Let's Hear It For America's (Liberal) Educators!

[regent]

McCarthy almost made the anticommunism crusade into a cheap joke. I often wondered if

McCarthy almost made the anticommunism crusade into a cheap joke. I often wondered if he believed any of his speeches, charges etc. he made. I almost felt sorry for him in the Army-McCarthy hearings, he was so pathetic. I think even the Republican Senators felt betrayed by him.

As usual, the slander from Rooseveltian blow-hards continues.
Unfortunately for you, the truth has come out.


" .... original source archives that have come to light in recent years suggest that, if anything, McCarthy understated the breadth of Soviet infiltration. These include the revelations by the former KGB Chief Oleg Gordievsky, who in conjunction with the Cambridge intelligence expert Christopher Andrew, began exposing the scope of Soviet penetration in 1990, even before the USSR collapsed; the U.S. intelligence community’s Venona decryptions that began becoming public in the mid-1990s and were summarized in breathtaking detail by Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel; the investigative work of Jerrold and Leona Schecter, who traced the flow of Venona revelations into the Truman White House, beginning as early as 1945; the former KGB archivist Vasily Mitrokhin, who smuggled his files out of Moscow in 1992 (and who, in conjunction with Christopher Andrew, found astonishing the apathy of American historians regarding the KGB’s influence operations); the groundbreaking scholarship of John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr on the history of Communist espionage and the mulish determination of the academy not to notice it; the voluminous evidence of American treason on Moscow’s behalf amassed by Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev; the files of FBI investigations and congressional hearings on Communist infiltration that have recently been declassified; and so on.

No American in history has undergone as thoroughgoing a character assassination as McCarthy."
Red herrings by Andrew C. McCarthy - The New Criterion


Luckily, there are fewer and fewer of you dinosaurs denying the truth.

As more of the truth becomes known....so do the transgressions of you idol, Franklin Roosevelt.

So how did it all turn out? I mean has the Senate rescinded their censure, do books on political ideology now rate McCarthy as a good conservative, have dictionaries now changed their definition of McCarthyism? Perhaps even as important have they ever found that list of communists that McCarthy used to start his crusade?
One thing did change, however, the latest historical rating of presidents placed FDR as America's best president, number one, the biggie.

That is a very interesting response.

YOu seem to dismiss the relevance of the truth because the negative characterization of McCarthy is still widely believed and it serves your purpose.

I care not one whit about McCarthy except how he used fear to exploit people. McCarthy used people's fear to feed his political ego, but was so clumsy that he became a joke, and McCarthyism is now used as a anecdote for fear. As one goes over these boards we can see example after example of posters trying to frighten people.

Was that meant to address my question?

Because it seems when you say you only care about one thing, that strongly implies that you don't care about all other things, in this case the truth.

I want to be clear about that. Are you saying that you don't care about the truth?

There are certainly better sources for the truth than these boards, and to tout McCarthy off as a bearer of truth is itself a joke.

 

[Correll]

As usual, the slander from Rooseveltian blow-hards continues.
Unfortunately for you, the truth has come out.


" .... original source archives that have come to light in recent years suggest that, if anything, McCarthy understated the breadth of Soviet infiltration. These include the revelations by the former KGB Chief Oleg Gordievsky, who in conjunction with the Cambridge intelligence expert Christopher Andrew, began exposing the scope of Soviet penetration in 1990, even before the USSR collapsed; the U.S. intelligence community’s Venona decryptions that began becoming public in the mid-1990s and were summarized in breathtaking detail by Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel; the investigative work of Jerrold and Leona Schecter, who traced the flow of Venona revelations into the Truman White House, beginning as early as 1945; the former KGB archivist Vasily Mitrokhin, who smuggled his files out of Moscow in 1992 (and who, in conjunction with Christopher Andrew, found astonishing the apathy of American historians regarding the KGB’s influence operations); the groundbreaking scholarship of John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr on the history of Communist espionage and the mulish determination of the academy not to notice it; the voluminous evidence of American treason on Moscow’s behalf amassed by Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev; the files of FBI investigations and congressional hearings on Communist infiltration that have recently been declassified; and so on.

No American in history has undergone as thoroughgoing a character assassination as McCarthy."
Red herrings by Andrew C. McCarthy - The New Criterion


Luckily, there are fewer and fewer of you dinosaurs denying the truth.

