PDA

View Full Version : Dangerous Anti-Am/Conservatives Rewriting History



Gayle in MD
12-13-2010, 12:28 PM
<span style="color: #990000">A danger and a Disgrace! </span>

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/01/91478/some-conservatives-rewrite-history.html

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>WASHINGTON — The right is rewriting history.

The most ballyhooed effort is under way in Texas, where conservatives have pushed the state school board to rewrite guidelines, downplaying Thomas Jefferson in one high school course, playing up such conservatives as Phyllis Schlafly and the Heritage Foundation and challenging the idea that the Founding Fathers wanted to separate church and state.

The effort reaches far beyond one state, however.

In articles and speeches, on radio and TV, conservatives are working to redefine major turning points and influential figures in American history, often to slam liberals, promote Republicans and reinforce their positions in today's politics.

The Jamestown settlers? Socialists. Founding Father Alexander Hamilton? Ill-informed professors made up all that bunk about him advocating a strong central government.

Theodore Roosevelt? Another socialist. Franklin D. Roosevelt? Not only did he not end the Great Depression, he also created it.

Joe McCarthy? Liberals lied about him. He was a hero.

Some conservatives say it's a long-overdue swing of the pendulum after years of liberal efforts to define history on their terms in classrooms and in popular culture.

"We are adding balance," Texas school board member Don McLeroy said. "History has already been skewed. Academia is skewed too far to the left."

The effort in Texas and nationwide is controversial, however, even among many conservatives. McLeroy was defeated in a recent primary after he led the campaign for a more conservative version of history, a defeat that the National Review, a leading conservative organ, called "sensible."</span>


While even some conservative intellectuals say that some of the revisionist history is simply wrong, at the core, the effort reflects the ever-changing view of history, which is always subject to revision thanks to new information or new ways of looking at things, and often is viewed through a political lens.

"History in the popular world is always a political football," said Alan Brinkley, a historian at Columbia University. "The right is unusually mobilized at the moment."

"Part of the tide of history is that it's contested terrain," said Fritz Fischer, a historian at the University of Northern Colorado and the chairman of the National Council for History Education. "We should always be arguing and questioning what happened in the past."

It's not just historians who contest history, however. It's also politicians and pundits.

The left has done it.

Fischer cited the case of controversial former University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill, whose essay claiming that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were the fruit of illegal U.S. policies became a cause celebre. Fischer said Churchill "ignored a lot of evidence and made some up to promulgate a particular political belief."
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>
Now, it's the right.

"There's clearly a political impetus behind this that connects to the issues of today," Fischer said, such as labeling President Barack Obama a socialist. "But when history is ignored to do it, that can be dangerous."

Here are five recent examples of new conservative versions of history:

JAMESTOWN

Reaching for an example of how bad socialism can be, former House of Representatives Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, said recently that the people who settled Jamestown, Va., in 1607 were socialists and that their ideology doomed them.

"Jamestown colony, when it was first founded as a socialist venture, dang near failed with everybody dead and dying in the snow," he said in a speech March 15 at the National Press Club.

It was a good, strong story, helping Armey, a former economics professor, illustrate the dangers of socialism, the same ideology that he and other conservatives say is at the core of Obama's agenda.

It was not, however, true.</span>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The Jamestown settlement was a capitalist venture financed by the Virginia Company of London — a joint stock corporation — to make a profit. The colony nearly foundered owing to a harsh winter, brackish water and lack of food, but reinforcements enabled it to survive. It was never socialistic. In fact, in 1619, Jamestown planters imported the first African slaves to the 13 colonies that later formed the United States.</span>

ALEXANDER HAMILTON

At the same event, Armey urged people to read the Federalist Papers as a guide to the sentiments of the tea party movement.

"The small-government conservative movement, which includes people who call themselves the tea party patriots and so forth, is about the principles of liberty as embodied in the Constitution, the understanding of which is fleshed out if you read things like the Federalist Papers," Armey said.

Others such as Democrats and the news media, "people here who do not cherish America the way we do," don't understand because "they did not read the Federalist Papers," he said.

A member of the audience asked Armey how the Federalist Papers could be such a tea party manifesto when they were written largely by Alexander Hamilton, who the questioner said "was widely regarded then and now as an advocate of a strong central government."

