'TAILGUNNER JOE' McCARTHY FOUGHT A REAL FOE

NY POST ^ | May 10, 2003 | Letters column

[cynicom]

Right way? Perhaps not. When you are trying to open a can of worms and you have no can opener, you do what you can. Remember, these people were trying to destroy our country from within.

[The Duke]

A socialist is nothing more than a communist with no sense of decorum.

[Maelstrom]

The "right way" would have been to prosecute them for espionage after showing the links between the communist party and the USSR.

The links were there, and a great many of the people McCarthy caught were indeed engaged in espionage, the most obvious of which was the successful attempt to alter the US government so that tyrannical forces could begin to work.

The limitations against government are no longer honored, in part, due to the activities of the people McCarthy was stopped from capturing.

[ijcr]

The issue should not be whether or not those who McCarthy hunted were Communists. The real issue is that in a democratic society people were put on trial and blacklisted for their political beliefs. Behavior like McCarthy's is expected in Stalinist societies, but it is unacceptable in any country that wishes to proclaim itself a democracy.

What is the current obstructionist behavior of the the Senate to judical appointments? I am saddened, really saddened.

[wheelright]

"When you are trying to open a can of worms and you have no can opener, you do what you can." The can opener was being quietly employed by the professionals when old Joe came along with the chain saw and made a mess of it. A lot, if not most of the "worms" were rendered useless as a result. In counter-intelligence, observation, patience, meticulous development and cross-checking of sources, etc., done quietly and without the knowledge of your opponent is the way your objectives are best accomplished. The results are most useful when they are never known to the outside. This enables you to better turn what is found to your advantage. Premature release of information for short term political gain is the bane of the intelligence community.

[Liz]

The wrong way? I wonder what the "right way" would have been.

The first rule of fighting the enemy is protecting your flanks (physically and ideologically).
You don't fire a volley (or make statements and accusations) unless you are protected.

McCarthy left himself wide open to the dirty commie infiltrators.
He allowed them to use the very freedoms they would corrupt
to save their sorry rumps.

[Liz]

Progressive or liberal......

The collapse of the communist state - the USSR - erased the word communist as a pejorative.

[marbren]

Is Ann Coulter writing a book about Joe?

[Liz]

See post #26

McCarthy didn't protect his flanks. He left himself wide open.

He allowed the commies to use the very freedoms they would corrupt to save their sorry rumps.

[MEG33]

Now that is really scary!

[Liz]

"The issue should not be whether or not those who McCarthy hunted were Communists. The real issue is that in a democratic society people were put on trial and blacklisted for their political beliefs. "

The real issue is that the dirty commies used the very freedoms they were bent on corrupting to save their sorry rumps. That in my oponion was where McCarthy went wrong. He gave the Reds an out by using scatter-shoot accusations (that were then and still are true).

[VadeRetro]

Old Joe was right,but I do think he went about it in a way that left the commies many openings to demonize him.

He was the best friend the commies ever had, although it would have mortified him to see it. For decades, you absolutely positively couldn't call anyone a communist unless they were in a Red Army uniform. The best you could do was statements along the lines of "Whenever Ho Chi Minh/Brezhnev/Castro moves in this country, Jane Fonda/Ed Asner/Whoopi Goldberg/Alec Baldwin is out front blocking for him. The closest one-word construction was "anti-anticommunist" (someone who is against anticommunists).

Meanwhile, the Left has always remained free to call anyone anything as a matter of pure tactical convenience.

[Liz]

Not really.....just be aware.....as the Bard said: "A rose by any other name..."

[Carry_Okie]

The issue should not be whether or not those who McCarthy hunted were Communists. The real issue is that in a democratic society people were put on trial and blacklisted for their political beliefs. Behavior like McCarthy's is expected in Stalinist societies, but it is unacceptable in any country that wishes to proclaim itself a democracy.

False premise. Communists are willing to conspire in secret to use the open nature of a pluralistic republic to destroy that "democracy" the author touts. They will use ANY means including those that are illegal to acquire. They NEVER relinquish power, and will not allow themselves to be voted out. They exist in antipathy to democracy.

Thus communism is a criminal activity and, as far as I am concerned, is also a mental disorder. However clumsy McCarthy was about making that clear, his instincts were on target.

[Susannah]

The collapse of the communist state - the USSR - erased the word communist as a pejorative.

True; however, since the Smith Act it's not illegal to be a member of the American Communist Party...and they have their own website...http://www.cpusa.org

http://www.presidentsusa.net/ghall.html Gus Hall, American Communist Party candidate for president 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984 (not on the ballot in all 50 states)

[limitedgov]

"The real issue is that in a democratic society people were put on trial and blacklisted for their political beliefs."

If those political beliefs extend to the destruction of that democratic society (a Republic by the way) then why not find out a little more about the witnesses? And by the way, a congressional hearing is not a trial, even though legal consequences may result, usually perjury.

And if that argument doesn't fly and no crime has been committed, why not tell the truth? Witnesses could have proudly stated, "Yes, I am a member of the Communist Party." instead of "I am not and have never been."

Why couldn't they tell the truth? Oh yes, for the same reason our modern day democrats cannot honestly tell us what they believe in or stand for.

History has vindicated McCarthy and indicted his suspect's defenders.

[Orion78]

PING!

[Just mythoughts]

I don't know what would have been the "right" way.

It is because that the liberals hate this man as much, as much as any person in history, more than Stalin, that drew my attention to their method of operation, while in high school.

McCarthy never shed innocent blood yet there are few other names that are uttered that can intimidate "Conservatives" so easily.

The Soviet archives themselves give credibility to what McCarthy was after.

I didn't realize that the McCarthy documents were sealed and that says it all.

[DPB101]

The can opener was being quietly employed by the professionals when old Joe came along with the chain saw and made a mess of it

Check out this.

[ninenot]

Go to today's NewsMax site, scroll down to the editorials, and find the McCarthy item.

Serious scholarship demonstrates that McCarthy was quite a bit more responsible and circumspect than is reported.

"McCarthyism" is a very useful word. Invented by the Reds and used heavily by the fellow-travelers in the press and Hollywood, it got the point across without any reference to the facts of the matter.

Venona, and other recently-released documentation, as well as 'Witness,' published 40+ years ago, are verifiable, first-hand accounts.

Too bad Joe was a drinker.