Posted on 12/12/2007 5:31:38 PM PST by secretagent
A lot of them already tell us who they are
I give you....
The Progressive Caucus
Caucus Member List Co-Chairs Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-6) Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-9) Vice Chairs Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33) Hon. Raul Grijalva (AZ-7) Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-5) Hon. Hilda Solis (CA-32) Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-2) Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17) Senate Members Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT) House Members Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-1) Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-2) Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31) Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL) Hon. Robert Brady (PA-1) Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-3) Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-8) Hon. Julia Carson (IN-7) Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL) Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11) Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-1) Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-9) Hon. John Conyers (MI-14) Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-7) Hon. Danny Davis (IL-7) Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-4) Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-3) Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-5) Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17) Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-2) Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51) Hon. Barney Frank (MA-4) Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-4) Hon. John Hall (NY-19) Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22) Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15) Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-2) Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18) Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30) Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-4) Hon. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (OH-11) Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-9) Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13) Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10) Hon. Tom Lantos (CA-12) Hon. John Lewis (GA-5) Hon. David Loebsack (IA-2) Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14) Hon. Ed Markey (MA-7) Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-7) Hon. James McGovern (MA-3) Hon. George Miller (CA-7) Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-4) Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-8) Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL) Hon. John Olver (MA-1) Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-4) Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10) Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15) Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37) Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-1) Hon. Linda Sanchez (CA-47) Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-9) Hon. Jose Serrano (NY-16) Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28) Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13) Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-2) Hon. John Tierney (MA-6) Hon. Tom Udall (NM-3) Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12) Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35) Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12) Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30) Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
I’ve read the Herman biography, and was pleasantly surprised. Since the Venona decrypts had corroborated McCarthy’s accusations of infiltration by communist agents, I knew that the Wisconsin senator had been correct in his assessment. But I had still seen him as a drunken, blowhard, self-promoter. Herman explained that that was a false image created by McCarthy’s enemies in the media (and there were many) and that he was in truth a mild-mannered, even shy man who was ambushed by his own success.
The actual sequence is quite revealing. The Dems put Marshall in at state in part to have an unassailable war hero figure there. Marshall then went up to the hill and testified that there were no problems, it had all been cleaned up long ago - without getting into names or cases. The committee taught him otherwise afterward, giving him specific FBI info on security risks still in important positions. Marshall gets right on it and uses authority congress gave the Truman administration years before - but that they hadn't used - to rapidly can several of these security risks.
Well, then the left press screamed about the injustice to their fine upstanding Ivy friends. And Marshall backed off, just like that. He had tried to do the right thing as a matter of course, but he was the sainted George Marshall and he got good press, not bad press. He didn't take this gig to ruin his reputation but to burnish it. That ended that.
Marshall didn't have an unpatriotic bone in his body, and Evans goes into detail refuting McCarthy on him and his decisions. He correctly finds the source of bad policies Marshall signed off on in Asia, in the advice he was getting from the Acheson crew, which was effectively running state day to day, below Marshall's figurehead-marquee level.
Acheson does not get off so easily. In Evans portrayal, he clearly connived to keep reds in the department because it was his and the Dems turf and reserved for his high brow buddies, and those uncouth ruffians in congress didn't have any business sticking their noses in. Truman and his justice went along with that out of pure partisanship and to avoid political blame, in public - Evans has the internal memos of liberal senate types warning Truman that McCarthy was scoring heavily and they had to do something, etc.
The commie networks themselves were playing the rest of the left like a fiddle, getting them to defend the worst cases to avoid admitting they'd been in bed together for so long already etc.
But it didn't actually work, and McCarthy won outright, as long as it was just him against the left. He didn't lose until he kept doing in despite the fact the it was now Ike in the whitehouse. He wanted serious action, Ike wanted it as just a good past campaign issue that would now go away to avoid embarassment. It was their collision on that, that ruined McCarthy. Ike had it in for him over Marshall, there is no question - Ike concluded from that episode that McCarthy was reckless and unfair etc.
Point being, it took the center right to break him, the left alone did not manage it.
They have nothing to fear from the GOP, who like a dog hit repeatedly in the nose with a newspaper cower in fear lest a PC member point a bony finger at them and cry "McCarthyism!!
Pathetic and sad that the GOP has no spine anymore.
This communist POS is a US Senator and doesn't even bother to call himself a Donkeycrat.
Does Haynes imply "an anti-communist consensus had swept away all communists in government" ?
No, rather that the most significant Soviet espionage networks had been all but destroyed and/or neutralized thanks to defections, American counter-intelligence, the FBI’s full-court press against the CPUSA, and President Truman’s loyalty-security program for government employees.
And here the debate can expand considerably between those who know the history of Soviet espionage, I imagine, as to the importance of the networks and spies eliminated (if any) by those critical of McCarthy.
Evan's book sounds like a worthwhile purchase.
The full story has yet to be written about the mammoth coverup carried out by the elitists in the Democratic party to avoid revealing the Truman administration’s failure to safeguard our national secrets. In the late forties, thanks to the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities, Truman was getting very bad press. Indeed, Ike was elected on campaign promises to “clean out the State Department.”
In a nearly forgotten book from the sixties, “The Ordeal of Otto Otepka,” William J. Gill details Otepka’s struggle to carry out his job as head of the State Department’s Office of Security. Otepka was responsible for issuing or denying security clearances for State Department personnel.
It’s the sad story of those who hate our national sovereignty and how they managed to worm their proteges into State over decades, with Otepka singlehandedly standing in their way despite their efforts to ruin him. The Kennedys finally fired him.
The most powerful passage in the book which I personally will never forget, describes Truman’s furious reaction as he read the FBI reports on Alger Hiss. Over and over, he muttered, “That SOB betrayed his country, he betrayed his country . . .”
Truman knew how bad it was, he just didn’t want the rest of the country to know.
To be fair to Truman and cold war liberals, A-bomb spies were also apprehended and convicted on his watch.
Haynes takes issue with Evans (and Novak) over the degree of "viciousness" of McCarthy's attack on Marshall:
When Novak goes on to suggest that McCarthy’s speech was not really a vicious attack on Marshall’s loyalty, he is more accurately presenting Evans’s argument, save that both men strain to absolve McCarthy. The senator declared in June 1951 that “if Marshall were merely stupid, the laws of probability would dictate that part of his decisions would serve this country’s interest,” yet it was also McCarthy’s view that none of Marshall’s decisions were in America’s interests, leaving a plain inference to be drawn.[9] Then, of course, the senator went on to say “we believe that men high in this [Democratic] government are concerting to deliver us to disaster.” Who were these men? It is difficult to believe that anyone who reads McCarthy’s speech even now does not understand he meant Harry Truman, Dean Acheson and, above all, George Marshall.
Haynes is saying that McCarthy accused Marshall of planning America's destruction, and that Evans and Novak are ignoring McCarthy's plain meaning.
McCarthy & American Jews.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1927254/posts
Waves of immigrants came to the USA from 1880-1920: the Poles the Italians the Irish the Jews. Most of these ethnic groups voted for FDR by large majorities in 1932, 1936 & 1940, but over time they have assimilated and become less politically monolithic. Yet to this day the American jews still vote democratic by hefty majorities. Why? It is because Hollywood still strenuously maintains the communist lie about the 1950-54 McCarthy era. That lie is maintained by the recent movies “A Beautiful Mind,” and “Good Night and Good Luck”.
Shortly before his death in 1953 Stalin initiated the Doctor’s Plot. There are various reasons given for that. The KGB hated Israel. Many Americans who were enthusiastic supporters of the UN were Jewish. Edvard Radzinsky in his book “Stalin” argues that while at one time Stalin hoped Jewish financial capital would help rebuild the Soviet Union after the WWII, Stalin hated the prospect of suborning himself to the Baruch Plan and he flat out rejected IAEA nuclear controls—presented in 1946 (an attitude is not entirely dissimliar to that of Iran today.) The Russians were working on their own A-bomb based on stolen US designs. Stalin, himself a Geogian, wanted to insure that the Russians saw a Russian face to a Communist Party which was top heavy with Jews.
Whatever the reason, Stalin fomented the Doctor’s plot hysteria and broke off diplomatic relations with Israel. He was within days of preparing to exile the Soviet Jews to the Gulag (as was done previously with various other ethnic minorities such as the Crimean Tatars, Chechens, etc.), and initiate another great purge along the lines of 1938.
Stalin already had the concentration camps set up, and some of the preliminary accusations had gone out for the Doctor’s Plot. 100 or so Russian jews had already been executed when he died in 1953. The important thing to recall is that the Doctor’s Plot happened at the same time as the McCarthy anti communist business from 1950-54. Also in 1953, in the US the Rosenburgs were tried and executed for treason—and this less than a decade after the Holocaust. This naturally caused fear and suspicion in the US Jewish community. This fear and suspicion was played upon by knowledgeable communists and leftists—large numbers of whom were themselves jewish. These folk not only knew about what Stalin had done in the 1930s and had been about to do with the doctor’s plot before he died, but also saw the McCarthy trials as show trials american style . . . that is, a prelude to an american pogrom. For which the Rosenbergs were exhibit A.
In a brilliant piece of jujitsu, leftists and communists imputed to Americans on the right exactly what Stalin had planned to do. But it was done soto voce. Basically, a blood libel was perpetrated on Americans without their knowing it. Worse, Protestant America was painted as the tribal enemy tooth and claw of the US jewish establishment without Christian America even knowing it. Never again! — Was the battle cry. But there weren’t any such enemies of Jews in the USA. If there actually had been Christian tribal enemies in the USA, Meyer Kahane and his Jewish Defense League would have provoked them into a bloodletting. Why did Meyer Kahane behave the way he did? Because he heard the same thing as everyone else - all the Jews, that is. He heard about enemies of the jews in the heartland. But when he went to give battle, the only sorts of fights the JDL could find resulted in unintelligible court disputes in places like Idaho. In the end, Kahane married an American woman & helped expedite Stalin’s last wish—to rid Russia of Jews. When his American wife committed suicide, Kahane lost interest in the USA and focused instead on Israel. When Kahane died in 1990 it was at the hands of a Moslem.
While the American public outside NY/LA were generally given the view that the McCarthy era was an age when innocent men were unjustly tried by suspicious anti semites like McCarthy & Nixon, the NY/LA Jewish establishment was given a very different story. They were given to understand that the democrats/liberals had prevented the US from visiting a holocaust on them - and that American Jews owed their loyalty to the liberal democrats because the liberal democrats were the protectors of the Jews. And this Meme went on untouched for decades after McCarthy.
This dual track story line didn’t crack until the early 1990’s when the KGB/NKVD/GRU opened up their files on the WWII-McCarthy period. In 1995 the US’s National Security Agency opened up their Venona files. Both Russian and American spy agency files showed that McCarthy was right. The Rosenburgs were guilty. The US government —notably including the Manhattan Project—had been at one time soaked with Russian Spies. While McCarthy had the details wrong, he got the general outline of the story right. Why did McCarthy get the outline right and the details wrong? The reason is that McCarthy’s relationship to Hoover was the same as Hoover’s relationship to the NSA.
The NSA told the FBI about the Venona intercepts but insisted that the FBI could not use NSA intercepts as evidence in court. The FBI had to develop their own leads. As a result most of the spies escaped prosecution. The FBI did not get their man.
In 1950 J. Edgar Hoover began weekly meetings with Joseph McCarthy. Those meetings ended in 1954. The beginning and end of those meetings coincided with the beginning and end of McCarthy star turn in the national spot light. McCarthy got most of the details of the spy story wrong but he got the general outline of the story right. His predicament was the same as that of the FBI. Whatever Hoover told him—McCarthy could not use in the senate hearings. To this day the FBI denies that Hoover told McCarthy anything about the Venona Cables and maybe Hoover said nothing explicit to McCarthy for which Hoover could be liable in court.
Needless to say, an American style shoah was never in the cards.
The reason that Hollywood hated Ronald Reagan so much was that he was an anti communist in Hollywood during the McCarthy period. To be staunchly anti communist in Hollywood or NYC at that time was to be at least vaguely anti semitic because in the 30’s to the 50’s communism was considered to be almost a secular form of Judaism in the Jewish communities of NY/LA. Given the reputation of the Jews in capitalist countries as the quintessential capitalists, this seems ironic. But in Russia, communism was a way to get ahead for the jews. And in addition to the opportunities communism presented to Jews, there was a biblical antecedent for jewish communists in the bible in the person of Joseph in Egypt because the relationship between Jews to Joseph’s Egypt maps over well to that between Jews and Communist Russia. And the history of the Jews from Joseph to Moses looks very similar to the rise to prominence of many Jews in the soviet communist bureaucracy from the 1917-1970 and the decades long expulsion of Russia’s jews after 1970 when it became clear that communism was not working. The Russians blamed Russian jews for the failure of communism.
Reagan was among the first wave of FDR democrats to switch parties. Reagan’s star turn in Hollywood ended after McCarthy, but his experiences in Hollywood served him well when he went into public service. He always understood the jujitsu of media talk of the age. Something that cannot be said of Nixon. Nixon’s rise to prominance began with his role with the House Unamerican Activities Committee (HUAC)—a role for which gained visceral leftist enemies with long memories (in the way John Kerry gained prominence during the Viet Nam era and made visceral enemies of the swift boat veterans.) Nixons fall also coincides with the Russian expulsion of Russia’s jews.
I would not argue that Nixon paid the price for Russia’s expulsion of Russian jews. That stretches the point. However, when I hear American based Moslems talking about McCarthyism being visited on them, I have to laugh. They have unknowingly pronounced themselves guilty in the eyes of many Americans.
The history of the McCarthy period now is forgotten among American Jews except for the vague idea that somehow Republicans are bad and somehow Democrats are good.
As for the Democrats, part of the reason for the loss of their inner coherence in the last decade has been that the part of their foundational raison d’être which stems from the McCarthy era was revealed to be based on a lie. So now the core of the Democratic Party is the sodomites. Those people are not just confusing, they are confused.
David Horowitz interviewed by Rush Limbaugh some months ago — talked about how his parents were communists and he was a communist in college. He said when he was in college his views were always treated respectfully by his professors. But, he said recently, a young Christian college student told him that his homosexual college professor had singled him out in class and asked him “Why do you Christians hate queers?” Asked why he continued to do what he did in the face of all the abuse he gets, David Horowitz said that - like Rush - he took public political positions because he had to. But also he said he did it as a matter of atonement.
He gets it.
Venona Historical Writings that include comparisons of venona and russian spy lists and the changing venona story in the academy. http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/page43.html http://www.johnearlhaynes.org/index.html
Evans makes clear they did try to clean some of them out, but did so by forcing retirements or reassignments. That avoided public scandal and blame directed at them - but it also led to the same crowd getting new government jobs elsewhere, or sliding over to the international institutions like the UN and the IMF. McCarthy's whole point in 1950 was that despite years of info from the FBIs press and the defectors, those fingered were still in office.
The FBI in particular was livid about it - and Evans makes pretty clear that McCarthy, whatever else he was, was J Edgar Hoover's battering ram to get the Truman adminstration to get off its backside on the issue.
Evans specifically exonerates Marshall on the point. He does not ignore McCarthy's plain meaning, he spends a chapter laying it out and showing that it was false. He shows that Marshall's other decisions did indeed redound to America's benefit, and shows the real explanation for the losses on his watch. Which was tolerated reds in country in China, and back home in state, and in treasury, all deliberately undermining the Chinese anti-communists - and Acheson flacking for them and defending them and buying their reports - and Marshall leaving such matters to Acheson, while he played jet setting statesman and worried about reconstructing Europe.
He has the absolutely devastating line, softplaying a very strong hand, that if the State department didn't lose China is wasn't for lack of trying. He freely admits it might have been overdetermined, and that the responsibility for it belongs first and foremost on the actual red sympathesizers sending back unbelievably tendentious crap about Mao and company, which he quotes in detail. He has treasury department types on the record explaining they deliberately held up aid money (voted and authorized, they refused to dispense) to the Chinese anti-communists for years, because they wanted them to lose.
Evans does not defend McCarthy on Marshall, he defends Marshall. But he also shows that China was not at all an innocent matter. The sins of the liberals, as opposed to the reds, were all of omission, and consisted in leaving the reds in place, and sometimes protecting them. But there were plenty of those sins. (The most egregious being their fixing the Amerasia case to get off spies caught red handed passing documents to the Chi-coms - which the FBI literally had on tape. The fixing I mean).
What is really going on here is that the author is reaching for the only solid charge available against *McCarthy*, and pretending it is an adequate charge against *Evans*. But it flat misses, for anyone who has read the book. Evans is not guilty of that he is charged with. But the libs of the day *are* guilty of what *they* were charged with, back then (conniving at protecting administration reds - for partisan reasons - who were in turn actively working to "throw" China to the communists, for treasonous ideological reasons).
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.