As more of the truth becomes known....so do the transgressions of you idol, Franklin Roosevelt.

So how did it all turn out? I mean has the Senate rescinded their censure, do books on political ideology now rate McCarthy as a good conservative, have dictionaries now changed their definition of McCarthyism? Perhaps even as important have they ever found that list of communists that McCarthy used to start his crusade?
One thing did change, however, the latest historical rating of presidents placed FDR as America's best president, number one, the biggie.

That is a very interesting response.

YOu seem to dismiss the relevance of the truth because the negative characterization of McCarthy is still widely believed and it serves your purpose.

I care not one whit about McCarthy except how he used fear to exploit people. McCarthy used people's fear to feed his political ego, but was so clumsy that he became a joke, and McCarthyism is now used as a anecdote for fear. As one goes over these boards we can see example after example of posters trying to frighten people.

Was that meant to address my question?

Because it seems when you say you only care about one thing, that strongly implies that you don't care about all other things, in this case the truth.

I want to be clear about that. Are you saying that you don't care about the truth?

There are certainly better sources for the truth than these boards, and to tout McCarthy off as a bearer of truth is itself a joke.

That is still not a direct nor clear answer.

So far, near as I can tell, your response to new information about the level of Soviet infiltration of US government revealed by the release of Cold War era soviet files, is to say you don't care because it has not rehabilitated McCarthy's reputation.

Are you pulling a "Harry Reid" in that you are comfortable with a lie if it serves your partisan purposes?

 

[PoliticalChic]

As usual, the slander from Rooseveltian blow-hards continues.
Unfortunately for you, the truth has come out.


" .... original source archives that have come to light in recent years suggest that, if anything, McCarthy understated the breadth of Soviet infiltration. These include the revelations by the former KGB Chief Oleg Gordievsky, who in conjunction with the Cambridge intelligence expert Christopher Andrew, began exposing the scope of Soviet penetration in 1990, even before the USSR collapsed; the U.S. intelligence community’s Venona decryptions that began becoming public in the mid-1990s and were summarized in breathtaking detail by Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel; the investigative work of Jerrold and Leona Schecter, who traced the flow of Venona revelations into the Truman White House, beginning as early as 1945; the former KGB archivist Vasily Mitrokhin, who smuggled his files out of Moscow in 1992 (and who, in conjunction with Christopher Andrew, found astonishing the apathy of American historians regarding the KGB’s influence operations); the groundbreaking scholarship of John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr on the history of Communist espionage and the mulish determination of the academy not to notice it; the voluminous evidence of American treason on Moscow’s behalf amassed by Allen Weinstein and Alexander Vassiliev; the files of FBI investigations and congressional hearings on Communist infiltration that have recently been declassified; and so on.

No American in history has undergone as thoroughgoing a character assassination as McCarthy."
Red herrings by Andrew C. McCarthy - The New Criterion


Luckily, there are fewer and fewer of you dinosaurs denying the truth.

As more of the truth becomes known....so do the transgressions of you idol, Franklin Roosevelt.

So how did it all turn out? I mean has the Senate rescinded their censure, do books on political ideology now rate McCarthy as a good conservative, have dictionaries now changed their definition of McCarthyism? Perhaps even as important have they ever found that list of communists that McCarthy used to start his crusade?
One thing did change, however, the latest historical rating of presidents placed FDR as America's best president, number one, the biggie.

That is a very interesting response.

YOu seem to dismiss the relevance of the truth because the negative characterization of McCarthy is still widely believed and it serves your purpose.

I care not one whit about McCarthy except how he used fear to exploit people. McCarthy used people's fear to feed his political ego, but was so clumsy that he became a joke, and McCarthyism is now used as a anecdote for fear. As one goes over these boards we can see example after example of posters trying to frighten people.

Was that meant to address my question?

Because it seems when you say you only care about one thing, that strongly implies that you don't care about all other things, in this case the truth.

I want to be clear about that. Are you saying that you don't care about the truth?

There are certainly better sources for the truth than these boards, and to tout McCarthy off as a bearer of truth is itself a joke.

Yet none of you FDR apologists are able to name even one non-communist whose life was 'ruined' by the hero, McCarthy.


That would give an intelligent person pause.