Armey ridiculed the very suggestion.

"Widely regarded by whom?" he asked. "Today's modern, ill-informed political science professors? . . . I just doubt that was the case, in fact, about Hamilton."

Hamilton, however, was an unapologetic advocate of a strong central government, one that plays an active role in the economy and is led by a president named for life and thus beyond the emotions of the people. Hamilton also pushed for excise taxes and customs duties to pay down federal debt.

In fact, Ian Finseth said in a history written for the University of Virginia, others at the constitutional convention "thought his proposals went too far in strengthening the central government."

THEODORE ROOSEVELT

Theodore Roosevelt was long an icon of the Republican Party, a dynamic leader who ushered in the Progressive era, busting trusts, regulating robber barons, building the Panama Canal and sending the U.S. fleet around the world announcing ascendant American power.

Fox TV commentator Glenn Beck, however, says that Roosevelt was a socialist whose legacy is destroying America. It started, Beck said, with Roosevelt's admonition to the wealthy of his day to spend their riches for the good of society.

"We judge no man a fortune in civil life if it's honorably obtained and well spent," Roosevelt said, according to Beck. "It's not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it only to be gained so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community."

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Actually, Roosevelt said, "We GRUDGE no man a fortune ... if it's honorably obtained and well USED." But either way, Beck saw the threat.</span>"Oh? Well, thank you," Beck said with scorn during his keynote speech to the recent Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. The presidential suggestion that the wealthy of the Gilded Age should contribute to the good of society was a clear danger that must be condemned, Beck said.
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>
"Is this what the Republican Party stands for? Well, you should ask members of the Republican Party, because this is not our founders' idea of America. And this is the cancer that's eating at America. It is big government; it's a socialist utopia," Beck said.

"And we need to address it as if it is a cancer. It must be cut out of the system because they cannot coexist. ... You must eradicate it. It cannot coexist."

There's no doubt that Roosevelt was a domestic policy liberal by today's standards. In a 1910 speech in Kansas, he acknowledged that his "New Nationalism" meant "far more active governmental interference with social and economic conditions in this country than we have yet had."

The 26th president insisted, however, that he wanted the government to guarantee opportunity, not a handout.

"The fundamental thing to do for every man is to give him a chance to reach a place in which he will make the greatest possible contribution to the public welfare," he said.

"Give him a chance, not push him up if he will not be pushed. ... Help any man who stumbles; if he lies down, it is a poor job to try to carry him; but if he is a worthy man, try your best to see that he gets a chance to show the worth that is in him."</span>In his autobiography three years later, Roosevelt went on to dismiss the tenets of socialism as taught by Karl Marx as "an exploded theory."

"Too many thoroughly well-meaning men and women in the America of today glibly repeat and accept," he wrote, "various assumptions and speculations by Marx and others which by the lapse of time and by actual experiment have been shown to possess not one shred of value."

In addition, Roosevelt didn't advocate government ownership of the means of production, the definition of socialism.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT

It's long been debated how well Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal government programs countered the Great Depression, but now a prominent conservative has introduced the idea that Roosevelt CAUSED the Depression.

"FDR took office in the midst of a recession," Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., told the Conservative Political Action Conference in February. "He decided to choose massive government spending and the creation of monstrous bureaucracies. Do we detect a Democrat pattern here in all of this? He took what was a manageable recession and turned it into a 10-year depression."

A year before, Bachmann went to the House floor to blame FDR and what she called the "Hoot-Smalley" tariffs for creating the Depression.

"The recession that FDR had to deal with wasn't as bad as the recession (President Calvin) Coolidge had to deal with in the early '20s," she said.

Coolidge cut taxes and created the roaring '20s, Bachmann said.

"FDR applied just the opposite formula: the Hoot-Smalley act, which was a tremendous burden on tariff restrictions. And of course trade barriers and the regulatory burden and of course tax barriers.

"That's what we saw happen under FDR. That took a recession and blew it into a full-scale depression. The American people suffered for almost 10 years under that kind of thinking."

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The truth? Historians agree that tariffs hurt trade and worsened the depression.

However, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act — not Hoot-Smalley — was proposed by two Republicans, Sen. Reed Smoot of Utah and Rep. Willis Hawley of Oregon. A Republican House and a Republican Senate approved it. President Herbert Hoover, a Republican, signed it into law.</span>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The facts also show that the country was in something far worse than a "manageable recession" in March 1933 when Roosevelt took office.

Stocks had lost 90 percent of their value since the crash of 1929. Thousands of banks had failed. Unemployment reached an all-time high of 24.9 percent just before Roosevelt was inaugurated.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>JOE MCCARTHY

Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wis., burst onto the national stage in the early 1950s with accusations that he had a list of names of known Communists in the federal government. He didn't name them, was censured by the Senate eventually and his name became synonymous with witch hunts — McCarthyism.

Now, the end of the Cold War has opened up spy files and identified many Communist spies who operated inside the government during the era. Some conservatives argue that this proves not only that McCarthy was right, but also that he was a hero and that he was smeared by liberals, the news media and historians.

"Almost everything about McCarthy in current history books is a lie and will have to be revised," conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly said.

"Liberals had to destroy McCarthy because he exposed the entire liberal establishment as having sheltered Soviet spies," conservative commentator Ann Coulter said in one interview.

"The myth of 'McCarthyism' is the greatest Orwellian fraud of our times," she said in another. "Liberals are fanatical liars, then as now. The portrayal of Senator Joe McCarthy as a wild-eyed demagogue destroying innocent lives is sheer liberal hobgoblinism. ... If the Internet, talk radio and Fox News had been around in McCarthy's day, my book wouldn't be the first time most people would be hearing the truth about 'McCarthyism.' "</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Yet even some prominent conservatives say that McCarthy's defenders go too far, and that even from a conservative perspective, McCarthy was no hero and damaged the country.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>
"A dangerous movement has been growing among conservative writers to vindicate the late Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy and his campaign to expose Soviet spies in the U.S. government," Ronald Kessler wrote for the conservative Web site Newsmax.com.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>"The FBI agents who were actually chasing those spies have told me that McCarthy hurt their efforts because he trumped up charges, unfairly besmirched honorable Americans and gave hunting spies a bad name."

Kessler said the release of secret Cold War files under the Venona Project confirmed that there were Soviet spies in the U.S. government.

"The problem was that the people McCarthy tarnished as Communists or Communist sympathizers were not the real spies," Kessler wrote.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>"The cause of anti-communism, which united millions of Americans and which gained the support of Democrats, Republicans and independents, was undermined by Sen. Joe McCarthy of Wisconsin," wrote William Bennett, who was the conservative secretary of education under President Ronald Reagan.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>
"McCarthy addressed a real problem: disloyal elements within the U.S. government. But his approach to this real problem was to cause untold grief to the country he claimed to love," Bennett wrote in his book "America: The Last Best Hope."</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>
"Worst of all, McCarthy besmirched the honorable cause of anti-communism. He discredited legitimate efforts to counter Soviet subversion of American institutions."</span>

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/01/91478/some-conservatives-rewrite-history.html#ixzz1816LFq8g

sack316
12-13-2010, 12:32 PM
Groups practicing revisionist history, slant, and indoctrinating students? Say it ain't so! Not in this country!

Sack

Gayle in MD
12-13-2010, 12:39 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Groups practicing revisionist history, slant, and indoctrinating students? Say it ain't so! Not in this country!

Sack </div></div>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'> historians from the right, and the left, have spoken out against these RW llies, about our history.</span>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The truth? Historians agree that tariffs hurt trade and worsened the depression.

However, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act — not Hoot-Smalley — was proposed by two Republicans, Sen. Reed Smoot of Utah and Rep. Willis Hawley of Oregon. A Republican House and a Republican Senate approved it. President Herbert Hoover, a Republican, signed it into law.

The facts also show that the country was in something far worse than a "manageable recession" in March 1933 when Roosevelt took office.

Stocks had lost 90 percent of their value since the crash of 1929. Thousands of banks had failed. Unemployment reached an all-time high of 24.9 percent just before Roosevelt was inaugurated. </div></div>

sack316
12-13-2010, 12:44 PM
I wasn't commenting on the right vs. wrong of it (for the record, I do agree that it is wrong). My comment is that this is nothing new. It goes on all the time, and has been for quite some time.

