WE'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'RE BEING CENSORED (Ann Coulter)

Ann Coulter ^ | 7/0903 | Ann Coulter

[ChadGore]

WE'LL LET YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'RE BEING CENSORED

By Ann Coulter

Earlier this year, the Screen Actors Guild (news - web sites) issued a statement lamenting that "those in the public eye should suffer professionally for having the courage to give voice to their views. Even a hint of the blacklist must never again be tolerated in this nation." Feeling the lash of a right-wing blacklist, the Dixie Chicks (news - web sites) recently played to an adoring, sold-out crowd at Madison Square Garden.

Ann Coulter

But earlier this week, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., denounced a radio corporation's decision not to play the Dixie Chicks as similar to Nazism and McCarthyism. The Dixie Chicks lead singer ridiculed President Bush (news - web sites) before a foreign audience. That was constitutionally protected free speech. The decision of radio stations not to play the Dixie Chicks, however, is not a matter of their own free speech.

Conservatives are openly blackballed in all the liberal professions -- publishing, Hollywood, the mainstream media, education and college faculties. Apparently, that's not "blacklisting." It is churlish for conservatives to complain about private censorship. True blacklisting occurs only when someone scowls at a liberal.

Ronald Radosh is one of the nation's pre-eminent historians, but he is blacklisted from American universities because he wrote a book concluding that the Rosenbergs were guilty -- a few years before decrypted Soviet cables were released proving they were guilty.

Inasmuch as Radosh had once been a "progressive" himself, a fatwa was inevitable. Radosh marched for the Rosenbergs. He attended candlelight vigils for the Rosenbergs. He was even personally acquainted with Pete Seeger! But after setting out to write a book proving the Rosenbergs innocent, his research led him to conclude otherwise. He was a liberal who rejected the faith. Under strict fatwa procedures, Radosh had to be banned from academia.

As has been copiously detailed by John Judis in the liberal New Republic magazine, whenever Radosh is on the verge of being hired by a major university, the liberal wolf pack bays and suddenly the position disappears. Anonymous critics were quoted "question(ing) his credentials." One historian told Judis: "I wouldn't hire a red-baiter like Ron." Another said Radosh was "not a historian at all."

Columbia history professor Eric Foner claimed Radosh's book on the Rosenbergs violated the canons of historical scholarship. As any infant knows, one of the canons of historical scholarship is to mindlessly hold as an article of faith the manifestly absurd belief that the Rosenbergs were innocent. It is an affront to good scholarship to suggest otherwise. Most devastatingly, Foner -- once president of the American Historical Association -- accused Radosh of "liberal anti-communism." Other historians have even stooped so low as to call Radosh a "conservative." One editor said he believed Radosh was a CIA (news - web sites) agent.

American college students are learning history from people who believe the Rosenbergs were innocent idealists and Radosh is a CIA agent. (How are the grades for students who write term papers saying the Rosenbergs were guilty?)

Obtaining a teaching position was not so difficult for Joel Kovel, who holds the prestigious "Alger Hiss Professor of Social Studies" chair at Bard College. With superb timing, in 1994, just one year before the Venona cables were declassified, Kovel published a book describing anti-communism as a psychiatric condition. Appropriately, Kovel dedicated the book to his chair's namesake, Soviet spy Alger Hiss. Making paranoid accusations based on his own neurotic impulses, Kovel explained that America's anti-communism was a form of anti-Semitism.

He should know. In a 2002 article, Kovel called the West Bank "a huge concentration camp," and demanded to know: "Why does the Zionist community, in raging against terrorism, forget that three of its prime ministers within the last 20 years, Begin, Shamir and Sharon, are openly recognized to have been world-class terrorists and mass murderers?"

But in his book "Red Hunting in the Promised Land" -- dedicated to uber-WASP communist Hiss -- Kovel raved: "The Communist became ... the archaic blood villain of Western civilization -- the Jew who killed Christ, the black Hamitic son of Noah, the howling savage beyond the gates reminding 100 percent Americans of the terrors of the dark." (Now that's serious scholarship.)

When the Venona Project was declassified one year later, it turned out there was another likely explanation for America's anti-communism. To wit: the fact that the government was crawling with Soviet spies feverishly passing atomic technology to America's mortal enemy. But right up until the Soviet cables were declassified, Kovel's lunatic psychological theory was accepted in the journals of mainstream opinion. His book describing anti-communism as a mental defect was one of The Washington Post's recommended books in 1994.

Unlike Radosh, who did not need to read Soviet cables to figure out that Julius Rosenberg was a spy, Kovel has encountered no difficulty in landing any number of teaching positions. In addition to holding the coveted Traitor Chair at Bard College, he has been an anthropology professor at the New School for Social Research; a professor of political science and communications at the University of California, San Diego; a lecturer at San Diego State University; and a professor at the Saybrook Institute in San Francisco.