 

[regent]

So how did it all turn out? I mean has the Senate rescinded their censure, do books on political ideology now rate McCarthy as a good conservative, have dictionaries now changed their definition of McCarthyism? Perhaps even as important have they ever found that list of communists that McCarthy used to start his crusade?
One thing did change, however, the latest historical rating of presidents placed FDR as America's best president, number one, the biggie.

That is a very interesting response.

YOu seem to dismiss the relevance of the truth because the negative characterization of McCarthy is still widely believed and it serves your purpose.

I care not one whit about McCarthy except how he used fear to exploit people. McCarthy used people's fear to feed his political ego, but was so clumsy that he became a joke, and McCarthyism is now used as a anecdote for fear. As one goes over these boards we can see example after example of posters trying to frighten people.

Was that meant to address my question?

Because it seems when you say you only care about one thing, that strongly implies that you don't care about all other things, in this case the truth.

I want to be clear about that. Are you saying that you don't care about the truth?

There are certainly better sources for the truth than these boards, and to tout McCarthy off as a bearer of truth is itself a joke.

Yet none of you FDR apologists are able to name even one non-communist whose life was 'ruined' by the hero, McCarthy.


That would give an intelligent person pause.

It isn't a life that was ruined but lives. McCarthy did the Elm Street fear thing on us and it cost us.
The use of fear by politicians is well known and our reaction to that fear can cause problems. Look at the attempts to use fear on these boards. We were so afraid of communism that we sent troops out to fight its spread. Why didn't we attack the USSR, because our fear of that encounter was greater, so we sent troops to Vietnam. We need leadership that does not use our fears for political gain. The only thing we need to fear is fear itself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

That is a very interesting response.

YOu seem to dismiss the relevance of the truth because the negative characterization of McCarthy is still widely believed and it serves your purpose.

I care not one whit about McCarthy except how he used fear to exploit people. McCarthy used people's fear to feed his political ego, but was so clumsy that he became a joke, and McCarthyism is now used as a anecdote for fear. As one goes over these boards we can see example after example of posters trying to frighten people.

Was that meant to address my question?

Because it seems when you say you only care about one thing, that strongly implies that you don't care about all other things, in this case the truth.

I want to be clear about that. Are you saying that you don't care about the truth?

There are certainly better sources for the truth than these boards, and to tout McCarthy off as a bearer of truth is itself a joke.

Yet none of you FDR apologists are able to name even one non-communist whose life was 'ruined' by the hero, McCarthy.


That would give an intelligent person pause.

It isn't a life that was ruined but lives. McCarthy did the Elm Street fear thing on us and it cost us.
The use of fear by politicians is well known and our reaction to that fear can cause problems. Look at the attempts to use fear on these boards. We were so afraid of communism that we sent troops out to fight its spread. Why didn't we attack the USSR, because our fear of that encounter was greater, so we sent troops to Vietnam. We need leadership that does not use our fears for political gain. The only thing we need to fear is fear itself.

So your excuse is that America had nothing to fear in allowing Stalin and his agents direct American policy.

 

[regent]

Was that meant to address my question?

Because it seems when you say you only care about one thing, that strongly implies that you don't care about all other things, in this case the truth.

I want to be clear about that. Are you saying that you don't care about the truth?

There are certainly better sources for the truth than these boards, and to tout McCarthy off as a bearer of truth is itself a joke.

Yet none of you FDR apologists are able to name even one non-communist whose life was 'ruined' by the hero, McCarthy.


That would give an intelligent person pause.

It isn't a life that was ruined but lives. McCarthy did the Elm Street fear thing on us and it cost us.
The use of fear by politicians is well known and our reaction to that fear can cause problems. Look at the attempts to use fear on these boards. We were so afraid of communism that we sent troops out to fight its spread. Why didn't we attack the USSR, because our fear of that encounter was greater, so we sent troops to Vietnam. We need leadership that does not use our fears for political gain. The only thing we need to fear is fear itself.

So your excuse is that America had nothing to fear in allowing Stalin and his agents direct American policy.

Is that called "begging the question"?

 

[HenryBHough]

Don't beg.

You're old enough to steal.

 

[squeeze berry]

CG,

many teachers are conservative, but keep their opinions to themselves for fear of reprisal

 

[mgh80]

CG,

many teachers are conservative, but keep their opinions to themselves for fear of reprisal

I'm not sure if they keep their opinions to themselves for faer of reprisal...I know plenty of Republican/Conservative teachers that are outspoken. It's just that Democrats/Liberals are a majority in the profession (not as much as many people think), and as an educators our job isn't to indoctrinate our kids with left or right politics...it's to educate. None of my students know what my beliefs are. From time to time they'll ask me, and I'll tell them that since I'm a teacher I'm not going to tell them (the overwhelming majority of students don't give a crap).

Teachers being liberal is a stereotype-and like many stereotypes there is some truth to it-but ultimately it's not as much as it would seem.

 

[regent]

How about school boards are they mostly conservative or liberal, and what of administrators conservative or liberal?

 

[Moonglow]

Whew! Glad you didn't deny your obvious stupidity.

Now...about your lack of education: did you run out of apostrophes?

"....youre terrible at writing."
"...you're terrible at writing."

Now...you may or may not be correct about 'writing'...but there is no doubt that I am always correct at telling the truth.

If youre going to point out lazy grammar - youd have to admit hypocrisy on that front.

I can quote my quote of your quote showing just that, but you already knew that.

Youre really terrible at this.

So you admit you're lazy. Most idiots are.

I admit my typing on an anonymous message board is lazy, yes. Justified by the fact that this *should* mean very little to its users in the grand scheme of things, but i do understand it means so much more to certain people.

The op, for instance? This is her full time occupation.

She's posting in between kneeling on the prayer bar at mass....

Seems G.T. is the one doing the kneeling but it's not to pray.

He's just another dirty white boy doing a Korean....girl.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

Was that meant to address my question?

Because it seems when you say you only care about one thing, that strongly implies that you don't care about all other things, in this case the truth.

I want to be clear about that. Are you saying that you don't care about the truth?

There are certainly better sources for the truth than these boards, and to tout McCarthy off as a bearer of truth is itself a joke.

Yet none of you FDR apologists are able to name even one non-communist whose life was 'ruined' by the hero, McCarthy.


That would give an intelligent person pause.

It isn't a life that was ruined but lives. McCarthy did the Elm Street fear thing on us and it cost us.
The use of fear by politicians is well known and our reaction to that fear can cause problems. Look at the attempts to use fear on these boards. We were so afraid of communism that we sent troops out to fight its spread. Why didn't we attack the USSR, because our fear of that encounter was greater, so we sent troops to Vietnam. We need leadership that does not use our fears for political gain. The only thing we need to fear is fear itself.

So your excuse is that America had nothing to fear in allowing Stalin and his agents direct American policy.

Is that called "begging the question"?

Again....let's get you on record: are you denying that Stalin directed much of the United State's war policy?

 

[PoliticalChic]

CG,

many teachers are conservative, but keep their opinions to themselves for fear of reprisal

I'm not sure if they keep their opinions to themselves for faer of reprisal...I know plenty of Republican/Conservative teachers that are outspoken. It's just that Democrats/Liberals are a majority in the profession (not as much as many people think), and as an educators our job isn't to indoctrinate our kids with left or right politics...it's to educate. None of my students know what my beliefs are. From time to time they'll ask me, and I'll tell them that since I'm a teacher I'm not going to tell them (the overwhelming majority of students don't give a crap).

Teachers being liberal is a stereotype-and like many stereotypes there is some truth to it-but ultimately it's not as much as it would seem.

You are either naive or far too kind to the Left.




1. Academic feminists who received tenure, promotion, and funding, tended to be pro-abortion, pro-pornography (anti-censorship), pro-prostitution (pro-sex workers), pro-surrogacy, and anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist, and anti-American…proponents of simplistic gender-neutrality (women and men are exactly the same) or essentialist: men and women are completely different, and women are better.