Sack

LWW
12-13-2010, 12:46 PM
What Gee really, really is pizzed about is that Senator Joseph McCarthy was vindicated by history when the Venona files were declassified after the fall of the USSR ... it turns out that not only was the FDR/Truman admins riddled by Soviet Agents, but it went as high as VPOTUS Wallace ... AND history has shown conclusively that the FDR policies deepened and lengthened the depression.

I will ask her the question which sent aitch into a self flagellation fit on AZB ... name for me one, just <u><span style='font-family: Arial Black'><span style='font-size: 26pt'>ONE</span></span></u>, innocent victim of senator McCarthy.

LWW

Gayle in MD
12-13-2010, 06:17 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I wasn't commenting on the right vs. wrong of it (for the record, I do agree that it is wrong). My comment is that this is nothing new. It goes on all the time, and has been for quite some time.

Sack </div></div>


When they start putting their lies in the history books, for our schools, they have gone too far.

This is the same thing that the deniers of the reason for the civil war, did, for decades, and few even realized it.

They even took over our National Park Service, and forced themm to refrain for mentioning slavery!

I posted about it here, several weeks ago, with links....

Now, when they start teaching our kids, that a destructive POS like Joe McCarthy, has beenn vindicated, they have gone WAY TOO FAR.

Hey, that's what they're writing in the history books!!!

RW LIES!

G.

Deeman3
12-13-2010, 06:21 PM
Has Hondo now gotten the boot? I have not seen him post in a few days!

moblsv
12-13-2010, 08:33 PM
"Widely regarded by whom?" he asked. "Today's modern, ill-informed political science professors?"

The RW mantra: Who's to say that our opinions aren't as valid as your peer reviewed, professionally studied, scientifically tested using sound process, falsifiable facts? Our louder yelling and media control has got half of America to believe us. that must mean something.

sack316
12-13-2010, 09:18 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
When they start putting their lies in the history books, for our schools, they have gone too far.
</div></div>

Which is my point, it's ALWAYS gone too far. For a long long long long time. For example, most think the Longfellow version of Paul Revere is the unabashed truth! And it's not even close! While at the same time you won't find Wentworth Cheswell in most history books or tales of great Americans... yet his real story is absolutely worthy of being inspirational American History.

"When the legend becomes fact, print the legend" That's our historical education motto.

Sack

Qtec
12-14-2010, 01:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What Gee really, really is pizzed about is that Senator Joseph McCarthy was vindicated by history when the Venona files were declassified after the fall of the USSR ... it turns out that not only was the FDR/Truman admins riddled by Soviet Agents, but it went as high as VPOTUS Wallace ... AND history has shown conclusively that the FDR policies deepened and lengthened the depression.

I will ask her the question which sent aitch into a self flagellation fit on AZB ... <u>name for me one, just <u><span style='font-family: Arial Black'><span style='font-size: 26pt'>ONE</span></span></u>, innocent victim of senator McCarthy.</u>

LWW </div></div>


link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Lee_Moss)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In his conclusion, Murrow said of McCarthy:

“ <span style='font-size: 14pt'>His primary achievement has been in confusing the public mind, as between the internal and the external threats of Communism. We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men. [...]

We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world, but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home. The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad, and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not really his. He didn't create this situation of fear; he merely exploited it—and rather successfully.</span>[84] </div></div>

No surprise to me that your hero would be a rat.

Q

LWW
12-14-2010, 03:10 AM
Most certainly not.

LWW

LWW
12-14-2010, 03:12 AM
So, you can't name one ... not even ONE ... innocent victim either?

I knew you couldn't.

Let's set the left's name calling and smears ... which merely prove that the only practitioners of "McCarthyism" are on the left ... and deal with the facts.

Do you or don't you have an innocent victim?

We both know that you don't.

LWW

LWW
12-14-2010, 03:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Has Hondo now gotten the boot? I have not seen him post in a few days! </div></div>

Check HERE (http://billiardsdigest.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=329540#Post329540) for an update on hondo's activities, and why he hasn't been posting.

I honestly hope the guy returns ... as long as he can keep his many issues under control.

LWW

Qtec
12-14-2010, 03:59 AM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/AnnieLeeMoss2.jpg

A threat to the USA?

Q

Qtec
12-14-2010, 04:00 AM
Who is innocent?

