PoliticalChic
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- #241
"McCarthy opponents" ??
What do you do, practice being stupid in front of a mirror before posting here?
Being opposed to a lying scumbag demagogue out for personal megalomania doesn't make one "anti-conservative". Idiot.
Take it, Senator...
>> The United States Senate has long enjoyed worldwide respect as the greatest deliberative body in the world. But recently that deliberative character has too often been debased to the level of a forum of hate and character assassination sheltered by the shield of congressional immunity.
It is ironical that we Senators can in debate in the Senate directly or indirectly, by any form of words, impute to any American who is not a Senator any conduct or motive unworthy or unbecoming an American -- and without that non-Senator American having any legal redress against us -- yet if we say the same thing in the Senate about our colleagues we can be stopped on the grounds of being out of order.
It is strange that we can verbally attack anyone else without restraint and with full protection and yet we hold ourselves above the same type of criticism here on the Senate Floor. Surely the United States Senate is big enough to take self-criticism and self-appraisal. Surely we should be able to take the same kind of character attacks that we "dish out" to outsiders.
...
I think that it is high time that we remembered that we have sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution. I think that it is high time that we remembered that the Constitution, as amended, speaks not only of the freedom of speech but also of trial by jury instead of trial by accusation.
Whether it be a criminal prosecution in court or a character prosecution in the Senate, there is little practical distinction when the life of a person has been ruined.
Those of us who shout the loudest about Americanism in making character assassinations are all too frequently those who, by our own words and acts, ignore some of the basic principles of Americanism:
The right to criticize;
The right to hold unpopular beliefs;
The right to protest;
The right of independent thought.
The exercise of these rights should not cost one single American citizen his reputation or his right to a livelihood nor should he be in danger of losing his reputation or livelihood merely because he happens to know someone who holds unpopular beliefs. Who of us doesnÂ’t? Otherwise none of us could call our souls our own. Otherwise thought control would have set in.
The American people are sick and tired of being afraid to speak their minds lest they be politically smeared as "Communists" or "Fascists" by their opponents. Freedom of speech is not what it used to be in America. It has been so abused by some that it is not exercised by others.
The American people are sick and tired of seeing innocent people smeared and guilty people whitewashed. But there have been enough proved cases, such as the Amerasia case, the Hiss case, the Coplon case, the Gold case, to cause the nationwide distrust and strong suspicion that there may be something to the unproved, sensational accusations.
... The nation sorely needs a Republican victory. But I donÂ’t want to see the Republican Party ride to political victory on the Four Horsemen of Calumny -- Fear, Ignorance, Bigotry, and Smear.
I doubt if the Republican Party could -- simply because I donÂ’t believe the American people will uphold any political party that puts political exploitation above national interest. Surely we Republicans arenÂ’t that desperate for victory.
I donÂ’t want to see the Republican Party win that way. <<
-- Margaret Chase Smith (R-ME), June 1950
I'll leave to other fallacy hunters who have more time the low-hanging fruit canards of what the fuck sexual allegations, specious quotes and a public hug have to do with political philosophies. Some fruit just hangs too low.
Not to mention what the fuck any of this has to do with a topic on a British songwriter, which has apparently been abandoned...
Well, well....another moron who needs slapping down.
Coming right up.
"Being opposed to a lying scumbag demagogue out for personal megalomania doesn't make one "anti-conservative". Idiot."
1. Whittaker Chambers wrote in his book WITNESS that liberals are/were incapable of ever effectively fighting Communism because they did not see anything in Communism that was antithetical to their own beliefs. In short, Liberals are Communists and Communists are Liberals.
And, sure enough....a mentally incapacitated Liberal jumps right up to prove it.
Communists, Liberals...same thing. You.
2. Only a Liberal would claim that Senator McCarthy was more of a danger than the paid Soviet spies in the government....the ones who helped FDR send plans for the atomic bomb to Stalin, caused the Korean War, and....lost China to the homicidal maniac Mao.
Raise your paw.
3. The thrust is that it was McCarthyism, more than Soviet espionage or Communism infiltration of government, that was – in the words of the October 23, 1998, NYTimes editorial, “a lethal threat to American democracy.” This, in the same editorial that admitted that the evidence against Julius Rosenberg, and “most likely” Alger Hiss, was clear.
And this:
4. As a result of the Venona Papers, and declassification of KGB files verifies pretty much all of McCarthy’s charges….and no one was ‘ruined’ by McCarthy revelations….The greatest complaint against McCarthy was that he was unkind….even mean….to those in question.
Think of it....you might still be a virgin except for what nature did to your mind.
Man, that was fun.
Drop by when you need another lesson.
