I dare call it treason [repost]

The myth of "McCarthyism" is the greatest Orwellian fraud of our times. Liberals are fanatical liars, then as now. The portrayal of Sen. Joe McCarthy as a wild-eyed demagogue destroying innocent lives is sheer liberal hobgoblinism. Liberals weren't hiding under the bed during the McCarthy era. They were systematically undermining the nation's ability to defend itself, while waging a bellicose campaign of lies to blacken McCarthy's name. Liberals denounced McCarthy because they were afraid of getting caught, so they fought back like animals to hide their own collaboration with a regime as evil as the Nazis. As Whittaker Chambers said: "Innocence seldom utters outraged shrieks. Guilt does."

At the time, half the country realized liberals were lying. But after a half century of liberal myth-making, even the disgorging of Soviet and American archives half a century later could not overcome their lies. In 1995, the U.S. government released its cache of Soviet cables that had been decoded during the Cold War in a top-secret undertaking known as the Venona Project. The cables proved the overwhelming truth of McCarthy's charges. Naturally, therefore, the release of decrypted Soviet cables was barely mentioned by the New York Times. It might have detracted from stories of proud and unbowed victims of "McCarthyism." They were not so innocent after all, it turns out.

Soviet spies in the government were not a figment of right-wing imaginations. McCarthy was not tilting at windmills. He was tilting at an authentic communist conspiracy that had been laughed off by the Democratic Party. The Democrats had unpardonably connived with the greatest evil of the 20th century. This could not be nullified. But liberals could at least hope to redeem the Democratic Party by dedicating themselves to rewriting history and blackening reputations. This is what liberals had done repeatedly throughout the Cold War. At every strategic moment this century, liberals would wage a campaign of horrendous lies and disinformation simply to dull the discovery the American people had made. They had gotten good at it.

There were, admittedly, a few rare and striking exceptions to the left's overall obtuseness to communist totalitarianism. John F. Kennedy's pronouncements on communism could have been spoken by Joe McCarthy. For all his flaws, Truman unquestionably loved his country. He was a completely different breed from today's Democrats. Through the years, there were various epiphanic moments creating yet more anti-communist Democrats. The Stalin-Hitler pact, Alger Hiss' prothonotary warbler, information about the purges and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's The Gulag Archipelago – all these had their effect.

But after World War II, the Democratic Party suffered a form of what France had succumbed to after World War I. The entire party had lost its nerve for sacrifice, heroism and bravery. Beginning in the '50s, there was a real battle for the soul of the Democratic Party. By the late '60s, the battle was over. The anti-communist Democrats had lost.

In 1972, George McGovern, darling of left-wing radicals, was the Democratic presidential candidate. Tom Hayden, leader of Students for a Democratic Society and an instigator of the Chicago riots, became a Democratic state senator in California. (In 1968, Staughton Lynd wrote of Tom Hayden: "On Monday, Wednesday and Friday he was a National Liberation Front guerilla, and on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, he ... was on the left wing of the Democratic Party.") Black Panther Bobby Rush would go on to become a Democratic congressman. Todd Gitlin, a former president of SDS, would soon be a frequent op-ed columnist for the New York Times. By the time of the 1991 Gulf War, only 10 Senate Democrats voted with President Bush to use troops against Saddam Hussein. If the old Democratic Party was merely obtuse, the new Democratic Party was a beachhead of domestic anti-Americanism. This was the new Democratic Party.

Clinton was the left's last best hope for proving they could too handle the presidency. Having tricked the American people into entrusting a Democrat with the White House (on a plurality vote), they had to defend him from any lie, any felony, any reprehensible, contemptible conduct he threw their way. When Clinton first showed his fat oleaginous mug to the nation, the Republicans screamed he was a draft-dodging, pot-smoking flim-flam artist. Had the Republicans turned out to be right again, it would have sounded the death knell for the Democratic Party.

So the Democrats lied. Through their infernal politics of personal destruction, liberals stayed in the game for a few more years.

Unless we fight for proper treatment of history and counter the nonsense images of McCarthy, no history can be safe from the liberal noise machine. Someday, school children will be taught that all of America cringed with terror at Ken Starr, whose evil designs on the nation were frustrated only through the sacrifice of brave liberals. People will have vivid images of the pounding boots of Starr's subpoena-servers and the Gestapo-like wails of alarms as Ken Starr arrived to kick in the doors of innocent Americans and storm through their bedrooms. It will be the Reign of Terror under Ken Starr.

Bill Clinton will be revered in high school history books as the George Washington of his day who, along with patriots Larry Flynt and James Carville, "saved the Constitution." He will be honored with a memorial larger than the Washington Monument (though probably with the same general design).

People will believe that. And liberals will continue unabashedly invoking a lie in order to shield their ongoing traitorous behavior.

" ... if anything, McCarthy understated the extent of communist infiltration of our government at the time."

"The pertinent facts in the case are these: the media jackal-pack were in full-cry against McCarthy, his chief investigator was a homosexual, the Washington crowd were scared to death of him, and the senator, who was not all that photogenic, had a personality about as smooth as sandpaper. As if that were not enough, he was brash enough to take on the Eisenhower administration in the immediate wake of a landslide election victory, having already alienated the Democrats to the limit of possibility. McCarthy had a death-wish -- it's as simple as that. His reason for taking on the Washington establishment was the same as that of his pal Joe Kennedy. It was only incidentally about communists and had everything to do with the WASP mentality that prevailed in those days: no Irish need apply."

"Then as now, the mainstream press functioned as puppets of the power-elite -- that is why they went after McCarthy with such feline ferocity. Of course there was also their ideological commitment to the milque-toast left in vogue at the time, but they were able to keep that in check so long as it seemed that McCarthy had the upper hand. One of the most telling slips by the establishment press of that era is an article that appeared in Time magazine which conceded that, for all his crudity and ill- mannered lack of decorum, the senator had some solid achievements to his credit. On the following week the Army-McCarthy imbroglio erupted, which was to doom McCarthy's political career. What a faux pas. How could Time be guilty of such a faulty sense of timing?"

"DeLay and Smith are making a big mistake -- they are out of step with the Washington crowd and that is not permitted in this land of the free. If I seem to digress it is because one cannot understand the present political dynamic, particularly as it involves the mainstream press, without knowing something of the McCarthy era. It was a defining moment in our history that signaled the emergence of the anti-anti-communist left from the closet to dominate the front page of the elite newspapers, as well as their editorials, and commandeer the burgeoning new medium of television. Then, as now, the conservatives were relegated to radio -- voices such as Fulton Lewis, Jr., were heard for a few minutes in the evening. Walter Winchell, a gossip columnist who had been lavish and tireless in his praise of Franklin D. Roosevelt, had become a national institution with his Sunday night radio broadcasts. Oddly, Winchell defended McCarthy to the bitter end. It was he who coined the term "presstitute."

"Pulling it all together, what we have right here in our own country are all of the ingredients necessary for a totalitarian police state. We have a federal government that nobody in his right mind would trust, which lies to us incessantly, uses illegal force against its citizens with impunity, and collaborates with totalitarian dictators under cover of a massive propaganda campaign conducted by our supposedly free press. Our major information media are dominated by closet totalitarians who pay lip service to democracy while covertly promoting the interests of communist despots. The political opposition is made up largely of cowards who are so intimidated by our totalitarian propaganda media they are unable to offer effective resistance to even the most egregious violations of civil liberties by the corrupt Clinton regime. They have become, in the fullest sense of the term, Weimar Republicans."

"And finally, we have that which makes it all possible, a listless, docile, dumbed-down public who gape mindlessly at all of the above phenomena without the slightest glimmer of comprehension, and prattle the latest propaganda cliches dumped into their empty heads by the mainstream media."

"The Elian affair has truly given us a... glimpse---into the abyss of tyranny."

"The message that comes through loud and clear is that the system isn't working. The question that remains to be answered is whether we still possess the intelligence and fortitude necessary to fix it."

Edward Zehr (( deceased...nov--2001 )) can (( not )) be reached at ezehr@capaccess.org

Published in the May. 22, 2000 issue of The Washington Weekly (( defunct ))

Now Free Access to All Stories at http://www.federal.com

The portrayal of Sen. Joe McCarthy as a wild-eyed demagogue destroying innocent lives is sheer liberal hobgoblinism.
===================================
I can recall watching the McCarthy Army hearings on TV as a teen-ager. Savannah had only one station at the time and TV was still new enough that I watched EVERYTHING even if it wasn't particularly enjoyable. Not yet politicized and having what Rush refers to as "a head full of mush" my reactions were emotional rather than intellectual.

Joe McCarthy simply was not likable. He had an abrasive personality. Thus, he was vulnerable when the forces of evil gathered their strength and went after him. I do not recall feeling any sympathy for him when he fell.

I have served on a number of juries as an adult. In my observation, if a prosecutor (which is what Joe really was) wants to win the case, it's better to be likable than right! Joe was the wrong man with the right message.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Ann Coulter MEGA PING!!