Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Letter the Wall Street Journal Refused to Run (in defense of Ann Coulter)
Anncoulter.org ^ | 07-30-03 | M. Stanton Evans

Posted on 07/30/2003 2:25:13 AM PDT by Norm640

To The Editor:

A pretty good rule of thumb for judging media comment on Joe McCarthy is that people who most vociferously deplore him seldom know the facts of record.

Vide the recent Dorothy Rabinowitz piece in the Journal attacking Ann Coulter’s new book Treason and its McCarthy chapters. In her double-barreled blast against McCarthy/Coulter, Ms. Rabinowitz makes statements that indicate extensive ignorance of McCarthy’s doings and can but compound prevailing myths about him.

One need go no further to see the point than the first of the McCarthy cases Rabinowitz refers to, and that Coulter discusses in her book: The episode of Annie Lee Moss, the U.S. Army code clerk so memorably portrayed by Edward R. Murrow, and others, as a pitiful victim of McCarthy. Ms. Rabinowitz, sad to say, obviously knows nothing at all about this matter.

As it happens, there is a voluminous official record on the case, accessible to Ms. Rabinowitz and anyone else who cares to view it. This shows Mrs. Moss had been identified as a member of the Communist Party in the District of Columbia by FBI undercover agent Mary Markward, who had access to the party’s records. This information was passed on from the Bureau to the Army, which nonetheless promoted Mrs. Moss from cafeteria worker to code clerk, and security-cleared her for these duties.

The outrageous Joe McCarthy, if you can believe it, actually wanted to know how such a thing could happen. When Mrs. Moss appeared before him in March of 1954, she denied she was a communist, indicated she had never heard of Marx, and allowed that she was being confused with some other Annie Lee Moss who must have been the guilty party. This mistaken-identity theme was echoed by the Democrats on the panel, and has been repeated often since.

Unfortunately for Mrs. Moss and for such as Murrow, she inadvertently gave the game away in testifying--volunteering as one of her addresses 72 R St. S.W. in the District. This proved to be the crucial evidence in the case when, four years later, the Subversive Activities Control Board (SACB) obtained the records of the D.C. party, and there found an Annie Lee Moss, of 72 R St. S.W., listed as a member in the middle ‘40s. Thus Markward’s testimony was confirmed by the Communists’ own records, reflecting this particular Annie Lee Moss, and no other, as a party member.

Ann Coulter’s discussion of the case quite accurately sums up the foregoing information, while Rabinowitz -- though with Coulter’s book before her -- ignores it entirely. The Coulter-Markward-McCarthy version gets the matter exactly right; the Murrow-Senate Democrat-Rabinowitz version is wrong, as shown by an extensive record (the SACB revisited the case on a number of occasions).

The question of Annie Lee Moss is important in itself, as it is so often mentioned in discussions of McCarthy. However, it is even more important as a kind of template for his other cases -- Peress, Amerasia, the speech at Wheeling, Owen Lattimore, and many more. There can be no intelligible discussion of these matters without knowing what the facts are, and these won’t be found by re-cycling Edward R. Murrow’s version of our history.

Anyway, that’s already being handled by The New York Times. Faithful readers of your pages expect something better from the Journal.

M. Stanton Evans Washington, DC


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Free Republic; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; books; checkb4upost; communism; democrats; duplicate; liberals; mccarthy; mccarthyism; mstantonevans; theleft
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last
To: aardvark1; Deb
Don't forget, Ms. Rabinowitz makes her living claiming people were falsely accused.
41 posted on 08/01/2003 5:37:30 AM PDT by Those_Crazy_Liberals (Ronaldus Magnus he's our man . . . If he can't do it, no one can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: austinTparty; Norm640
M. Stanton Evans is *the* expert in this particular area. Unless the WSJ is totally asleep at the wheel, not running this letter was a deliberate act, the ramifications of which should be carefully considered by conservatives.
42 posted on 08/01/2003 5:51:38 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (this space intentionally blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
Perhaps the WSJ does not view everything they write through the prism of Ms. Coulter? The cult status being assigned to her by some is a bit disquieting. Not publishing a letter is not an act of war, for crying out loud, and seeing that as a "call to arms" by "conservatives" (as though all conservatives must gravitate in group-think) is more than overkill. If you agree with the book, then show your support through the marketplace, and buy a dozen copies to give as gifts. Casting everything as a crisis diminishes the impact of serious issues.
43 posted on 08/01/2003 6:56:34 AM PDT by austinTparty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: austinTparty
When you print demonstrable inaccuraccies that indicate that perhaps the commentator didn't even read the book being discussed, and then won't print a rebuttal by a (the?) top acknowledged expert in the field, it makes it look like you're trying to sweep things under the rug. Go read the commendary on the FR Rabinowitz thread that deconstructs her column.

FreeRepublic is playing the "Bill O'Reilly" role here and not is not letting this be swept under the rug.
44 posted on 08/01/2003 7:18:02 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (this space intentionally blank)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: sine_nomine
... conservative women are beautiful, feminine, and articulate. Have you noticed that the Left wing women are ugly, shrill, and hysterical?

LOL. You're analysis applies most of the time.

"Our" women are LADIES and Feminine. The Leftie Women are mostly "neutered" ballsy, bossy, pushy, power hungry, anti-men, anti-American, and generally not cute.

45 posted on 08/01/2003 7:26:21 AM PDT by Gracey (what's a tag line?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Those_Crazy_Liberals
Wow! Irony!
46 posted on 08/01/2003 9:03:21 PM PDT by Deb (My Tag Skies to Gotham & Con-Fabs With Net Prexies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson