The Truth About "Treason" (Book Review)

Claremont Institute ^ | July 25, 2003 | Ken Masugi

[DPB101]

And hardly anyone remembers FDR admonishing the nation about the similarity between conservative Republicans and fascists in his 1944 State of the Union address.

The net knows:

Franklin Roosevelt's 11th State of the Union Message

" . . .We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all . . ."

[JoeSchem]

My contacts in Appleton, Wisc. have relayed to me that McCarthy should have been hospitalized for acute alcoholism even before the Hearings commenced

Putting people in mental hospitals because they criticize the regime is something they used to do in the Soviet Union. Perhaps your self-described 'unassailable conservative credentials' are just a wee bit assailable.

[Conservative84]

McCarthy, without a shred of evidence, unleashed a vitriolic diatribe against the US Army (with the support of a thoroughly disreputable assistant, a sullied homosexual by the name of Cohn).

Your tone carries the implication that you equate "thoroughly disreputable," "sullied," and "homosexual." Despite knee-jerk liberal assertions of conservative intolerance and regardless of your unassailable credentials, I have found that only liberals tend to sink to such low, ad-hominim attacks. Further, didn't Cohn successfully prosecute the Rosenbergs? And weren't they executed? Cohn was indeed homosexual, and he did once engage in a bit of attempted influence peddling. But if such minor flaws render him "thoroughly disreputable" and "sullied," then I submit that virtually no one can be considered reputable. Regardless of one's dislike of the messenger, it is the message that matters. And his performance in the Rosenberg affair makes up for that relatively minor matter.

As to the Senate's virtually party-line censure of McCarthy , a Democratic Senator from Massachusetts scheduled surgery rather than be present for such a scurrilous display of partisanship - yes, JFK himself was an admirer of McCarthy.

And what of McCarthy's censure? It seems that McCarthy said unkind things, indicating that one senator had to be "taken out of mothballs" and that he referred to another as "the only man in the world who had lived so long with neither brains nor guts." These words are what earned him censure - NOT his pursuit of communist spies employed by the US Government. Yet your post implies that he was censured for some sort of wrongdoing during his hearings. Either you did not know the trivial basis for his censure or you intentionally juxtaposed the fact he was censured with mention of the McCarthy Hearings with the intention of discrediting the latter through association. Since a conservative Republican with unassailable credentials would definitely not engage in anything so disingenuous, I will grant that you were victim of the liberal smear campaign against McCarthy and did not intend to deceive.

[nutmeg]

read later bump

[PGalt]

Bump for morning read.

[dk/coro]

OK...we all have our positions on this. And, I certainly agree that the government was rife with leftists during that period.

I still contend that the United States should have had a much more credible sword carrier than McCarthy...and I hold both him and his henchmen in total distain for their scatter-gun approach to the problem.

As for the negative aspersions to my patriotism: How about 800 plus carrier landings; three combat tours in SEA and a Silver Star, (along with a host of other awards) -- accelerated promotion to 0-6...and three commands prior to early retirement (on principle) during Watergate. Match that, youngsters.

Goodnight all..and have a great weekend.

[DPB101]

I still contend that the United States should have had a much more credible sword carrier than McCarthy...and I hold both him and his henchmen in total distain for their scatter-gun approach to the problem

Got any specifics? The transcripts don't show a "scatter-gun" approach (Anyone want excerpts of the 5,000 pages send me a private reply).

What was not credible that McCarthy said?

Btw...these were not just "leftists", they were agents of a foreign power at the highest levels of our government.

[dix]

This is a bit off topic, but since you are our resident expert on just about anything McCarthy. Gretta Van Sustreen, and McCarthy were both from Wisconsin, and I think Gretta’s Dad was a judge who wound up being disbarred I think, for his support of Joe. I think I also heard Gretta spent years trying to clear her Dad’s name. Does any of this ring any bells with you?

[DPB101]

Amazing isn't it? Judge Urban P. Van Susteren even helped McCarthy with his speeches.

[goldstategop]

Joe McCarthy was right about the substance and wrong on the process. The American people knew he was flawed but they believed he was right and his liberal critics were wrong. Communism was a danger. As for his victims they turned out to have been Communists or fellow travellers. What happened to them? Oh they were excluded for awhile from polite society. Under Communist regimes, millions of opponents were simply executed without due process. Ann Coulter knows McCarthy was flawed but points out this country faced a terrible danger. The Democrats initially fought Communism but after McCarthy was discredited eventually moved on to champion the Vietcong, unilateral disarmament, and losing our mortal fear over Communism. They were on the wrong side of history and now they're trying to position themselves to be on the wrong side of the war on terrorism. Now as once upon a time this country faces a terrible danger. Is siding against your country when it faces a dedicated enemy treason? Let the debate rage on.