They are loyal to their careers and their cliques, not to the truth. [In their writing, they] have pretended that brilliance and originality can best be conveyed in a secret, Mandarin language that absolutely no one, including themselves, can possibly understand…and this obfuscation of language has been employed to hide a considerable lack of brilliance and originality and to avoid the consequences of making oneself clear.
“The Death of Feminism,” by Phyllis Chesler


2. Liberals stamp out dissent by social and professional ostracism and legal discrimination. This is the modern version of methods used by medieval Christianity: a secular Inquisition.

a. Intelligentsia as grand inquisitors: in the media, universities, the law, political and professional groups. The dominating ideologies include anti-capitalism, feminism, multiculturalism, and environmentalism. They form the unchallengeable orthodoxy in academia. No challenges or deviations are permitted, and anyone who does not share these values is defined as extreme.

b. These ideologies have as their common theme the overturning of the established order of the West.

c. How ironic that intellectual liberty is assaulted within the institutions of reason.
Melanie Philips, “The World Turned Upside Down,” ch 6

 

[regent]

It's that "thinking" stuff that drives conservatives nuts. They believe It's all been done, and we should leave well enough alone. Liberals want to keep the thinking process going, new ideas, new concepts, better lives, better economic systems, better people, better governments and on and on. The problem seems to be that some cannot help doing the thinking stuff and so the conflict goes on.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It's that "thinking" stuff that drives conservatives nuts. They believe It's all been done, and we should leave well enough alone. Liberals want to keep the thinking process going, new ideas, new concepts, better lives, better economic systems, better people, better governments and on and on. The problem seems to be that some cannot help doing the thinking stuff and so the conflict goes on.

"It's that "thinking" stuff that drives conservatives nuts"

What a hypocrite!

You're the dope who regularly responds to linked,documented, sourced facts with the same dopey line 'you better hurry up and tell all the historians.'



You've proven once again, anytime you want to know what Leftists are doing, just see what they blame the other side for.

 

[rdean]

You only have to compare Red State to Blue States to understand the value of a so called "liberal" education. Magical creation, Young Earth and God controls the weather will get us no where except down.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You only have to compare Red State to Blue States to understand the value of a so called "liberal" education. Magical creation, Young Earth and God controls the weather will get us no where except down.

Actually....it's far simpler.

One need only read your posts, and recognize on which side you reside.

 

[Unkotare]

Untold death and suffering have been caused by the leftist belief that they can 'make' people perfect through social, political, and personal engineering - whether the "ignorant masses" want it or not. For their own good, of course...

 

[regent]

It's that "thinking" stuff that drives conservatives nuts. They believe It's all been done, and we should leave well enough alone. Liberals want to keep the thinking process going, new ideas, new concepts, better lives, better economic systems, better people, better governments and on and on. The problem seems to be that some cannot help doing the thinking stuff and so the conflict goes on.

"It's that "thinking" stuff that drives conservatives nuts"

What a hypocrite!

You're the dope who regularly responds to linked,documented, sourced facts with the same dopey line 'you better hurry up and tell all the historians.'



You've proven once again, anytime you want to know what Leftists are doing, just see what they blame the other side for.

Untold death and suffering have been caused by the leftist belief that they can 'make' people perfect through social, political, and personal engineering - whether the "ignorant masses" want it or not. For their own good, of course...

I don't think our founders or framers were trying to make anyone perfect, but perhaps more-perfect, as they explained the new government in the preamble.

 

[Correll]

That is a very interesting response.

YOu seem to dismiss the relevance of the truth because the negative characterization of McCarthy is still widely believed and it serves your purpose.

I care not one whit about McCarthy except how he used fear to exploit people. McCarthy used people's fear to feed his political ego, but was so clumsy that he became a joke, and McCarthyism is now used as a anecdote for fear. As one goes over these boards we can see example after example of posters trying to frighten people.

Was that meant to address my question?

Because it seems when you say you only care about one thing, that strongly implies that you don't care about all other things, in this case the truth.

I want to be clear about that. Are you saying that you don't care about the truth?

There are certainly better sources for the truth than these boards, and to tout McCarthy off as a bearer of truth is itself a joke.

Yet none of you FDR apologists are able to name even one non-communist whose life was 'ruined' by the hero, McCarthy.


That would give an intelligent person pause.

It isn't a life that was ruined but lives. McCarthy did the Elm Street fear thing on us and it cost us.
The use of fear by politicians is well known and our reaction to that fear can cause problems. Look at the attempts to use fear on these boards. We were so afraid of communism that we sent troops out to fight its spread. Why didn't we attack the USSR, because our fear of that encounter was greater, so we sent troops to Vietnam. We need leadership that does not use our fears for political gain. The only thing we need to fear is fear itself.

There was certainly fear about communism.

You are assuming that that fear was ill founded, without doing anything to support that assumption and ignoring all and any evidence presented that contradicts your assumption.