When Andrew Sullivan claimed in his hit piece on Ann a few weeks ago that Ronald Radosh had told him Ann's book was a "distortion" of research he, Haynes and Klehr had done (Ann paid Radosh back by writing a column decrying the way Radosh has been treated by academia for his book "The Rosenberg File"---Proverbs 25:21-22), I was just waiting for the "other shoe to drop." Now it seems good old Dave Horowitz (who still carries Ann's column on his Frontpage Magazine site!) has organized a "stacked deck" "symposium" to "debunk" Ann's book.
I'll save a detailed response for later, but it's worth noting that many individuals who are now the "go to" people for the history of post-WW II communism have origins on the left or were initially sympathetic to American Communists or Popular Front types. Radosh initially set out to prove that the Rosenbergs had been railroaded to their deaths, and Weinstein initially got access to and the cooperation of Alger Hiss for his definitive study of the Hiss-Chambers case "Perjury," because he was at first convinced of Hiss' innocence (to their credit, both Radosh and Weinstein let the evidence change their minds, and both have paid a price for such honesty in academia).
A "stacked deck" is right. Horowitz is using what he learned as a member of the New Left. First he softened up the target with his own attack (which was picked up by liberals across the nation to "prove" Coulter is crazy). Now he has a rigged debate. The moderator is against Coulter. A babbling left wing nut is brought in to offset Ann's one defender. Then two academics who are against Coulter are used to make opposition to Ann appear to be the "reasonable" position.
Well done, David! We're convinced now! The people rise as one to denouce the demagoguette Coulter and her running dogs demagogueweenians.