People who have dedicated their lives to exposing lesbian imagery in "Moby-Dick" are more prevalent on the nation's campuses than serious scholars. The nation's colleges and universities have become a Safe Streets program for traitors and lunatics. At least Tailgunner Joe got them out of government work.

[skeeter]

There are definitely some FReepers who are concerned Ann might hurt some people's feelings, I guess we can count you in that group!

If the 50+ year old battle against contemporary liberalism is won it will be no thanks to neurotic conservatives who wilt at the use of strong rhetoric by their own side.

I guess these folks are more comfortable when they're the one being viciously attacked.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

One historian told Judis: "I wouldn't hire a red-baiter like Ron." Another said Radosh was "not a historian at all."

Journalists peck at any conservative in exactly the same "not a journalist" way.

Any Tom, Dick, or Harry can set up a printing press (you have a low-speed one hooked to your computer, probably--and you have the ability to post to a web site which is accessible world wide) and become a journalist to his heart's content. But if Harry is a conservative, Tom and Dick will wage a flame war on him for "pretending" to a title which they themselves have no official sanction for holding, never mind excluding others from.

I used to be annoyed at Rush Limbaugh for ceding the point unnecessarily. But I have concluded taht the logical viewpoint to take is to let them have the word, and ridicule "journalists" as a group. It at least gives us a convenient target . . .

This article covers material also seen in Treason, in which Ann makes the point that historians treat journalism as "the first draft of history." And that that is exactly how "McCarthyism" entered history--historians reading the newspapers rather than going to the primary sources for the real story.

"Historian" is therefore a term of contempt like "journalist"--anyone who figures out and publishes a liberty-affirming truth is "not a historian (or journalist) at all."

Why Broadcast Journalism Is Unnecessary and Illegitimate

[TheDon]

"There are tens of millions of Americans who consider themselves to be "liberal" and most of them are not bad people."

That's a line the liberals always use to shut conservatives up. I'm sure the liberals you refer to are bright enough to figure out if they are the liberals Ann is referring to. I imagine most of "good" liberals would simply agree with Ann and say that the "bad" liberals are giving liberalism a bad name. Hmmm...I wonder if there any "good" liberals? (Dead ones?) Doesn't seem likely.

It is better to win tens of millions over to our side than to worry about the tens of millions who are not on our side and may be offended.

"How about his ever-shrinking list of communists that he liked to wave around?"

Are you referring to the pro-communist liberals accusations that Joe said he had something like 200, then changed it to about 50? Ann talks about that in "Treason", you should read it. If that's the best you can do, you should really reconsider everything you have been told about Joe. Consider the source.

[DPB101]

Don't have much more to add to what I said in #48 and #54 and #64.

Dorothy Rabinowitz is a great writer. Her attack on Coulter was sloppy and misleading. I believe she has personal reasons for continuing to believe McCarthy was evil incarnate. I used Victor Rabinowitz, the employees at Ft. Monmouth, the City College circle and Coulter's polling data of McCarthy's approval rating to show the issue is societal--in my opinion-- with many people. Rabinowitz isn't the only one blinded by prejudice.

[dennisw]

Are they related? Yes or no? I notice how you dodged my question.

[DPB101]

I didn't dodge any question. Read my replies I cited on this thread. I already answered the answer. What is your point anyways? Rabinowitz is correct is her assessment of Coulter's book? She isn't you know. She flat out distorted the history of Phillip Loeb.

[dennisw]

Like I said ..... you dodged my question. You know zero about Dorothy Rabinowitz and her connection to a Rabinowitz (or two) who was pursued by McCarthy or called a communist. Yet you have made a few attempts to slime her via such a connection.

Go pick up the NYC phonebooks of the 1950s and you will find many, many Rabinowitzs. I would guess 1000 in all of NYC back then.

You know what the score is. You just play a game of evasion

[GOPJ]

So, according to liberals, we have to buy their garbage or they're being censored?

From this idiocy we can assume Hollywood is censoring us if they don't support FreeRepublic? OK, Dixie Chicks, pay up.

[DPB101]

You tell me if she is related then. I said I didn't know. Doesn't matter anyways. Pick any liberal Democrat in NYC, Hollywood or Harvard during the McCarthy era who is around today and they all have a chip on their shoulder. Everyone of them was on the wrong side of history. They can't admit the lies they have told about McCarthy for the last 50 years are lies. They have been telling their kids, their grandkids, the nephews and nieces for decades that the "Red Scare" was real, that Americans were terrorized by McCarthy. They cannot admit they and other liberals were not victims of a witchhunt, were not the "good" people they pretended to be but supporters or dupes of the most murderous regime in history. Just watch the conservative reviews of Treason roll in...most of the critical ones will all be from people who were once liberals. So far we are three for three--Sullivan, Rabinowitz and Horowitz.

