Sen Joe McCarthy: American Patriot and Hero

[JakeStarkey]

The following pulled up very easily on a simple search. I have not audited them. I don't need the fluoridation controversy to know McCarthy was an enemy of all that is good in America.

#
Water fluoridation controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
... who "believed flouridated water was a Jewish plot to weaken the white race." ..... Senator Joe McCarthy. University of California Press. pp. 21–22. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation_controversy - Cached
#
HorsesAss.Org » Blog Archive » Pierce County Executive Pat ...
Dec 29, 2008 ... Brylcreem. Pre-flouride dentists stuffing the holes in kids' teeth with mercury. Joe McCarthy. Lynchings. The strange things we all ate. ...
horsesass.org/?p=11259 - Cached - Similar
#
Newsvine - 1950's Republican were Right: Fluoride in the Drinking ...
Aug 21, 2009 ... Flouride was and is added to drinking water in order to get rid of it .... The communists were only a group of people that Joe McCarthy ...
rapidreload.newsvine.com/_.../3177648-1950s-republican-were-right-fluoride-in-the-drinking-water-was-a-communist-plot-to-sap-... - Cached - Similar
#
Open Thread | Crooks and Liars
Jun 11, 2009 ... Fri, 06/12/2009 - 00:20 — Uncle Joe Mccarthy .... if'n it ain't the mercury, it's the flouride. if'n it ain't the flouride, ...
crooksandliars.com/bluegal/open-thread-183 - Cached
#
Drive-in: Save Free TV : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
Pay TV....bet it was one of those Communist plots....like putting fluoride in the drinking water. Thank god Joe McCarthy went to the drive-in and caught ...
Internet Archive: Free Movies, Music, Books & Wayback Machine › ... › Drive-In Movie Ads - Cached - Similar
#
View topic - Theres gonna be Lithium in our water now.. - School ...
8 posts - 6 authors - Last post: 3 days ago
... osmosis filter take out this shit like it does the flouride? ... in the 1940s as the group was labeled communist by Joseph McCarthy.[3] ...
Information - School Survival Forums... - Cached

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Same way Rep. Lewis heard the voice in his head calling him a "******"

I honestly have to say that I don't give a fat rat's ass WHAT McCarthy did or didn't think about fluoride - and if you leftist twits are going to keep babbling about it, at least fucking spell it right. It's utterly irrelevant to the question here, which is: WERE THERE COMMUNISTS IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT?!

Don't be an idiot Cecile. It is not now nor was it ever against the law to belong to the communist party. What it is is stupid because communism doesn't work. The question you need to be asking is "was there anyone spying on our secrets and providing those secrets to our enemies?" Yes there were ...not many but they did exist. We have them now also. There will always be foreigners trying to steal our ideas and compromise our security. Communist spies..sure..a handful. The FBI was investigating them as they are now. McCarthy didn't find any spies. What he did was drive them deeper into the fabric of or society and put them on alert to be extra carefull. Communists in the movie industry were no threat to our country. Spies come from every country on earth. Singling out communists for a witch hunt was counter productive and wrong. It diverted resources to look at idiots that wanted to start communes and took resources away from truly dangerous people.

This country never has been threatened by communists. Sure there have been some pipe dreamers but like I said they were stupid. You might try looking at spying as a police matter... be curious...look in places where harm can be done.. focus on those places and people. Investigating everyone of any political persuasion is foolish and rarely leads to anything. If someone stood up in the senate and demanded that every muslim must be investigated would you support that? How about every Korean?..Every Chinese?.. Every Jew?..on and on. And yes CC.. there have been so called good christians found out to be spies... Spies have never been that hard to find because they always have to eventually sell or give thier information to someone that wants it. Just watching embassys catches almost all of them. The rest get found out travelling to our enemies countries.

Don't be so easily duped.

Speaking of foolish, you realize that McCarthy had NOTHING to do with the HUAC and the "Movie industry", right?

I love how the Left does not realize how totally foolish they look as, in the year 2010, they parrot back all the stuff they were brainwashed about McCarthy: that he blacklisted people in Hollywood, that he was against fluoridation of water and that there were no Communists at the State Department.

McCarthy nailed it! FDR took advise from genuine Communists spies against the better interests of America because State AND Treasury were home to genuine honest to God traitirs who should have been executed with the Rosenbergs.

 

[American Horse]

The following pulled up very easily on a simple search. I have not audited them. I don't need the fluoridation controversy to know McCarthy was an enemy of all that is good in America.

#
Water fluoridation controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
... who "believed flouridated water was a Jewish plot to weaken the white race." ..... Senator Joe McCarthy. University of California Press. pp. 21–22. ...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation_controversy - Cached

I looked at the first one; which individual case of the above provides primary source material that ties JMcM into the flouiride claim? JUST ONE PLEASE, not a page full of tangential links.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The following pulled up very easily on a simple search. I have not audited them. I don't need the fluoridation controversy to know McCarthy was an enemy of all that is good in America.

#
Water fluoridation controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
... who "believed flouridated water was a Jewish plot to weaken the white race." ..... Senator Joe McCarthy. University of California Press. pp. 21–22. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_fluoridation_controversy - Cached
#
HorsesAss.Org » Blog Archive » Pierce County Executive Pat ...
Dec 29, 2008 ... Brylcreem. Pre-flouride dentists stuffing the holes in kids' teeth with mercury. Joe McCarthy. Lynchings. The strange things we all ate. ...
horsesass.org/?p=11259 - Cached - Similar
#
Newsvine - 1950's Republican were Right: Fluoride in the Drinking ...
Aug 21, 2009 ... Flouride was and is added to drinking water in order to get rid of it .... The communists were only a group of people that Joe McCarthy ...
rapidreload.newsvine.com/_.../3177648-1950s-republican-were-right-fluoride-in-the-drinking-water-was-a-communist-plot-to-sap-... - Cached - Similar
#
Open Thread | Crooks and Liars
Jun 11, 2009 ... Fri, 06/12/2009 - 00:20 — Uncle Joe Mccarthy .... if'n it ain't the mercury, it's the flouride. if'n it ain't the flouride, ...
crooksandliars.com/bluegal/open-thread-183 - Cached
#
Drive-in: Save Free TV : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
Pay TV....bet it was one of those Communist plots....like putting fluoride in the drinking water. Thank god Joe McCarthy went to the drive-in and caught ...
Internet Archive: Free Movies, Music, Books & Wayback Machine › ... › Drive-In Movie Ads - Cached - Similar
#
View topic - Theres gonna be Lithium in our water now.. - School ...
8 posts - 6 authors - Last post: 3 days ago
... osmosis filter take out this shit like it does the flouride? ... in the 1940s as the group was labeled communist by Joseph McCarthy.[3] ...
Information - School Survival Forums... - Cached

Thank you for highlighting how besides the Progressives desire to mention McCarthy and Fluoride in the same sentence there is nothing, no first hand account, no articles, no speeches, no original material whatsoever to the the McCarthy/Fluoride allegations.

You have been brainwashed, Comrade and in your case it took a mist of water and almost no soap.

Thanks for the new "McCarthy as anti-Semite" material

 

[JakeStarkey]

The book by Hermann, JM's primary defender, would be the first place to look for a scholarly material. Hermann's a homer, but I am sure he would address the issue. Ask Political Chic, I bet she has a copy.

 

[American Horse]

The book by Hermann, JM's primary defender, would be the first place to look for a scholarly material. Hermann's a homer, but I am sure he would address the issue. Ask Political Chic, I bet she has a copy.

I have it, and it's not mentioned in Herman's book. People who study history understand the importance of primary sources. Evan's book "Blacklisted ..." was full of ONLY primary sources.

ANYONE serious about studying history of any period realizes one cannot get an accurate historical accounting by reading from rumour mills (read bloggs, or other hearsay accounts)

Frank's OP was about the amount of primary material that has disappeared from the public record, and national archives. We need to ask the question why would such material have need of disappearing if it was not in conflict with "popular wisdom?"
That is a fair question to ask.

But even though important archival material disappears, (stolen/destroyed), the dilligent historian can turn much of it up. Virtally everything in the 58 pages of references and actual copies of documents in Evan's book largely go against the case that was made against McCarthy, and the subsequent hysteria.

 

[HUGGY]

I honestly have to say that I don't give a fat rat's ass WHAT McCarthy did or didn't think about fluoride - and if you leftist twits are going to keep babbling about it, at least fucking spell it right. It's utterly irrelevant to the question here, which is: WERE THERE COMMUNISTS IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT?!

Don't be an idiot Cecile. It is not now nor was it ever against the law to belong to the communist party. What it is is stupid because communism doesn't work. The question you need to be asking is "was there anyone spying on our secrets and providing those secrets to our enemies?" Yes there were ...not many but they did exist. We have them now also. There will always be foreigners trying to steal our ideas and compromise our security. Communist spies..sure..a handful. The FBI was investigating them as they are now. McCarthy didn't find any spies. What he did was drive them deeper into the fabric of or society and put them on alert to be extra carefull. Communists in the movie industry were no threat to our country. Spies come from every country on earth. Singling out communists for a witch hunt was counter productive and wrong. It diverted resources to look at idiots that wanted to start communes and took resources away from truly dangerous people.

This country never has been threatened by communists. Sure there have been some pipe dreamers but like I said they were stupid. You might try looking at spying as a police matter... be curious...look in places where harm can be done.. focus on those places and people. Investigating everyone of any political persuasion is foolish and rarely leads to anything. If someone stood up in the senate and demanded that every muslim must be investigated would you support that? How about every Korean?..Every Chinese?.. Every Jew?..on and on. And yes CC.. there have been so called good christians found out to be spies... Spies have never been that hard to find because they always have to eventually sell or give thier information to someone that wants it. Just watching embassys catches almost all of them. The rest get found out travelling to our enemies countries.

Don't be so easily duped.

Speaking of foolish, you realize that McCarthy had NOTHING to do with the HUAC and the "Movie industry", right?
I love how the Left does not realize how totally foolish they look as, in the year 2010, they parrot back all the stuff they were brainwashed about McCarthy: that he blacklisted people in Hollywood, that he was against fluoridation of water and that there were no Communists at the State Department.

McCarthy nailed it! FDR took advise from genuine Communists spies against the better interests of America because State AND Treasury were home to genuine honest to God traitirs who should have been executed with the Rosenbergs.

That is not true and I'm sure you know it Frankie.

America was a much different place in 1954. There was no 1,000,000 places to get information like there is today. We had just defeated fascism and tyranny all over the planet in a world war fighting for our very existence in a conflict not of our choosing. Totalitarianism disguised as Communism was a serious threat to enslave a world that had just recently rescued itself from another attempt at enslavement. Nothing like our modern world where we have no serious challenge to our spot on the food chain.

People everywhere in our country were very respectful of government and our military. We were conditioned to accept authority out of necessity. Our very survival demanded unquestioned acquiescence to our leadership. That is the stage McCarthy took in his vile witch hunt. The ripple effect was a shock wave of over reaction out of patriotism and our recent bunker them vs us mentality. You Frankie are doing the same thing in reverse ..using the freedom of our expression as it is today as if to suggest that McCarthy was just one guy..what's the big deal? That is extremely dishonest. When it came to information absorbed by the public there was no other guy. No diversion from what we saw countered the venom McCarthy spewed until a handful of genuine American leaders had had enough of that piece of shit. He and he alone spear headed the extreme attitude that in fact the first amendment was irrelevant. He is despised for his demagoguery for good reason.

 

[HUGGY]

I honestly have to say that I don't give a fat rat's ass WHAT McCarthy did or didn't think about fluoride - and if you leftist twits are going to keep babbling about it, at least fucking spell it right. It's utterly irrelevant to the question here, which is: WERE THERE COMMUNISTS IN THE STATE DEPARTMENT?!

Don't be an idiot Cecile. It is not now nor was it ever against the law to belong to the communist party. What it is is stupid because communism doesn't work. The question you need to be asking is "was there anyone spying on our secrets and providing those secrets to our enemies?" Yes there were ...not many but they did exist. We have them now also. There will always be foreigners trying to steal our ideas and compromise our security. Communist spies..sure..a handful. The FBI was investigating them as they are now. McCarthy didn't find any spies. What he did was drive them deeper into the fabric of or society and put them on alert to be extra carefull. Communists in the movie industry were no threat to our country. Spies come from every country on earth. Singling out communists for a witch hunt was counter productive and wrong. It diverted resources to look at idiots that wanted to start communes and took resources away from truly dangerous people.

This country never has been threatened by communists. Sure there have been some pipe dreamers but like I said they were stupid. You might try looking at spying as a police matter... be curious...look in places where harm can be done.. focus on those places and people. Investigating everyone of any political persuasion is foolish and rarely leads to anything. If someone stood up in the senate and demanded that every muslim must be investigated would you support that? How about every Korean?..Every Chinese?.. Every Jew?..on and on. And yes CC.. there have been so called good christians found out to be spies... Spies have never been that hard to find because they always have to eventually sell or give thier information to someone that wants it. Just watching embassys catches almost all of them. The rest get found out travelling to our enemies countries.

Don't be so easily duped.

Speaking of foolish, you realize that McCarthy had NOTHING to do with the HUAC and the "Movie industry", right?
I love how the Left does not realize how totally foolish they look as, in the year 2010, they parrot back all the stuff they were brainwashed about McCarthy: that he blacklisted people in Hollywood, that he was against fluoridation of water and that there were no Communists at the State Department.

McCarthy nailed it! FDR took advise from genuine Communists spies against the better interests of America because State AND Treasury were home to genuine honest to God traitirs who should have been executed with the Rosenbergs.

That is not true and I'm sure you know it Frankie.

America was a much different place in 1954. There was no 1,000,000 places to get information like there is today. We had just defeated fascism and tyranny all over the planet in a world war fighting for our very existence in a conflict not of our choosing. Totalitarianism disguised as Communism was a serious threat to enslave a world that had just recently rescued itself from another attempt at enslavement. Nothing like our modern world where we have no serious challenge to our spot on the food chain.

People everywhere in our country were very respectful of government and our military. We were conditioned to accept authority out of necessity. Our very survival demanded unquestioned acquiescence to our leadership. That is the stage McCarthy took in his vile witch hunt. The ripple effect was a shock wave of over reaction out of patriotism and our then recent bunker "them vs us" mentality. You Frankie are doing the same thing in reverse ..using the freedom of our expression as it is today as if to suggest that McCarthy was just one guy..what's the big deal? That is extremely dishonest. When it came to information absorbed by the public there was no other guy. No diversion from what we saw countered the venom McCarthy spewed until a handful of genuine American leaders had had enough of that piece of shit. He and he alone spear headed the extreme attitude that in fact the first amendment was irrelevant. He is despised for his demagoguery for good reason. Your poor judgement in attempting to paint over the harm he caused is harmful in it's own right.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Don't be an idiot Cecile. It is not now nor was it ever against the law to belong to the communist party. What it is is stupid because communism doesn't work. The question you need to be asking is "was there anyone spying on our secrets and providing those secrets to our enemies?" Yes there were ...not many but they did exist. We have them now also. There will always be foreigners trying to steal our ideas and compromise our security. Communist spies..sure..a handful. The FBI was investigating them as they are now. McCarthy didn't find any spies. What he did was drive them deeper into the fabric of or society and put them on alert to be extra carefull. Communists in the movie industry were no threat to our country. Spies come from every country on earth. Singling out communists for a witch hunt was counter productive and wrong. It diverted resources to look at idiots that wanted to start communes and took resources away from truly dangerous people.

This country never has been threatened by communists. Sure there have been some pipe dreamers but like I said they were stupid. You might try looking at spying as a police matter... be curious...look in places where harm can be done.. focus on those places and people. Investigating everyone of any political persuasion is foolish and rarely leads to anything. If someone stood up in the senate and demanded that every muslim must be investigated would you support that? How about every Korean?..Every Chinese?.. Every Jew?..on and on. And yes CC.. there have been so called good christians found out to be spies... Spies have never been that hard to find because they always have to eventually sell or give thier information to someone that wants it. Just watching embassys catches almost all of them. The rest get found out travelling to our enemies countries.

Don't be so easily duped.

Speaking of foolish, you realize that McCarthy had NOTHING to do with the HUAC and the "Movie industry", right?
I love how the Left does not realize how totally foolish they look as, in the year 2010, they parrot back all the stuff they were brainwashed about McCarthy: that he blacklisted people in Hollywood, that he was against fluoridation of water and that there were no Communists at the State Department.

McCarthy nailed it! FDR took advise from genuine Communists spies against the better interests of America because State AND Treasury were home to genuine honest to God traitirs who should have been executed with the Rosenbergs.

That is not true and I'm sure you know it Frankie.

America was a much different place in 1954. There was no 1,000,000 places to get information like there is today. We had just defeated fascism and tyranny all over the planet in a world war fighting for our very existence in a conflict not of our choosing. Totalitarianism disguised as Communism was a serious threat to enslave a world that had just recently rescued itself from another attempt at enslavement. Nothing like our modern world where we have no serious challenge to our spot on the food chain.

People everywhere in our country were very respectful of government and our military. We were conditioned to accept authority out of necessity. Our very survival demanded unquestioned acquiescence to our leadership. That is the stage McCarthy took in his vile witch hunt. The ripple effect was a shock wave of over reaction out of patriotism and our recent bunker them vs us mentality. You Frankie are doing the same thing in reverse ..using the freedom of our expression as it is today as if to suggest that McCarthy was just one guy..what's the big deal? That is extremely dishonest. When it came to information absorbed by the public there was no other guy. No diversion from what we saw countered the venom McCarthy spewed until a handful of genuine American leaders had had enough of that piece of shit. He and he alone spear headed the extreme attitude that in fact the first amendment was irrelevant. He is despised for his demagoguery for good reason.

You're spewing back lies and nonsense that you never critically examined just decided to take as your own thoughts.

Progressives made an issue of McCarthy simply because he correctly exposed Soviet espionage in the US Government.

I thought you would at least take a look at how new material has totally vindicated McCarthy and I think that one day you eventually might.

 

[HUGGY]

Speaking of foolish, you realize that McCarthy had NOTHING to do with the HUAC and the "Movie industry", right?
I love how the Left does not realize how totally foolish they look as, in the year 2010, they parrot back all the stuff they were brainwashed about McCarthy: that he blacklisted people in Hollywood, that he was against fluoridation of water and that there were no Communists at the State Department.

McCarthy nailed it! FDR took advise from genuine Communists spies against the better interests of America because State AND Treasury were home to genuine honest to God traitirs who should have been executed with the Rosenbergs.

That is not true and I'm sure you know it Frankie.

America was a much different place in 1954. There was no 1,000,000 places to get information like there is today. We had just defeated fascism and tyranny all over the planet in a world war fighting for our very existence in a conflict not of our choosing. Totalitarianism disguised as Communism was a serious threat to enslave a world that had just recently rescued itself from another attempt at enslavement. Nothing like our modern world where we have no serious challenge to our spot on the food chain.

People everywhere in our country were very respectful of government and our military. We were conditioned to accept authority out of necessity. Our very survival demanded unquestioned acquiescence to our leadership. That is the stage McCarthy took in his vile witch hunt. The ripple effect was a shock wave of over reaction out of patriotism and our recent bunker them vs us mentality. You Frankie are doing the same thing in reverse ..using the freedom of our expression as it is today as if to suggest that McCarthy was just one guy..what's the big deal? That is extremely dishonest. When it came to information absorbed by the public there was no other guy. No diversion from what we saw countered the venom McCarthy spewed until a handful of genuine American leaders had had enough of that piece of shit. He and he alone spear headed the extreme attitude that in fact the first amendment was irrelevant. He is despised for his demagoguery for good reason.

You're spewing back lies and nonsense that you never critically examined just decided to take as your own thoughts.

Progressives made an issue of McCarthy simply because he correctly exposed Soviet espionage in the US Government.

I thought you would at least take a look at how new material has totally vindicated McCarthy and I think that one day you eventually might.

The vile misuse of the public platform did not find anything the FBI was not already aware of. What it did was ruin lives. What he did was a full frontal assauly on the Constitution. Sorry Frankie..my experience having lived through the period is rellevant. I don't give a rats ass if this thread lasts for ten thousand posts. I will not back down on this. I will never allow a McCarthy revision to go unchallenged.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The book by Hermann, JM's primary defender, would be the first place to look for a scholarly material. Hermann's a homer, but I am sure he would address the issue. Ask Political Chic, I bet she has a copy.

I have it, and it's not mentioned in Herman's book. People who study history understand the importance of primary sources. Evan's book "Blacklisted ..." was full of ONLY primary sources.

ANYONE serious about studying history of any period realizes one cannot get an accurate historical accounting by reading from rumour mills (read bloggs, but other accounts which are hearsay)

Frank's OP was about the amount of primary material that has disappeared from the public record, and national archives. We need to ask the question why would such material have need of disappearing if it was not in conflict with "popular wisdom?"
That is a fair question to ask.

But even though important archival material disappears, (stolen/destroyed), the dilligent historian can turn much of it up. Virtally everything in the 58 pages of references and actual copies of documents in Evan's book largely go against the case that was made against McCarthy, and the subsequent hysteria.

Hmmm, now I get to go down to the library and check out a copy of Hermann to double check your comment. If you are right, I will acknowledge. If you aren't, I will acknowledge that as well.

I agree that primary materials are important, and the interpretation from those materials are as important. The question of course with Evans is that he has not covered competently all the primary sources that discredit McCarthy, thus failing to meet the historian's duty.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Here is an interesting review of Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator By Arthur Herman (New York: Free Press, 2000. Pp. vi, 404. $26 cloth.)

McCarthy and His Enemies, Revisited by Larry I. Bland

A POLITICAL TRACT DISGUISED AS A SCHOLARLY history, this book is intended to be a contribution to the right-wing side of the current “culture war” in the United States. Nevertheless, it could have been written in 1956 as a companion piece to William Buckley and Brent Bozell’s McCarthy and His Enemies. Contrary to appearances, the author is not McCarthy’s defense lawyer but a cultural historian who received his Ph.D. in history from Johns Hopkins University (1985), is adjunct professor at George Mason University, and coordinator of the Western Civilization Program at the Smithsonian Institution. In 1997 he published The Idea of Decline in Western History.

