouble, McCarthy actually attempted to avoid naming names, but

was forced to do so by the Democrats.

His name has been dragged through the mud by those liberals, Democrats and other

members of that part of the political spectrum, and the drumbeat of propaganda for fifty

years has resulted in thinking such as your.


Educate yourself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Should I derail this thread to post about the topic?



Or should I post an opionion regarding McCarthy? The "Red Scare?"



Since I'm old fashioned I'm gonna stick to the topic, and then be ignored.

I taught in Texas, then moved to Colorado, and have been astonished at the difference between the school systems in each state.

Texas Conservatism doesn't allow Halloween to be MENTIONED in school.

In Colorado, there are school sponsored Halloween PARTIES!!!!

Hey, I'm lookin' for a scrap!

Let's have that opinion!

 

[AllieBaba]

Besides which, he was proven right, as was shown later when his papers and FBI investigation information was finally released. And that information has been posted again and again in this thread. Liberals just ignore it, and continue with their hack job as they did back then.

Typical.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Besides which, he was proven right, as was shown later when his papers and FBI investigation information was finally released. And that information has been posted again and again in this thread. Liberals just ignore it, and continue with their hack job as they did back then.

Typical.

The problem is that 'McCartyism' has become an urban legend.

As I posed to our friends on the left, if he was so horrid, show me the individuals whose lives were ruined because they were unfairly labeled Soviet agens or fellow travelers.

The silence is deafening.

Unfortunately, the left controls the media and the schools, and most folks are too busy in their lives to actually investigate the claims.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Being fair minded, I believe that you will come to a new realization.

The Red Scare Revisited: Inside the McCarthy Files

Senate Releases McCarthy Transcripts

These are two summary articles on the release of the transcripts of McCarthy's investigations. McCarthy, and the environment he helped create, destroyed many many many lives. If you doubt this, you should research the Hollywood Blacklists, the blacklists that existed in Academia and in Business, and the HUAC. McCarthy may have not been personally affiliated with some of these, but his reckless actions helped foster an environment where these things were possible.

I have read up on this. I consider myself a reasonable person, and I have changed my opinion on a great many issues in light of new evidence. My beliefs today are not monolithic and unchanging. They are different than the views I held as a younger man, as a college student, and even as a grad student.

However, I can not begin to understand how a thinking, reasoning, freedom loving individual can support the actions of McCarthy himself, and the actions of others emboldened by him. Even though he managed to find a few acorns, McCarthy's actions are well outside what we as a free people accept.

Again I have to ask, for those that support McCarthy would you support the Democrats in Congress using McCarthy's tactics to go on a witch hunt through the Right Wing Radio and Tea Party movement? Do you support the Fairness Doctrine?

I am willing to consider both sides on a great many issues, but on this one I have to reject the attempts to defend a blatant example of the abuse of power at the Federal level and a blatant attempt at undermining the Constitutional protections of liberty we hold dear.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Texas Conservatism doesn't allow Halloween to be MENTIONED in school.

Halloween seems to be an odd ball issue in every State. I assure you, it isn't just an issue in Texas. In fact, I seem to recall from my time in Indiana growing up that opinions on Halloween would change back and forth over time.

Every state education system has its oddities on certain issues. That seems to just be part of the fact that each State has its own unique culture.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

...or due to a belief in a untopianism, was responsible for the one hundred millon murdered by Communist governments in the last century.

This slipped by me, and I admit I haven't studied utopianism in quite a while, but I believe that Utopianism was pretty much quashed by WWI. IIRC (that's a big If), most of the Utopian philosophies and literature was written prior to WWI, while many of the Dystopian novels and literature (like Brave New World was written post WWI).

I admit I need to learn more about the Bolshevik Revolution, but I always saw it as a parallel to the French Revolution rather than some Utopian movement. There are a great many romanticized views of the French Revolution, but if you get into the Reign of Terror you realize that the only real difference appears to be that Stalin had access to more technology to fuel his oppression than Robespierre or Napolean did. A lot of the issues that helped fuel both are in parallel.

