The Letter the Wall Street Journal Refused to Run (in defense of Ann Coulter)

Anncoulter.org ^ | 07-30-03 | M. Stanton Evans

[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

[Norm640]

I don't know if this has already been posted, but I'm glad someone is out there defending Coulter. Personally, I like her "direct" approach and I like here humor. She can be crude, but so what? As she might say, we're in a battle for the survival of the United States right now, it is no time to worry about being politically correct.

[Budge]

Thank you for posting this letter.

McCarthy was right, but the communist flat outsmarted him.

[plsjr]

</rant>
I wouldn't say the communists outsmarted him - they outsmarted us.

They have been telling lies continuously and we haven't had the gumption to stand up to them. We've allowed them to leverage our lack of passion for the truth, our lazyness, and our 'goodness' (unwillingness to confront, contend, or assail) into coopting secure positions of influence (media, schools, and judiciary).

We must hold them accountable, we must pry them from their perches of influence and control. </rant off>

It will take much more than Ann, but she's got point well covered.

[sine_nomine]

Ann is one of the best of a host of brilliant conservative writers. By the way, the conservative women are beautiful, feminine, and articulate. Have you noticed that the Left wing women are ugly, shrill, and hysterical?

I remember this particular "mistaken identity" case being replayed on TV countless times, with the panelists laughing that such a simple woman could be called an enemy agent. The TV commentators never mentioned that she was clearly identified as such.

Tailgunner Joe was a strange guy with some weird associates, such as Bobby Kennedy and Roy Cohn, but the was right about his main issue, as we known from the Venona intercepts.

[PGalt]

Thanks for the post. Telling.

[A_perfect_lady]

Bump. Wish there were a way to bring this to more people's attention.

[wita]

Just the other day I was listening to a house floor speech by a certain congresswoman who is "the" living example of that which you state and which is, it seems, so very sad and true. Perhaps it was meant to be as in the animal world so that dangerous ravenous beasts would be easily recognized by those they wish to consume. Oh the name, rosas are red...

[aardvark1]

Good post.

As it happens, there is a voluminous official record on the case, accessible to Ms. Rabinowitz and anyone else who cares to view it.

Don't confuse the left with the truth.

[skinkinthegrass]

...and then again, a large segment of the American people were stupid enought to believe Hollywood and the Media from the 60s' till now...the NAZI Dr. Grobbel (sp?) "THE BIG LIE" Theory...you know the chant, Liberals practice it everyday, on the 1/2 hour... :\

[Arrowhead1952]

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

You just mentioned the difference between the beauty of Ann Coulter to the UGLY DIMS Hitltery and Janet E'l Reno. Hitlery and E'l Reno are two of the worst examples of female human flesh on the planet.

[RonDog]

Thanks for posting this!

I missed it the first time.

See also, from search FR for "Coulter":

The Letter the Wall Street Journal Refused to Run [Evans defends Coulter against Rabinowitz]
			Posted by Akron Al On 07/27/2003 9:24 AM PDT with 79 comments anncoulter.org ^ | M. Stanton Evans

[Spirited]

I ap-preciate the post, too. I also missed it and thanks for giving us the link.!

[RaceBannon]

You guys know the rules!!

...

...

[Sangria]

Sounds like what we have here is envy (by a dried up old prune with dyed black hair who is way past her prime) of a beautiful, young, smart and informed authorm whose book has done exceptionally well. I used to admire Rabinowitz so much, but this trashy article has ripped it with me.

[ICX]

You mean you don't think Molly Ivins is a fine piece of ass?

[mathluv]

Just an ass.

[twigs]

conservative women are beautiful, feminine, and articulate... the Left wing women are ugly, shrill, and hysterical?

There's a reason for that. I noticed throughout Treason that Ann made as many un-PC observations using gender as creative adjectives as I've ever seen and I wondered why she was doing that. For example, you see a lot of "girly-men" used... and many other such descriptives. She could not have emphasized the difference between the genders and the stereotypes thereof more. Then, toward the end of the book, she makes the point how women, because they are women, are important to democracy, the American way of life. They are guardians of morality, more sensitive to it than men as a whole. Without women being women, our country will fail. It's a powerful point. It's no coincidence, according to Coulter, that Dems try to break down women's moral roles.. they are trying to destroy our culture, nay even civilization itself.

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

[Norm640]

Coulter is attractive, but more for her wit, vocabulary and grasp of the issues (and the fact that she has more guts than most men--esp. the guys at NRO), than she is for she looks. Make no mistake, she's a fine lookin' gal---just a little too thin for me.

[sine_nomine]

The key is being feminine. Coulter and her kin are feminine rather than being feminists. The definition of feminist is "not feminine."

The feminine conservative women are outspoken, accomplished, articulate. I have not heard them blame men for keeping them down.