So now answer my question: "Why did Rabinowitz distort the history of Phillip Loeb when she attacked Ann Coulter?"

[dennisw]

You tell me if she is related then. I said I didn't know. Doesn't matter anyways.

So I'm supposed to *prove* she's not related? LOL! Odds are she isn't. In at least three separate posts you insinuated Dorothy Rabinowitz is related to the Rabinowitz who was named a communist back in the 1950s. Only after your third post did I call you on it.

As I said, back in the 1950's there were likely 500-1000 Rabinowitzs in the NYC phone directory. You made some sloppy insinuations and I merely pointed them out. Your posts in general are quite knowledgeable

[Zack Nguyen]

No, I don't believe that JFK was a traitor, and I don't believe that the DNC was being run by the Politburo.

Does she call JFK a traitor? Does she claim that the DNC was run by the Politburo? I have not read the book, but I have a feeling that neither of these claims are made.

[dennisw]

Searched the web for Rabinowitz. 96,900 results with google.

[dennisw]

Searched the web for Rabinowitz. 96,900 results with google. Do search with your name and see how many you get.

[I_Love_My_Husband]

First of all I am Jewish. I too was brought up believing that McCarthy had it in for Jews.

However, I did the research which has all been posted here at FReep, which you will see.

McCarthy did not have it in for the Jews at all! He wanted to weed out the commies! Roy Cohn was Jewish! In fact, it is utter complete BS to say that without backing up your facts!

I *did* the research. The truth was that the Rosenbergs were guilty as charged. What didn't happen was getting the others that worked on the bomb (Oppenheimer, et al). MOST of them were also socialists and communists! And Truman and Ike KNEW it, but did nothing about it.

Truman in fact did not want to because he did not want the Repubs screaming at him saying there were traitors and that dems were traitors!

Anny: I read your Horowitz link. IMHO he has some valid points but he was way to close to the fire to see it objectively, and in fact, he's pro-gays, pro-illegal immigration. He has a lot of unconservative ideas in my opinion.

In criticizing Ann he's hoping for more fame for himself and that HE ALONE is the truth bearer! Not true my friend. He is far from the truth beaer. Ann's research is impeccable. No one can refute her facts. Not one of her detracters can refute anything she says.

She is an intense writer. But the left IS treasonous. Remember the war? Where were the Dems? What side were they on?

Frankly McCarthy was RIGHT.

[txzman]

Great Article. In your face, with ice cream.

[HISSKGB]

Why did Rabinowitz lie?

Why did she print that communist Philip Loeb was a victim of McCarthy's actions?

[dennisw]

Why did Rabinowitz lie?

Go ask her. Write to the WSJ editorial page. I don't know if she lied. She writes a lot and made a mistake. Do you make mistakes?

Why did she print that communist Philip Loeb was a victim of McCarthy's actions?

Haven't a clue.
 

[DPB101]

Hey..all gloves are off. Liberals have been slandering conservatives who fought communism since...well..before the Bolshevik revolution. Rabinowitz played the violin about poor Phillip Loeb...his kid was mentally ill...he was broke..he killed himself...all because of "McCarthyism." Fact is, Loeb got $85,000 (over $500,000 in current dollars) because nobody--at a time when Americans were being killed by communists in Korea--wanted to turn on their TV set and see a supporter of Stalin on it. So he was fired. Big deal. He blew his severance pay in 4 years, couldn't pay $1,000 in New York State taxes and killed himself. An appropriate end, I think, for someone who didn't mind the state stealing everything from people in Russia and who wanted the state to do the same thing in America.

Rabinowitz dishes this swill out she should expect some slopped back on her. I'm sick of taking it from the defenders of commies. There is no moral difference between communism and Nazism. Those who make excuses for the supporters of either should be social pariahs.

Just my opinion, of course....

[annyokie]

David Horowitz never says that Ann Coulter is wrong; he questions her method of presentation. (As do I. She is no Barbara Olsen who was ever classy yet eviscerating.)

Agreed, Horowitz was close to the fire. His father refused to admit that he was a member of a Communist cell while a teacher in the NYC school system. All is outlined in his fantastic and candid autobiography "Radical Son".

McCarthy was right about many things. The Rosenbergs were guilty. Horowitz is not "pro-gay" or "pro illegal immigration." He is a very reasoned and tolerant man.

One of his sons is married to a black woman and he has three biracial granddaughters, yet he had the stones to write "Hating Whitey".

He is not a glory hound, but a beacon for those (myself included) who left the left, as Reagan did when "the democratic party deserted me, I did not desert the democratic party."

[bray]

The only place that Free Speech is not permitted in America is the University! Never mind that Communism murdered 200 million people, it's still nirvana to the libs. Ann Rox!

Pray for GW and the Truth