 

[rdean]

Leave it to Republicans to defend McCarthy.

For conservative Republicans, the real complaint about "school" is that it's "too hard". But hey, if it were dumbed down and made "easy", then where would all those marvalous scientists come from to make new bombs to drop on other countries to make us "safe"?

 

[Father Time]

Besides which, he was proven right, as was shown later when his papers and FBI investigation information was finally released. And that information has been posted again and again in this thread. Liberals just ignore it, and continue with their hack job as they did back then.

Typical.

He was proven right on a few names that was all. Please provide evidence that most of his accusations were right.

 

[AllieBaba]

Being fair minded, I believe that you will come to a new realization.

The Red Scare Revisited: Inside the McCarthy Files

Senate Releases McCarthy Transcripts

These are two summary articles on the release of the transcripts of McCarthy's investigations. McCarthy, and the environment he helped create, destroyed many many many lives. If you doubt this, you should research the Hollywood Blacklists, the blacklists that existed in Academia and in Business, and the HUAC. McCarthy may have not been personally affiliated with some of these, but his reckless actions helped foster an environment where these things were possible.

I have read up on this. I consider myself a reasonable person, and I have changed my opinion on a great many issues in light of new evidence. My beliefs today are not monolithic and unchanging. They are different than the views I held as a younger man, as a college student, and even as a grad student.

However, I can not begin to understand how a thinking, reasoning, freedom loving individual can support the actions of McCarthy himself, and the actions of others emboldened by him. Even though he managed to find a few acorns, McCarthy's actions are well outside what we as a free people accept.

Again I have to ask, for those that support McCarthy would you support the Democrats in Congress using McCarthy's tactics to go on a witch hunt through the Right Wing Radio and Tea Party movement? Do you support the Fairness Doctrine?

I am willing to consider both sides on a great many issues, but on this one I have to reject the attempts to defend a blatant example of the abuse of power at the Federal level and a blatant attempt at undermining the Constitutional protections of liberty we hold dear.

Too vague, per usual.

WHAT actions, how was the abuse of power carried out? Specifics, please.

The case against McCarthy has taken on the proportions of urban legend.

 

[Father Time]

Being fair minded, I believe that you will come to a new realization.

The Red Scare Revisited: Inside the McCarthy Files

"And while he informed the 395 witnesses of their right to constitutional protection, he described any attempt to do so as an admission of guilt - and encouraged employers to fire them."
Sounds reckless irresponsible and frankly despicable to me.

 

[rdean]

Being fair minded, I believe that you will come to a new realization.

The Red Scare Revisited: Inside the McCarthy Files

"And while he informed the 395 witnesses of their right to constitutional protection, he described any attempt to do so as an admission of guilt - and encouraged employers to fire them."
Sounds reckless irresponsible and frankly despicable to me.

To Republicans, it sounds like "erring on the side of good".

 

[Father Time]

Being fair minded, I believe that you will come to a new realization.

The Red Scare Revisited: Inside the McCarthy Files

Senate Releases McCarthy Transcripts

These are two summary articles on the release of the transcripts of McCarthy's investigations. McCarthy, and the environment he helped create, destroyed many many many lives. If you doubt this, you should research the Hollywood Blacklists, the blacklists that existed in Academia and in Business, and the HUAC. McCarthy may have not been personally affiliated with some of these, but his reckless actions helped foster an environment where these things were possible.

I have read up on this. I consider myself a reasonable person, and I have changed my opinion on a great many issues in light of new evidence. My beliefs today are not monolithic and unchanging. They are different than the views I held as a younger man, as a college student, and even as a grad student.

However, I can not begin to understand how a thinking, reasoning, freedom loving individual can support the actions of McCarthy himself, and the actions of others emboldened by him. Even though he managed to find a few acorns, McCarthy's actions are well outside what we as a free people accept.

Again I have to ask, for those that support McCarthy would you support the Democrats in Congress using McCarthy's tactics to go on a witch hunt through the Right Wing Radio and Tea Party movement? Do you support the Fairness Doctrine?

I am willing to consider both sides on a great many issues, but on this one I have to reject the attempts to defend a blatant example of the abuse of power at the Federal level and a blatant attempt at undermining the Constitutional protections of liberty we hold dear.

Too vague, per usual.

WHAT actions, how was the abuse of power carried out? Specifics, please.

The case against McCarthy has taken on the proportions of urban legend.

Like both articles said when people tried to use their constitutional protections Mccarthy threatened to have them fired. I don't see how anyone could not consider this abusive.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Being fair minded, I believe that you will come to a new realization.

The Red Scare Revisited: Inside the McCarthy Files

Senate Releases McCarthy Transcripts

These are two summary articles on the release of the transcripts of McCarthy's investigations. McCarthy, and the environment he helped create, destroyed many many many lives. If you doubt this, you should research the Hollywood Blacklists, the blacklists that existed in Academia and in Business, and the HUAC. McCarthy may have not been personally affiliated with some of these, but his reckless actions helped foster an environment where these things were possible.

I have read up on this. I consider myself a reasonable person, and I have changed my opinion on a great many issues in light of new evidence. My beliefs today are not monolithic and unchanging. They are different than the views I held as a younger man, as a college student, and even as a grad student.

However, I can not begin to understand how a thinking, reasoning, freedom loving individual can support the actions of McCarthy himself, and the actions of others emboldened by him. Even though he managed to find a few acorns, McCarthy's actions are well outside what we as a free people accept.

Again I have to ask, for those that support McCarthy would you support the Democrats in Congress using McCarthy's tactics to go on a witch hunt through the Right Wing Radio and Tea Party movement? Do you support the Fairness Doctrine?

I am willing to consider both sides on a great many issues, but on this one I have to reject the attempts to defend a blatant example of the abuse of power at the Federal level and a blatant attempt at undermining the Constitutional protections of liberty we hold dear.

Glad you returned.

"...I consider myself a reasonable person, and I have changed my opinion on a great many issues in light of new evidence..." I agree, and that's why I would like to provide said evidence.

But, if you do change your mind about McCarthy, be prepared to battle every person you admit this to...watch out.

It is a firmly held, if incorrect, view.

"... destroyed many many many lives..."

1. Names? Description of the ruination that innocent folks suffered?

2. The 'naming names' was not by McCarthy:

One of the lies about McCarty was that he “named names” ruining peoples’ lives with reckless accusations. Actually, McCarthy resisted releasing names to the public, except when Democrats forced him to name names. He raised the issue of loyalty risks working for the government rather than proven cases of espionage. His argument was that there are many reasons that a person should not be handling classified material, far less than proof beyond a reasonable doubt that one was a Soviet spy.

McCarty said that he would attach names to the cases only in a closed committee hearing. When he presented his case against the State Department on the Senate floor, McCarthy described the loyalty risks anonymously as case #1, case #2, and so on.

Democrats demanded names. Democrat Senate Majority Leader Scott Lucas (D-Ill.) said: “I want to remain here until he names them!” (William F. Buckley and Brent Bozell, McCarty and His Enemies, p. 70, quoting the Congressional Record). Democrat Withers of Kentucky: “I should like to ask the Senator what reason he has for not calling names?” The Democrats voted to compel him to name names in front of the press.

Don't you notice the difficulty you are having in finding the names of innocent folks ruined by McCarthy? Why do you think that is?


"...how a thinking, reasoning, freedom loving individual can support the actions of McCarthy himself,..."

1. What, exactly, were the actions to which you refer. Rhetoric, is that action? If so,
when considering the anger over McCarthy’s rhetoric, have you ever heard about Democrat statements, such as Democrat President Truman, who, in his 1948 campaign, claimed: “If anybody in this country is friendly to the Communists, it is the Republicans.” (Harry S. Truman: Rear Platform Remarks in Indiana.)