According to Herman, McCarthy was justified and correct in all important political ideas and actions. The senator’s liberal enemies in academia, government, and the media were elitist gullible fools (at best). Sometimes they were irresponsibly blind (“in complicity with evil&#8221 to the enormous danger communist subversion and propaganda posed to American society, but just as often they were actual traitors or Marxist-inclined dupes. Revisionist and antiwar writers of the 1960s and after are the ideological descendants of this evil crew.

The author uses several techniques to defend the senator.

The first is to admit that his hero had certain human flaws, which he then explains away. Was McCarthy an alcoholic? Yes, but not “an abusive or violent drunk.”

Second, tu quoque arguments. Did McCarthy do deed X of dubious fairness or morality? Yes, but the liberals did it first and worse.

Third, everybody-does-it (i.e., lies, distorts, leaks documents, etc.).

Fourth, it was worse elsewhere or at another time (i.e., not that many people were sent to jail or had their careers damaged between 1947 and 1954, and besides the Red Scare of 1919-20 was worse, and McCarthy’s actions were trivial compared to Stalin’s purges and gulags).

Fifth, be certain to select only the most outré, context-less quotes by McCarthy’s critics.

Sixth, be entirely innocent of the content of the past half century of diplomatic history writings when you assert such silly chestnuts such as: Harry Hopkins believed every lie that the Marxists told him, that Alger Hiss played an important role in the “disastrous decisions at Yalta,” or that China was lost when George C. Marshall — encouraged by Commie-symp types like John Stewart Service — embargoed military supplies to Chiang Kai-shek in 1946, thereby causing Mao’s victory and high U.S. casualties in the Korean War.

Finally, assert that every charge you (or Whittaker Chambers, Elizabeth Bentley, et al.) have made against liberals has been proven true by the Venona transcripts or recent documentary revelations.

Most of the author’s sources are secondary, but he also uses contemporary publications, published congressional hearings, a few interviews, and some manuscript collections. The book is nicely published, illustrated, and indexed. Nobody left of Jesse Helms or Strom Thurmond will be convinced by the author’s exegesis, but the book is a must for all conservatives and conspiracy buffs. One presumes that right-wing foundations and corporations will wish to buy it in bulk for distribution to true believers.

http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/AD_Issues/amdipl_16/bland_mccarthy.html

 

[CrusaderFrank]

That is not true and I'm sure you know it Frankie.

America was a much different place in 1954. There was no 1,000,000 places to get information like there is today. We had just defeated fascism and tyranny all over the planet in a world war fighting for our very existence in a conflict not of our choosing. Totalitarianism disguised as Communism was a serious threat to enslave a world that had just recently rescued itself from another attempt at enslavement. Nothing like our modern world where we have no serious challenge to our spot on the food chain.

People everywhere in our country were very respectful of government and our military. We were conditioned to accept authority out of necessity. Our very survival demanded unquestioned acquiescence to our leadership. That is the stage McCarthy took in his vile witch hunt. The ripple effect was a shock wave of over reaction out of patriotism and our recent bunker them vs us mentality. You Frankie are doing the same thing in reverse ..using the freedom of our expression as it is today as if to suggest that McCarthy was just one guy..what's the big deal? That is extremely dishonest. When it came to information absorbed by the public there was no other guy. No diversion from what we saw countered the venom McCarthy spewed until a handful of genuine American leaders had had enough of that piece of shit. He and he alone spear headed the extreme attitude that in fact the first amendment was irrelevant. He is despised for his demagoguery for good reason.

You're spewing back lies and nonsense that you never critically examined just decided to take as your own thoughts.

Progressives made an issue of McCarthy simply because he correctly exposed Soviet espionage in the US Government.

I thought you would at least take a look at how new material has totally vindicated McCarthy and I think that one day you eventually might.

The vile misuse of the public platform did not find anything the FBI was not already aware of. What it did was ruin lives. What he did was a full frontal assauly on the Constitution. Sorry Frankie..my experience having lived through the period is rellevant. I don't give a rats ass if this thread lasts for ten thousand posts. I will not back down on this. I will never allow a McCarthy revision to go unchallenged.

Some people like Solomon Adler and Cedric Belfrage needed to have their lives ruined.

I've mentioned Solomon Adler at least 6 times, have you looked him up even once?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The book by Hermann, JM's primary defender, would be the first place to look for a scholarly material. Hermann's a homer, but I am sure he would address the issue. Ask Political Chic, I bet she has a copy.

I have it, and it's not mentioned in Herman's book. People who study history understand the importance of primary sources. Evan's book "Blacklisted ..." was full of ONLY primary sources.

ANYONE serious about studying history of any period realizes one cannot get an accurate historical accounting by reading from rumour mills (read bloggs, but other accounts which are hearsay)

Frank's OP was about the amount of primary material that has disappeared from the public record, and national archives. We need to ask the question why would such material have need of disappearing if it was not in conflict with "popular wisdom?"
That is a fair question to ask.

But even though important archival material disappears, (stolen/destroyed), the dilligent historian can turn much of it up. Virtally everything in the 58 pages of references and actual copies of documents in Evan's book largely go against the case that was made against McCarthy, and the subsequent hysteria.

Hmmm, now I get to go down to the library and check out a copy of Hermann to double check your comment. If you are right, I will acknowledge. If you aren't, I will acknowledge that as well.

I agree that primary materials are important, and the interpretation from those materials are as important. The question of course with Evans is that he has not covered competently all the primary sources that discredit McCarthy, thus failing to meet the historian's duty.

But, of course, you know that without troubling yourself to even look at Evans book because that's the very first thing he covers

Did you get that by telepathy or did your Progressives friends tell you?

 

[Cecilie1200]

You're spewing back lies and nonsense that you never critically examined just decided to take as your own thoughts.

Progressives made an issue of McCarthy simply because he correctly exposed Soviet espionage in the US Government.

I thought you would at least take a look at how new material has totally vindicated McCarthy and I think that one day you eventually might.

The vile misuse of the public platform did not find anything the FBI was not already aware of. What it did was ruin lives. What he did was a full frontal assauly on the Constitution. Sorry Frankie..my experience having lived through the period is rellevant. I don't give a rats ass if this thread lasts for ten thousand posts. I will not back down on this. I will never allow a McCarthy revision to go unchallenged.

Some people like Solomon Adler and Cedric Belfrage needed to have their lives ruined.

I've mentioned Solomon Adler at least 6 times, have you looked him up even once?

McCarthy wasn't trying to turn up anything new, despite popular belief (and no one but the FBI at the time knew that the FBI knew this stuff. They didn't tell anyone because they didn't want the Soviets to know they could decrypt their messages). McCarthy's purpose in doing what he did was to find out why our government was giving security clearances to people who should never have gotten them. All the drivel about "it wasn't illegal to be a Communist" aside, it was the equivalent of our current government hiring known al Qaeda sympathizers to work at the State Department.

 

[Gadawg73]

What Coulter failed to reveal in her "tell all" book is that there were already undercover investigations into most of the named communists in the state department long before McCarthy said there were there. In fact, the McCarthy blabber mouth hearings derailed most of those undercover investigations that took years to develop.
Even a blind squirrel can find a nut once in a blue moon.
What you folks fail to realize is that you seek to turn spies for INFORMATION. Ideology has no power and the knowledge of someone's ideology has no useful purpose in espionage. INFORMATION is power and no one cares what ideology you are as long as the information is credible and valuable.
The fact that McCarthy pointed out a handfull of already known communist spies out of the thousands he incorrectly labeled is proof that his methods are wrong.
In America you SHOULD NEVER have toprove yourself innocent. McCarthy labeled thousands as communists without any proof and each and every one of themhad to go prove their innocense.
That is UnAmerican. The accused never has to prove anything under our system of justice. It is always the burden of the accuser to prove their case BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Out of the thousands McCarthy accused how many were convicted of anything. Case closed.
In America, YOU ARE ALWAYS PRESUMED INNOCENT.
And McCarthy violated that sacred foundation of American society. It was not tolerated then, he was exposed as a fraud for doing so and that foundation continues today. If you do not like that then find another country to live in.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Here is an interesting review of Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America’s Most Hated Senator By Arthur Herman (New York: Free Press, 2000. Pp. vi, 404. $26 cloth.)

McCarthy and His Enemies, Revisited by Larry I. Bland

A POLITICAL TRACT DISGUISED AS A SCHOLARLY history, this book is intended to be a contribution to the right-wing side of the current “culture war” in the United States. Nevertheless, it could have been written in 1956 as a companion piece to William Buckley and Brent Bozell’s McCarthy and His Enemies. Contrary to appearances, the author is not McCarthy’s defense lawyer but a cultural historian who received his Ph.D. in history from Johns Hopkins University (1985), is adjunct professor at George Mason University, and coordinator of the Western Civilization Program at the Smithsonian Institution. In 1997 he published The Idea of Decline in Western History.

According to Herman, McCarthy was justified and correct in all important political ideas and actions. The senator’s liberal enemies in academia, government, and the media were elitist gullible fools (at best). Sometimes they were irresponsibly blind (“in complicity with evil&#8221 to the enormous danger communist subversion and propaganda posed to American society, but just as often they were actual traitors or Marxist-inclined dupes. Revisionist and antiwar writers of the 1960s and after are the ideological descendants of this evil crew.

The author uses several techniques to defend the senator.

The first is to admit that his hero had certain human flaws, which he then explains away. Was McCarthy an alcoholic? Yes, but not “an abusive or violent drunk.”

Second, tu quoque arguments. Did McCarthy do deed X of dubious fairness or morality? Yes, but the liberals did it first and worse.

Third, everybody-does-it (i.e., lies, distorts, leaks documents, etc.).

Fourth, it was worse elsewhere or at another time (i.e., not that many people were sent to jail or had their careers damaged between 1947 and 1954, and besides the Red Scare of 1919-20 was worse, and McCarthy’s actions were trivial compared to Stalin’s purges and gulags).

Fifth, be certain to select only the most outré, context-less quotes by McCarthy’s critics.

Sixth, be entirely innocent of the content of the past half century of diplomatic history writings when you assert such silly chestnuts such as: Harry Hopkins believed every lie that the Marxists told him, that Alger Hiss played an important role in the “disastrous decisions at Yalta,” or that China was lost when George C. Marshall — encouraged by Commie-symp types like John Stewart Service — embargoed military supplies to Chiang Kai-shek in 1946, thereby causing Mao’s victory and high U.S. casualties in the Korean War.

Finally, assert that every charge you (or Whittaker Chambers, Elizabeth Bentley, et al.) have made against liberals has been proven true by the Venona transcripts or recent documentary revelations.

Most of the author’s sources are secondary, but he also uses contemporary publications, published congressional hearings, a few interviews, and some manuscript collections. The book is nicely published, illustrated, and indexed. Nobody left of Jesse Helms or Strom Thurmond will be convinced by the author’s exegesis, but the book is a must for all conservatives and conspiracy buffs. One presumes that right-wing foundations and corporations will wish to buy it in bulk for distribution to true believers.

Bland | McCarthy and His Enemies

While interesting, the views of the late Dr. Bland tend to be conclusory, if not altogether convincing...

While at the library you might pick up Mitrokhin's book...

Mitrokhin kept the archives for the KGB, and therefore, I contend his view to be more dispositve as to the veracity of Senator McCarthy and other fighters of communist infiltration.

‘The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archives, the History of the KGB,” by Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin.

But, if you are too busy, here are some of my notes on the tome.

1. This top archives was described by the FBI as “the most complete and extensive intelligence ever achieved from any source.”

2. Vasili Mitrokhin worked for 30 years in the foreign intelligence archives of the KGB. In 1972 he was made responsible for moving the entire archives to new headquarters in Moscow. But Mitrokhin spent over a decade making notes and transcripts of these classified files. In 1992, British Secret Intelligence Service exfiltrated the defector, and his presence in the west remained secret until the publication of this book.

3. December 20, 1917 The KGB traces its origins to this date, six weeks after the Bolshevik Revolution, with the foundation of the Cheka, the first Soviet security and intelligence agency. KGB officers were, in fact, paid on the 20th of each month in honor of the Cheka’s birthday. The KGB adopted the Cheka symbol’s of the sword and the shield: the shield to defend the revolution, and the sword to smite its enemies.

4. Mitrokhin named some rather diverse individual in whom Soviet placed high hopes on the eve of WW II: Laurence Duggan (agent ’19,’ later FRANK) in the State Department; Michael Straight (NIGEL), State Department; Martha Dodd Stern (LIZA), daughter of the former US ambassador to Germany, and the wife of Alfred Kaufman Stern (also a Soviet agent); Martha’s brother William E. Doss, jr. (PRESIDENT), who had run for Congress as a Democrat; Harry Dexter White in the Treasury Department (KASSIR and JURIST); an agent codenamed MORIS, probably John Abt in the Justice Department; Boris Morros (FROST), Hollywood producer; Mary Wolfe Price (KID and DIR), secretary to Walter Lippman, and Henry Buchman (KHOSYAIN, ‘employer&#8217 owner of a woman’s fashion salon in Baltimore. [p106]

5. “But for the remarkably lax security of the Roosevelt administration, the damage to NKVD operation might have been much worse than the arrest (May 1941) of (Gayk) Ovakimyan” [head of NKVD legal residency department]. P.107

6. “On September 2, 1939, the day after the outbreak of war in Europe, Whittaker Chambers had told much of what he knew about Soviet espionage in the United States to Adolph Berle, Assistant Secretary of State and President’s Roosevelt’s advisor on internal security. Immediately afterwards, Berle drew up a memorandum for the President which listed Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White and the other leading for whom Chambers acted as courier. One was a leading presidential aide, Lauchlin Currie….Roosevelt, however, was not interested. He seems to have dismissed the whole idea of espionage rings within his administration as absurd.” p.107

7. “Henry Wallace, vice-president during Roosevelt’s third term in office (1941-1945), said later that if the ailing Roosevelt had died during that period and he had become President, it had been his intention to make Duggan his Secretary of State and White his Secretary of Tresury…The fact that Roosevelt survived into…a fourth term…deprived Soviet intelligence of what would have been its most spectacular success in penetrating a major Western government.” P.107-8

8. In 1944, in addition to Fuchs, there were two more spies at Los Alamos. “The first, David Greenglass, was recruited through a group of S & T agents run by Julius Rosenberg (codenamed ANRWNNA and LIBERAL), A 26-year-old New York Communist with a degree in electrical engineering. Like Fuchs, the members of the Rosenberg ring, who included his wife, Ethel, had been rewarded with cash bonuses in the summer.” Ibid, p.128

9. “The New York residency also reported in November 1944 that the precociously brilliant nineteen-year old Harvard physicist Theodore Alvin “Ted” Hall, (codename MLAD) then working at Los Alamos, had indicated his willingness to collaborate. As well as being inspired by the myth-image of the Soviet worker-peasant state, which was an article of faith for most ideological Soviet agents, Hall convinced himself that an American nuclear monopoly would threaten the peace of the post- war world. Passing the secrets of the MANHATTAN project to Moscow was thus a way ‘to help the world’ as well as the Soviet Union.’ ”Ibid, p.128

10. In November of 1944, “according to Elizabeth Bentley, there came an urgent warning from an agent in the White House, Roosevelt’s administrative assistant Lauchlin Currie. Currie reported that ‘the Americans were on the verge of breaking the Soviet code.’ The alarm appears to have subsided when it was discovered that Currie had wrongly concluded that a fire-damaged NKGB codebook obtained by OSS from the Finns would enable Soviet communications (which went through a further, theoretically impenetrable, encipherment by ‘one-time pad&#8217 to be decrypted.” The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archives, the History of the KGB,” by Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin.p.130

11. “The most valuable S & T concerned the atomic program. Kurchatov (scientific head of the Soviet atomic project) reported to Beria on September 29, 1944 that intelligence revealed the creation for the MANHATTAN project ‘a concentration of scientific and engineering-technical power on a scale never before seen in the history of world science, which has already achieved the most priceless results.’…On February 28, 1945 the NKGB submitted to Beria its first comprehensive report on atomic intelligence for two years- also the first to be based on reports from inside Los Alamos….based chiefly on intelligence…from Hall …and Greenglass. It was probably Hall who first revealed the implosion method of detonating the bomb, thoug a more detailed report on implosion by Fuchs reached Kurchatov on April 6.” Ibid, p.131.