According to you and McCarthy if someone doesn't think like you they are Obamatrons, pinkos, Commies, etc.

Only in America is Socialist a dirty word and that's only with the Republicans.

Q

Gayle in MD
12-14-2010, 05:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Has Hondo now gotten the boot? I have not seen him post in a few days! </div></div>

Not that I know of...

LWW
12-14-2010, 05:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/AnnieLeeMoss2.jpg

A threat to the USA?

Q </div></div>

Did you read your own link?

Of course you didn't.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In accordance with a loyalty review program introduced by President Harry S. Truman in 1947, Moss was investigated by the loyalty board of the General Accounting Office in October 1949.[8] The next year, when Moss was promoted to communications clerk at the Pentagon, she was reinvestigated by the Army’s Loyalty-Security Screening Board. The result of this investigation was that Moss was suspended from her position with the recommendation that she be discharged. She appealed this decision and was cleared by the Army board in January 1951.</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Since Markward’s information included an address for Annie Lee Moss, and Moss confirmed this address in her testimony, the possibility of mistaken identity was never a very realistic one.[25][26] In 1958 the Subversive Activities Control Board investigated a related case and confirmed Markward’s testimony that Moss’s name and address had appeared on the Communist party rolls in the mid-1940s. Several sources have reported this as "proving" that Moss had been a Communist.[27] More substantive is the evidence contained in Moss's FBI file, some of which wasn't revealed until the file was released through a Freedom of Information Act request. Andrea Friedman describes this evidence as "perhaps a dozen pieces of paper—included a list of 'party recruits' that identified Moss by name, race, age, and occupation; membership lists from two Communist party branches, the Communist Political Association, and various ad hoc committees containing Moss’s name and address, as well as the number of her Communist Party membership book; and receipt records from 1945 for Daily Worker subscriptions." </div></div>

She was investigated and suspended prior to the McCarthy hearings.

She was later rehired by higher ups working for the Soviets.

She was oddly promoted from being a dessert cook to being an Army Signal Corps communications clerk at the Pentagon.

McCarthy questioned her on being a CPUSA member ... which was later proven to be a Soviet front group ... and she was later demonstrated to in fact be a CPUSA member.

In spite of all this she worked for the govt until her retirement in 1975.

I asked for an innocent victim.

You have provided a non-victim communist.

Why is that?

LWW

Gayle in MD
12-14-2010, 05:16 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: moblsv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Widely regarded by whom?" he asked. "Today's modern, ill-informed political science professors?"

The RW mantra: Who's to say that our opinions aren't as valid as your peer reviewed, professionally studied, scientifically tested using sound process, falsifiable facts? Our louder yelling and media control has got half of America to believe us. that must mean something. </div></div>

Exactly, Friend, and it's incredible to me that on this site, people deny proven facts regularly.

Intellectual knowledge has long been the enemy of the Republicans. Not hard to figure that one out.

The result, is yet another country being destroyed by Milton Freidman's Unamerican BS, which destroyed Chile, and has been completely distorted by the Republican party. It didn't take long for Freidman to advise how to change a peaceful country, into revolution, over the broad theft of wealth, redirected upwards to the top, while all others lost economic ground, promoted by the same sort of SHOCK, which the Bush Cheney cabal, so enjoyed using for their massive redistribution of wealth in this country, to ONLY the top two percent.

Now, here we are, staying with the same failed policies, which Bush destroyed our econoomy with, over his tenure.

Clinton created twenty-two million jobs. Bush? Slightly over a million. Every economic figure, was far better under Clinton, than Bush, and now, republicans are confirming who they are, pawns of the wealthy, thieves of the rest....hence, we're becoming a third world country. Where are those phony Tea Party people, with all of their outrage over how the Republicans are insisting on growing the deficit!


BTW, have you read the book, or seen the movie, The Shock Doctrine ????????

G.

Gayle in MD
12-14-2010, 05:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
When they start putting their lies in the history books, for our schools, they have gone too far.
</div></div>

Which is my point, it's ALWAYS gone too far. For a long long long long time. For example, most think the Longfellow version of Paul Revere is the unabashed truth! And it's not even close! While at the same time you won't find Wentworth Cheswell in most history books or tales of great Americans... yet his real story is absolutely worthy of being inspirational American History.

"When the legend becomes fact, print the legend" That's our historical education motto.

Sack </div></div>

This is far worse than those kinds of things, Sack. This is a massiive re-writing of proven historical facts. A concerted slant, which leaves out facts, and replaces them with RW friendly versions, totally and incredibly, concocted to manipulate coming generations of this country, into a clueless bunch of frightened bahing sheep, who will have nothing coming their but an Orwellian wasteland.

Frightening.

G.

Gayle in MD
12-14-2010, 05:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What Gee really, really is pizzed about is that Senator Joseph McCarthy was vindicated by history when the Venona files were declassified after the fall of the USSR ... it turns out that not only was the FDR/Truman admins riddled by Soviet Agents, but it went as high as VPOTUS Wallace ... AND history has shown conclusively that the FDR policies deepened and lengthened the depression.

I will ask her the question which sent aitch into a self flagellation fit on AZB ... <u>name for me one, just <u><span style='font-family: Arial Black'><span style='font-size: 26pt'>ONE</span></span></u>, innocent victim of senator McCarthy.</u>

LWW </div></div>


link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annie_Lee_Moss)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">In his conclusion, Murrow said of McCarthy:

“ <span style='font-size: 14pt'>His primary achievement has been in confusing the public mind, as between the internal and the external threats of Communism. We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men. [...]

We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world, but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home. The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad, and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not really his. He didn't create this situation of fear; he merely exploited it—and rather successfully.</span>[84] </div></div>

No surprise to me that your hero would be a rat.

Q </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">“ His primary achievement has been in confusing the public mind, as between the internal and the external threats of Communism. We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men. [...]

</div></div>

Substitute the word terrorism, for communism, and this entire paragraph could well have been written about George Bush and Dick Cheney! Fits perfectly! [/color]

LWW
12-14-2010, 05:33 AM
The question wasn't what Murrow's personal opinion of McCarthy was.

The question was if you could name one single innocent victim?

Can you?

BTW ... we both know that you can't, so please stop embarrassing yourself.

LWW

Gayle in MD
12-14-2010, 05:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/AnnieLeeMoss2.jpg

A threat to the USA?

Q </div></div>


<span style="color: #660000">Oh, of course, just like Lucille Ball was a threat!

I have a whole list of NEOCONS, who were IN the communist party, in their college days.

Got to hunt that one up. You'll see many from The American enterprise Institute on that list., including William Kristol SR. </span>

Qtec
12-14-2010, 05:42 AM
So this poor woman went to a union meeting and signed something she thought was for a good cause and now she is a Soviet spy. Good thinking Batman.

WE DON'T BUY IT!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">McCarthyism is a term used to describe the making of accusations of disloyalty, subversion, or treason <u>without proper regard for evidence.</u> The term has its origins in the period in the United States known as the Second Red Scare, lasting roughly from the late 1940s to the late 1950s and characterized by heightened fears of communist influence on American institutions and espionage by Soviet agents. Originally coined to criticize the anti-communist pursuits of U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy, "McCarthyism" soon took on a broader meaning, describing <u>the excesses</u> of similar efforts. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>The term is also now used more generally to describe reckless, </span>unsubstantiated accusations, as well as demagogic attacks <span style='font-size: 26pt'>on the character or patriotism of political adversaries.</span> </div></div>

Keep digging, the hole only gets deeper.

Q

LWW
12-14-2010, 05:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style="color: #660000">Oh, of course, just like Lucille Ball was a threat!</span> </div></div>

You guys are SO predictable ... I knew you would do exactly what you did.

Let's review:

1 - Lucy was a registered communist, and in fact was appointed to the State Central Committee of the Communist Party of California.

2 - Lucy was called before the "HOUSE UNAMERICAN ACTIVITIES COMMITTEE."

3 - This hearing was in the house, not the senate where <span style='font-size: 11pt'>SENATOR</span> McCarthy served.

4 - Lucy was never called before the McCarthy hearings.

5 - HUAC was a creation of the democrook controlled congress unbder the FDR regime for the purpose of stopping investigations in the KKK.

6 - Democrook HUAC member remarked, as an excuse to not investigate the KKK, "After all, the KKK is an old American institution."