Some liberals were tougher then McCarthy was. In 1954, Senator Hubert Humphrey introduced a bill that would have outlawed the Communist Party. (Joshua Muravchik, “Seeing Red,” The National Interest, Fall 1996) BTW, it was the same year that the Senate voted to censure McCarthy.

Then there was Walter Reuther, a prominent figure in the anti-Communist left, who fought against communists in the labor unions, but also asked that McCarthy be censured.


"...McCarthy's tactics to go on a witch hunt through the Right Wing Radio and Tea Party movement? Do you support the Fairness Doctrine..."
C'mon, now.

Are you comparing those with a right of center view, but a clear love and devotion to the United States to paid agents of the Soviet Union? Or are you saying that this administration was horrid for attacking Fox news, Rasmussen polling? Or President Clinton for attacking Rush Limbaugh as a cause of the Oklahoma City bombing? Verbal attacks are verbal attacks.

The answer to 'bad speech' is 'good speech."

Have you noticed 50 years of anti-McCarthy speech?

Now, as for Soviet agents:

When questioned by the FBI in 1947, suspected spy Helen Silvermaster lamented that “anyone with liberal views seemed to be called a communist now-a-days.”(Hayes and Klehr, Venona, p.135) Soviet cables now prove that Silvermaster was a Soviet spy, as was her husband, Gregory, and that their son was a courier for their spy ring. (Ibid.) He sent Moskow “huge quantities of material on weapons, aircraft, tank, artillery, and shipping production.” While working for the Roosevelt administration, Silvermaster was given a medal for his service to the USSR.

• Nathan Gregory Silvermaster, Chief Planning Technician, Procurement Division, United States Department of the Treasury; Chief Economist, War Assets Administration; Director of the Labor Division, Farm Security Administration; Board of Economic Warfare; Reconstruction Finance Corporation Department of Commerce
• Helen Silvermaster (wife)
List of Soviet agents in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Silvermaster got his job at the Treasury from another Soviet agent, Harry Dexter White. When his loyalty was questioned by Naval Intelligence, Soviet spies Harry Dexter White, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury; Head of the International Monetary Fund, and Lauchlin Currie, Administrative Assistant to President Roosevelt; Deputy Administrator of Foreign Economic Administration; Special Representative to China, both vouched for his patriotism!

Are you ready to defend Silvermaster, White, Curran against McCarthy?

Liberals always defend the spies, until the truth comes out:

McCarthy’s targets are still defended by the left. Arthur Schlesinger, jr, liberal writer and Pulitzer Prize recipient, bitterly denounced anyone who said Duggan was a spy…until the Venona decrypts proved it. (Ronald Radosh, “The Book Club, The Cold War: Still a Hot Topic, Slate Magazine, June 24, 1999)

So, whadda ya' think?

 

[Father Time]

Besides which, he was proven right, as was shown later when his papers and FBI investigation information was finally released. And that information has been posted again and again in this thread. Liberals just ignore it, and continue with their hack job as they did back then.

Typical.

The problem is that 'McCartyism' has become an urban legend.

I thought Mccarthyism referred mostly to his tactics once he got the accused.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Besides which, he was proven right, as was shown later when his papers and FBI investigation information was finally released. And that information has been posted again and again in this thread. Liberals just ignore it, and continue with their hack job as they did back then.

Typical.

The problem is that 'McCartyism' has become an urban legend.

I thought Mccarthyism referred mostly to his tactics once he got the accused.

Greetings, my friend.

You make a good point: define terms.

The attacks on McCarthy center around the following:

1. He brought charges against innocent people.

2. He made up charges that he could not defend.

3. He ruined lives.

4. His tactics were unfair.

The last is easiest to defend. This man was providing the people of the United States with a 30-year cushion against take-over by the same political form that grew in the Soviet Union, China, and many other parts of the world. And resulted in 100 million murders.
What would have happened here if a Joseph Stalin came to power?

That is what communists were working towards.

If you feel he spoke too loudly, or bullied, then you must feel the same way against any defense attorney.

As for item #1, #2, and #3, produce innocent individuals whose lives were ruined.

No, McCarthy turned on the light, and the cockroaches ran.

 

[Father Time]

Which defense attorneys (although really this should be prosecutors) tried to get people fired if they tried to use the 5th?

Oh and I find your logic that 'he was defending us against communism therefore it's OK for him to be unfair' disturbing. The ends never really justify evil means.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Which defense attorneys (although really this should be prosecutors) tried to get people fired if they tried to use the 5th?

Oh and I find your logic that 'he was defending us against communism therefore it's OK for him to be unfair' disturbing. The ends never really justify evil means.

I love it. Really good post.

"...tried to get people fired ..."

McCarthy’s primary goal was not to expose individual Communists, he was simply demanding of the liberal establishment: Why were they sheltering traitors? It was the exact same point Eisenhower was making when he directed Attorney General Brownell to inform the public that President Truman had wittingly place a Soviet spy in a key position at the IMF… For decades, people who should not have been allowed anywhere a government job were strolling into sensitive positions with the US government. For the most part, accusations were not aimed at sending the accused to a gulag, only to private practice.

“A host of other right-wing Republicans had sought to dramatize the communism issue, but only McCarthy succeeded. And McCarthy succeeded while the others did not in part because of his thoroughgoing contempt for the rules of political controversy.”
Michael Paul Rogin, The Intellectuals and McCarthy: The Radical Specter, p. 251

He forced liberals to explain themselves in full view of the American people. So they made McCarthy the issue.

Fifty years of liberal propaganda got people to thinking of Communist Party member as lovable idealists and the urge to fire them from their government jobs as an irrational anachronistic prejudice. Allowing card-carrying members of the Communist Party to handle classified material after the Alger Hiss case would be like encouraging al-Qaeda members to carry box cutters on airplanes after 9-11.


"...therefore it's OK for him to be unfair'..."

Please explain the 'unfair' part.

If, in the process of preventing a bank robbery, a policeman knocks the teeth out of the robber, is that what you mean?

McCarty was exposing the laxity of government agencies as in the Peress case:
Even after the scandal of the Rosenberg cell emerging from the Army, the Army was still employing security risks. Beginning in early 1953, of a whole year, Army intelligence issued urgent warnings about Captain Irving Peress, reports stating that Peress was an active member of the Communist Party, that he was “very disloyal and untrustworthy."
(Arthur Herman, Joseph McCarty: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator, p. 248) He was thought to be organizing a Communist cell on the Army base. His company commander wanted him dismissed on grounds of national security. (David Oshinsky, A Conspiracy So Immense, p. 366-367 ) Instead the Army promoted him to Major! McCarty exposed the Army’s stupidity in dealing with Peress. The result? Honorable discharge. And McCarty was attacked by Vermont Republican Senator Flanders, stating the Peress was merely “a pink dentist in New Jersey.”

Consider President Eisenhower's Executive Order 10450:

"Executive Order 10450, issued by the President on April 27, 1953, establishing broad new security standards for federal employment. Critics say that Ten-Four-Fifty results in a cold reign of terror among Government workers, that no man is safe from his neighbor's malice. Defenders say that Order 10450 is necessary to protect the U.S. from the infiltration of its Government by enemies.

EXECUTIVE Order 10450 requires that the hiring and continued employment of federal workers must, in the judgment of department and agency heads, be "clearly consistent" with the interests of national security. The order recognizes that an employee may be loyal, yet still be a security risk. The homosexual may be easy prey to blackmail. The person with relatives behind the Iron Curtain may be exposed to overwhelming pressures. The alcoholic may unintentionally blab secrets.

But the system does not—and cannot—adhere strictly to judicial principles, with the "defendant" presumed innocent until proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. For guilt in the legal sense is not involved. The idea is not to wait until the drunken employee gives away an important secret; it is to get rid of him beforehand. “
Read more: National Affairs: THE MEANING OF SECURITY - TIME