[MEG33]

My cable went out just as I finished FDR's speech that you linked.That second Bill of Rights was what he sought to advance after the war.They are admirable goals mostly ,certainly not rights,and it sounded more socialistic or UN ish than American and I found myself profoundly disturbed about the influence on Roosevelt of the socialist solution.Eleanor was not alone in flirting with communism.How "fascist" of me to think this way!

[HISSKGB]

The communists contend that McCarthy was not credible. They decree this in spite of mountains of evidence that proved McCarthy was credible. The only reason McCarthy is perceived as not credible is because of communist propaganda.

You are to commended for your military service but that in itself does not always prove true patriotism. Peress was promoted to Captain while he was recruiting communist spies at Fort Monmouth. Army Intelligence reported this to McCarthy who tried to investigate why Peress was promoted when his communist activities were known.

[MEG33]

I recall that at least one area was shut down at Fort Monmouth after the McCarthy hearings...with no recognition of the problem but in effect cleaning out the problem.I can't find the answer in google.

[nopardons]

Your military credentials are not in question; your Conservatism is . While I applaud and am thankful for your service, That doesn't prove a damned thing; your post to this thread, OTOH, does. It proves that you are SOFT on Communism, have swallowed, as whwole cloth, all of the rabid anti-McCarthy propaganda, and are unable to actually see the forrest for the trees.

Which of " McCathy's henchmen " do you still hold in disdain ...Cohen, Nixon, Bobby Kennedy ?

You laud Welsh, a known bully, self aggrandizing blowhard, yet lash out against those who stood couragiously up to the stinking Commies. For that, you expect us US to somehow acknowledge your Conservative bona fides ? In what universe ?

For much of your time here, you have remained silent. Better, by far, that you should go back to doing so.

[HISSKGB]

As you say, some things are to find. I read the same thing but can't find it now.

BTW, I see that Anne Coulter has been called 'Hitler with a pretty face'.

[MEG33]

I thought the left said Ann is over the top..pot/kettle!Ann impressed me with Treason.Of course reading it made me angry all over again!The carping by the dems right now is a warning..they love to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

[Conservative84]

As for the negative aspersions to my patriotism: How about 800 plus carrier landings; three combat tours in SEA and a Silver Star, (along with a host of other awards) -- accelerated promotion to 0-6...and three commands prior to early retirement (on principle) during Watergate. Match that, youngsters.

I, for one, never cast any doubts on your patriotism, valor, abilities, or service to this country. I served 4 years in the Army as a Tank officer and left without being promoted to O-3. Plenty of explanations, but the bottom line is I didn't come anywhere close to O-6. It was the "conservative Republican" part I was a bit unsure about.

To put into perspective my rather jaundiced view of advanced military rank, I present my final brigade commander in the Army back in 1988: none other than COL (O-6) Wesley K. Clark. Yes, that Wesley K. Clark, who was eventually promoted to General (O-10, 4 stars). My opinion of him as my brigade commander was he was a self-centered, politically motivated man who would never rock the boat and would do nothing that might jeapordize his career. During Desert Storm, he was an O-7 and I happened to meet a woman who had been his West Point roommate's girlfriend and later the roommate's wife. She got to know Clark rather well both as a Cadet and as an officer. Her opinion of GEN Clark was far lower than mine. In support of these opinions, note which party is courting GEN Clark for their ticket in the 2004 Presidential race. One hint: it isn't the Republicans!

However, before you take any offense in the comparison, allow this rather unsuccessful officer to express great respect for your service. Further, the fact that you resigned on principle when you could not stomach what was happening (and, as an O-6, probably did not wield enough power to effect change) speaks volumes for your character and definitely means you don't qualify as a liberal. Far from it. That alone is enough to convince me of your conservatism.

The fact that we conservatives often have differing opinions on some issues, that we are willing (and able) to marshal logical arguments in defense of our opinions, and that we are willing to admit it when we realize we're wrong on an issue (well, sometimes - it sure isn't easy) is what really differeniates us from liberals.

A couple points on the McCarthy issue. First, he died before I was born. Second, assuming all else is equal, you lose to Ann Coulter for the one very minor reason that tips closely balanced scales every time: she's a babe! :-)

Okay, that last isn't a very logical argument. But it was an excuse (even if not a good one) to post her picture!

Would anyone happen to have a mailing address for Ann? :-)

[VOA]

From hearing Coulter on a couple of radio shows, I'm suprised that they've yet to
answer her real challenge. In MY words, I would sum it up thusly:

1. Name ONE person FALSELY accussed by McCarthy of Communist sympathies/collaboration
AND
2. suffered substantively due to that FALSE accussation.

I've heard probably 10 or more liberal/Democratic callers on "Treason" on talk
radio and...I'm still waiting.
Instead the lefties have simply thrown vitriol at Coulter, often about her previous books.

The longer I don't see them trot out such a case, the more I think they HAVE NO CASE.
AND/OR they are too worked up at keeping the memory of McCarthy in Hades, they can't
think straight.