7 - Going after communists by the HUAC was simply making a then obscure group a scapegoat and to have a "PUBLIC ENEMY" that drew attention away from the KKK and it's deep and broad roots in the democrook party.

So ... did you have the name of an innocent victim of senator McCarthy, or do you want to continue making a fool of yourself

OH DEAR! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucille_Ball#Testimony_Before_the_House_Committee_ on_Un-American_Activities)

FACTS! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HUAC) They are such stubborn things.

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a247/lww/ONLINE%20ARGUMENTS/Snoopy.jpg

LWW

LWW
12-14-2010, 05:54 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Keep digging, the hole only gets deeper.

Q </div></div>

Everyone should have a motto ... I'm glad you have yours.

LWW

LWW
12-14-2010, 05:56 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">So this poor woman went to a union meeting and signed something she thought was for a good cause and now she is a Soviet spy. Good thinking Batman.

Q </div></div>

Nice spin, but that isn't what <u><span style='font-family: Arial Black'><span style='font-size: 11pt'>YOUR</span></span></u> link said.

But, of course, I know this because I read it and you didn't.

LWW

Qtec
12-14-2010, 06:13 AM
Take a Med.

Q

Gayle in MD
12-14-2010, 06:15 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Take a Med.

Q </div></div>

A whole bottle.... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Qtec
12-14-2010, 06:17 AM
Now, now G, we should not mock the afflicted.

Q

Gayle in MD
12-14-2010, 06:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Now, now G, we should not mock the afflicted.

Q </div></div>

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

LWW
12-14-2010, 06:53 AM
How's that search for an innocent victim going?

What's that?

Confronted with the truth y'all would rather backslap each other over who can bury their head the deepest in the sand?

Imagine that.

LWW

Qtec
12-14-2010, 07:02 AM
McCarthy was Glenn Beck with power.

Q

eg8r
12-14-2010, 07:23 AM
Well actually it did not sound like gayle was mocking, it looked very close to her asking lww to OD.

eg8r

LWW
12-14-2010, 05:01 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">McCarthy was Glenn Beck with power.

Q </div></div>

So, you don't actually have an innocent victim ... but wish instead to blather on senselessly hoping that nobody noticed you made yourself look foolish. Again.

LWW

Qtec
12-15-2010, 12:33 AM
your hero (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-460953942838272185#)


spot the Commie (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWeZ5SKXvj8&feature=related)

Q

LWW
12-15-2010, 03:45 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> your hero (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-460953942838272185#)


spot the Commie (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWeZ5SKXvj8&feature=related)

Q </div></div>

Would that be the same Fred Fisher who had been outed by the New York Times as a communist before he was called before McCarthy's committee?

Would that be the same Fred Fisher associated for the "NATIONAL LAWYER'S GUILD" earlier?

Yes, the same NLG that was determined by the US Attorney General to be a front group under the control of the CPUSA ... which was under the control of the Soviets? The same NLG that was determined by the FBI to be a subversive group?

Oh, you forgot to mention also what happened to Mr Fisher over his associations ... what's that? Nothing happened to him?

Why do you subject yourself to this much embarrassment? Read what you link. Learn something. All you have done is repeat the same old leftist lies ... and blame the dastardly acts of HUAC on a great American hero.

To quote the Army-McCarthy hearings ... "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"

Snoopy ... shot down. Again. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Fisher_(lawyer))

FACTS! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Lawyers_Guild) They are such stubborn things.


Now, please, save yourself and admit that you cannot name one ... not even <u><span style='font-family: Arial Black'><span style='font-size: 26pt'>ONE</span></span></u> ... innocent victim of senator McCarthy.

LWW

Qtec
12-15-2010, 04:51 AM
From YOUR links.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> During the McCarthy era, the NLG was alleged by Attorney General Herbert Brownell Jr. and by the House Un-American Activities Committee to be a Communist front organization.[18][19] Federal Bureau of Investigation director J. Edgar Hoover repeatedly tried to get successive Attorneys General to declare the NLG a "subversive organization," <span style='font-size: 20pt'>but without success</span></div></div>

The NYT years later.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Frederick G. Fisher, 68; <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Was a McCarthy Target</span>

Frederick G. Fisher, a Boston lawyer who in 1954 became a target of Senator Joseph R. McCarthy at a dramatic turning point in hearings involving the Senator and the Army, died of a heart attack Thursday in Tel Aviv, Israel. Mr. Fisher, 68 years old, was at a lecture sponsored by the Israeli bar.