12. “It is probable that both Fuchs and H all independently furnished the plans of the first atomic bomb, ….Thanks chiefly to Hall and Fuchs, the first Soviet atomic bomb, successfully tested just over four years later, was to be an exact copy of the Alamogordo bomb” Ibid. p.132

13. Alger Hiss succeeded in becoming part of the American delegation at Yalta. Stalin managed to win the policy debates, mainly about the future of Poland (which had been conceded to Soviet dominance at Tehran) since he was kept informed about classified intelligence. An idea as to how important Hiss was to Moscow is conveyed by Moscow’s congratulations to Hiss. Gorsky reported… in March 1945, after a meeting between Akhmerov and Hiss: ‘Recently ALES (Hiss) and his whole group were awarded Soviet decorations. After the Yalta conference, …passed on to him their gratitude and so on.’ ” ‘The Sword and the Shield: The Mitrokhin Archives, the History of the KGB,” by Christopher Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin.p.134 (quoting the Venona decrypts)

14. “In September (1945) J. Edgar Hoover reported to the White House and the State Department that (defector) Gouzenko had provide information on the activities of a number of Soviet spies in the United States, one of whom was ‘an assistant to the Secretary of State’…On November 7 (Elizabeth) Bentley…began revealing what she knew of Soviet espionage…Next day Hoover sent President Truman’s military aide a first list of fourteen of those identified by Bentley as supplying information to ‘the Soviet espionage system’: among them Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Harry Dexter White, OSS (CIA) executive assistant Duncan C. Lee, and Roosevelt’s former aide Lauchlin Currie.” Ibid, p.142

15. Ted Hall (code name MLAD), who with Klaus Fuchs, were agents of the Soviet union who gave the secrets of the atomic bomb to the Soviets when they worked on the Manhattan project at Los Alamos, while working for his PhD at Chicago University, joined the Communist Party, …(intending) to work for the Progressive candidate, the naively pro-Soviet Henry Wallace, in the presidential election.” Albright and Kunstel, “Bombshell,” pp.176-8

 

[PoliticalChic]

What Coulter failed to reveal in her "tell all" book is that there were already undercover investigations into most of the named communists in the state department long before McCarthy said there were there. In fact, the McCarthy blabber mouth hearings derailed most of those undercover investigations that took years to develop.
Even a blind squirrel can find a nut once in a blue moon.
What you folks fail to realize is that you seek to turn spies for INFORMATION. Ideology has no power and the knowledge of someone's ideology has no useful purpose in espionage. INFORMATION is power and no one cares what ideology you are as long as the information is credible and valuable.
The fact that McCarthy pointed out a handfull of already known communist spies out of the thousands he incorrectly labeled is proof that his methods are wrong.
In America you SHOULD NEVER have toprove yourself innocent. McCarthy labeled thousands as communists without any proof and each and every one of themhad to go prove their innocense.
That is UnAmerican. The accused never has to prove anything under our system of justice. It is always the burden of the accuser to prove their case BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Out of the thousands McCarthy accused how many were convicted of anything. Case closed.
In America, YOU ARE ALWAYS PRESUMED INNOCENT.
And McCarthy violated that sacred foundation of American society. It was not tolerated then, he was exposed as a fraud for doing so and that foundation continues today. If you do not like that then find another country to live in.

"The fact that McCarthy pointed out a handfull of already known communist spies out of the thousands he incorrectly labeled is proof that his methods are wrong."

Thousands! Wow!
Then why is ithe 'Litmus Test' so difficult for you, Dullard?

Again, the easily-led brigade fails to ascertain truth, and bathes in a warm bath of liberal mythology…

The litmus test is fairly simple…and you being equally so, it should appeal to you:
If Senator Joseph McCarthy had such a deleterious effect, and ‘ruined’ so many lives, it should be effortless for you to name a half dozen or so whose lives were so ‘ruined.’

1. If you cannot do so, it clearly casts the lie to your premise.
2. Ruin does not refer to being insulted. You must show actual damages, i.e. imprisoned and later found innocent of the charges or never working again…

You can run, but you can't hide.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

What Coulter failed to reveal in her "tell all" book is that there were already undercover investigations into most of the named communists in the state department long before McCarthy said there were there. In fact, the McCarthy blabber mouth hearings derailed most of those undercover investigations that took years to develop.
Even a blind squirrel can find a nut once in a blue moon.
What you folks fail to realize is that you seek to turn spies for INFORMATION. Ideology has no power and the knowledge of someone's ideology has no useful purpose in espionage. INFORMATION is power and no one cares what ideology you are as long as the information is credible and valuable.
The fact that McCarthy pointed out a handfull of already known communist spies out of the thousands he incorrectly labeled is proof that his methods are wrong.
In America you SHOULD NEVER have toprove yourself innocent. McCarthy labeled thousands as communists without any proof and each and every one of themhad to go prove their innocense.
That is UnAmerican. The accused never has to prove anything under our system of justice. It is always the burden of the accuser to prove their case BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. Out of the thousands McCarthy accused how many were convicted of anything. Case closed.
In America, YOU ARE ALWAYS PRESUMED INNOCENT.
And McCarthy violated that sacred foundation of American society. It was not tolerated then, he was exposed as a fraud for doing so and that foundation continues today. If you do not like that then find another country to live in.

You're flailing wildly beating yourself and whatever points you thought you had nearly to death.

So now you admit that McCarthy did name genuine Communist spies, that shows some improvement, but then you add that he name "Thousands" and the only person who agrees with you might be Jake Starkey.

Then, you seem to think that McCarthy was judge and jury and he had some "Burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt" which is just lunacy. He was a US Senator. Got it? A US Senator.

McCarthy never "violated that sacred foundation of American society", instead he violated that sacred foundation of Marxist infiltration of American society: he named Communist spies and he was correct.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

At some point don't people begin to ask themselves, Political Chic has thrown down this gauntlet at least a dozen times:

Again, the easily-led brigade fails to ascertain truth, and bathes in a warm bath of liberal mythology…

The litmus test is fairly simple…and you being equally so, it should appeal to you:
If Senator Joseph McCarthy had such a deleterious effect, and ‘ruined’ so many lives, it should be effortless for you to name a half dozen or so whose lives were so ‘ruined.’

1. If you cannot do so, it clearly casts the lie to your premise.
2. Ruin does not refer to being insulted. You must show actual damages, i.e. imprisoned and later found innocent of the charges or never working again…

You can run, but you can't hide.

AND NOT ONE PERSON HAS VENTURED TO SITE A SINGLE NAME!