Replies

The quotes make one wonder: did David Horowitz read all of Treason or did his critique stem from what he heard from media reviews and her liberal critics? Yes, there were Democrats and anti-Communist liberals who were loyal to America. Ann should have made a mention of this fact before going on to deal with those liberals who were either supporters or fellow travelers for the Communist cause. I don't think Ann's right about McCarthy's tactics, which were morally flawed and politically indefensible but she is right about the fact the American people were in agreement with the Wisconsin Senator about the larger menace that America faced at the time. I think Irving Kristol himself stated as much in a celebrated essay about the distinction Americans made between the enemy McCarthy said was a danger to the American way of life and the tactics he used to expose those in its service. Treason does tend at points to overgeneralize and fall into the trap of making too much of McCarthy. But its also right that with a handful of exceptions most of his famous victims were really malefactors working on behalf of the most aggressive and brutal tyranny known to human history. It may be for that alone that we owe Ann a debt of lasting gratitude.

I've read the executive transcripts and for the life of me I can see nothing at all morally wrong with McCarthy's tactics. He bent over backwards to accommodate witnesses. No one was badgered. He and those who testified openly were the ones under attack. More than a few witnesses feared their lives would be wrecked by communists and their supporters if their testimony was made public. McCarthy sealed it for 50 years to protect them.

I don't see what is wrong with Congress calling Americans citizens before it and asking them if they belong to an organization funded by a foreign power which is trying to overthrow the government.

When the Democrats ruled, they set up the McCormack/Dickstein committee which went after those who opposed the New Deal. People were smeared as Nazi sympathizers and a few were alleged to be planning a putsch against FDR. That was done on the orders of Stalin by a man on the Soviet payroll--Dickstein of New York.

We hear over and over about McCarthy saying he had a list. Why don't we hear about Dickstein claiming, in 1941, that he had a list of 110 fascist organizations which had the keys to the back door of Congress?

I don't think Ann's right about McCarthy's tactics, which were morally flawed and politically indefensible

Did YOU read the book? She states that McCarthy's tactics were NOT morally flawed NOR politically indefensible. What they were were accurate. Did he put people into gulags? No. Did he prosecute people? No. Was he theatrical? Yes. Did he immobilize the liberals, causing the full brunt of their ire to be concentrated on him? Yes. Did he make it not "ok" to be a communist? Yes. The guy simply pointed out that communist agents, taking orders from Moscow, should not be in positions in the US government requiring security clearances. And asked why the army and the state dept. and other agencies wouldn't do anything about it. You know who he reminds me of right now? Tom Tancredo. The lone voice crying in the wilderness of the corruption that an overwhelming majority of patriotic americans can see, but that the government continues to ignore.