We now know, of course, that McCarthy was mostly right the United States government and many left-leaning organizations in the United States were indeed infiltrated by Communist spies and pro-Communist stooges sponsored and/or supported in one way or another by the Soviet Union. For example, at least one person that Murrow and American liberals defended, Laurence Duggan, was indeed a Communist spy and later worked openly in leftist, Neo-Marxist circles. We also know that a black woman, Annie Lee Moss, working in the Code Room of the Pentagon, whose famous testimony is featured in George Clooney's movie, was indeed a Communist Party member in the mid 1940s. Also, Annie Lee Moss really did receive a Daily Worker at her actual address in Washington, D.C., despite her demure, intentionally humorous protestations. We also know that George Clooney and his ilk are communists who hate America and think nothing of making a movie which distorts history.
1 posted on
10/08/2005 4:09:12 PM PDT by
wagglebee
To: wagglebee
facts what the heck are those
2 posted on
10/08/2005 4:11:47 PM PDT by
al baby
(Father of the beeber)
To: wagglebee
But Clooney is high on something (coke or communism; it's hard to tell, both make people extremely irrational).
To: wagglebee
This movie will be fun. I hope it's discussed a lot. Would be great to get a good McCarthy debate out there in the public domain.
I haven't read much Ann Coulter, and I probably won't in the future unless she gets off her "Impeach Bush" kick, but I did learn a lot about McCarthy from her book "Treason".
I do have questions, though about McCarthy's taking on the military and Eisenhower shutting him down.
To: wagglebee
Apparently some leftist loons have complained that the
McCarthy scenes are too sympathetic to the Senator ...
... not realizing that the movie used actual footage
of the real hearings for those scenes.
6 posted on
10/08/2005 4:15:28 PM PDT by
Boundless
To: wagglebee
I think Clooney is just dumb. I don't think he can even define a communist. He is just a flake like Streisand or Martin Sheen, albeit dumber than even them : )
7 posted on
10/08/2005 4:16:09 PM PDT by
calrighty
( Terrorists are like cockroaches . Kill em all soon, so they will find out there ain't no virgins)
To: wagglebee
All anyone has to do to learn about McCarthy is read the Venona Intercepts and the FOIA FBI file on Owen Lattimore.
As to the charge that Clooney's film is revisionist history, who is surprised by that?
Perhaps it can start another dialogue about McCarthy, and we can once again bitchslap Hollywood.
8 posted on
10/08/2005 4:16:17 PM PDT by
Stellar Dendrite
( Mike Pence for President!!! http://acuf.org/issues/issue34/050415pol.asp)
To: wagglebee
It's a MOVIE...selling whatever brings in the bucks....
9 posted on
10/08/2005 4:17:14 PM PDT by
dakine
To: wagglebee
I heard a review of the movie on TV this morning that began, "What's black-and-white and boring all over?" Hopefully, audiences will stay away in droves.
10 posted on
10/08/2005 4:17:35 PM PDT by
RedRover
To: wagglebee
12 posted on
10/08/2005 4:17:45 PM PDT by
brivette
To: wagglebee; xzins
WorldNetDaily wouldn't know a fact if it bit them in the ... hey, hey!
17 posted on
10/08/2005 4:20:45 PM PDT by
jude24
("Stupid" isn't illegal - but it should be.)
To: wagglebee
The last page of the latest Weekly Standard has a photo from the film where there's a freakin' water bottle on the guy's desk!
18 posted on
10/08/2005 4:21:19 PM PDT by
Scarchin
(www.classdismissedblog.com.)
To: wagglebee
Clooney film not high on facts Now THATS a revelation!
nyuk, nyuk!
24 posted on
10/08/2005 4:24:13 PM PDT by
EGPWS
To: wagglebee
I've got the picture, but I don't know how to post it. I'll gladly e-mail it to someone who can - galamaga@verizon.net
26 posted on
10/08/2005 4:34:48 PM PDT by
Scarchin
(www.classdismissedblog.com.)
To: wagglebee
"Clooney film not high on facts"
Since when did liberals ever believe in facts?
27 posted on
10/08/2005 4:38:22 PM PDT by
dmw
To: wagglebee
The world according to Hollywood. There are never any facts involved.
28 posted on
10/08/2005 5:11:35 PM PDT by
abigailsmybaby
("This is the sort of English up with which I will not put." Winston Churchill)
To: wagglebee
As such, it offers mainly emotional, bombastic arguments and lots of style, but not much substance. In other words, it's more of the same quintessential drivel from the Left. Why bother with facts when one can present flashy fiction and pass it off as facts?
30 posted on
10/08/2005 5:20:17 PM PDT by
highlander_UW
(I don't know what my future holds, but I know Who holds my future)
To: wagglebee
That's H'weird--someone's fantasy. Anyway, don't plan on seeing Clooney the Tooney in anything anymore.
To: wagglebee
"I've always been puzzled by the national news media's fascination with these McCarthy programs by Murrow and his team. They show a tendency to editorialize rather than use hard facts and rational arguments, and an inclination to avoid honest debate. Ironically, the same journalists who extol Murrow seem to look down their noses at Bill O'Reilly of Fox News, whose news commentaries and editorials are far more journalistically and factually sound, though perhaps just as bombastic (in their own way) as Murrow's."
To: wagglebee
George Clooney's career...uh, what career?
37 posted on
10/09/2005 4:20:03 AM PDT by
hershey
To: wagglebee
Just finished re-reading the newest book on McCarthy. He was a great American and none of the previous books on him had been written after the declassification of Venona.
The central question of the McCarthy investigation was never answered: Who promoted Irving Peress?
39 posted on
10/09/2005 7:03:48 AM PDT by
nonliberal
(Graduate: Curtis E. LeMay School of International Relations)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson