[ConsistentLibertarian]

Right about what? Right to "force [his] targets `to defend themselves' rather than advance their socialist ideas"? I think our side has better arguments, so I don't fear people having the freedom to advance other ideas. And I'm not willing to give the State power to regulate what counts as "politically correct" speech -- using State power to harrass and censure the expression of views the State finds distasteful, misguided, or inappropriate. We know where that path leads.

[Ditto]

I'm not willing to give the State power to regulate what counts as "politically correct" speech -- using State power to harrass and censure the expression of views the State finds distasteful, misguided, or inappropriate. We know where that path leads.

How about when those being "regulated" are US Government employees, most of whom had clearances for confidential/secret information and who's allegiance to a foreign power posed a threat to this nation.

Give me one example of someone "regulated" by Sen McCarthy who was not a government employee as described above.

The people McCarthy went after were not Hollywierd jerks --- they were government employees who were loyal not to this country, but to Joseph Stalin, the greatest mass murderer in history.