..Mr. Fisher had told the firm when he was hired that he had been a member of the lawyers guild while at Harvard ''and for a period of months after.'' <u>The guild was not on the Attorney General's list of subversive groups, but it had been cited as a ''Communist front'' by the House Committee on Un-American Activities.</u>

Historians consider the McCarthy-Welch exchange a pivotal point in turning public opinion against the Senator, who was subsequently censured by his colleagues.

<u>Mr. Fisher went on to become a partner at the firm in 1958 and later organized its commercial law department. He also served as president of the Massachusetts Bar Association and as chairman of many committees of the American and Boston bar associations. He was a former trustee of the National Institute of Trial Advocacy and chairman of the Franklin N. Flaschner Foundation in Waban, Mass. </u></div></div>


Why do you subject yourself to this much embarrassment?


Q

LWW
12-15-2010, 05:38 AM
You've got heart kid, you've got heart.

Now, how about that innocent victim's name you keep promising but never deliver?

LWW

Gayle in MD
12-16-2010, 09:59 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: moblsv</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Widely regarded by whom?" he asked. "Today's modern, ill-informed political science professors?"

The RW mantra: Who's to say that our opinions aren't as valid as your peer reviewed, professionally studied, scientifically tested using sound process, falsifiable facts? Our louder yelling and media control has got half of America to believe us. that must mean something. </div></div>


Dont know if you saw this, but I view it as proof of the long RW tradition of re-writing history, and it is documented proof, that they have been at it for decades going all the way back to the Civil War. These folks are also from the left and the right.


This clip really gave me a lot of understanding about how the right became so ignorant and skewed in their thinking.

No one in their right mind, could watch this, and see or read, "The Shock doctrine" and continue to deny the illness which afflicts the right, denial....it is a full and thorough history of Conservative lies.

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/TheTou

LWW
12-16-2010, 05:01 PM
We all know that both of you can sling insults in attempting to hide your ignorance of history ... but can you come up with a single innocent victim that you swear exists?

Obviously not.

Deal with it sweetheart.

LWW

LWW
03-21-2011, 04:31 AM
Maybe that innocent victim of senator McCarthy is in this thread?

LWW
03-21-2011, 04:37 AM
Nope.

The only innocent victims in this thread are the left's attempted assassination of history, and senator McCarthy.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 11pt'>“He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future.”</span>
-George Orwell-</div></div>

The battle for the intellectual integrity of eternity is being waged today. The public education system is rapidly programming a nation of bots to embrace the lie.

Qtec
03-21-2011, 06:38 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">During the McCarthy era, the NLG was alleged by Attorney General Herbert Brownell Jr. and by the House Un-American Activities Committee to be a Communist front organization.[19][20] Federal Bureau of Investigation director <u>J. Edgar Hoover repeatedly tried to get successive Attorneys General to declare the NLG a "subversive organization," but without success.</u>[21] On June 9, 1954, on the 30th day of the Army-McCarthy Hearings, McCarthy launched an attack against Fred Fisher (a junior attorney working at the same law firm as the Army's attorney, Joseph Welch) for having associated with the NLG while in law school. The attack provoked an impassioned response on the part of Welch, who angrily rebuked McCarthy with his famous plea, "You've done enough. Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?" Welch's speech was widely viewed as having undermined McCarthy's credibility and, coupled with an earlier March 1954 exposé by Edward R. Murrow, led to a major shift in public opinion against McCarthy.

The NLG was also involved in the American Civil Rights Movement from an early date, organizing a 1947 conference on the subject of lynching. This continued into the 1960s with the creation of the Guild's Committee for Legal Assistance. This era also saw NLG involvement in anti-war (including draft resistance) and anti-poverty efforts.

Past guild presidents have included Marjorie Cohn (a law professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and author), Dobby Walker (the first female President of the NLG, first serving in 1970 and member of the 1972 "Dream Team" that successfully defended Angela Davis using innovative litigation techniques that are now commonplace).[22] </div></div>

Q

LWW
03-21-2011, 08:40 AM
And again the far left displays it's ignorance of history by bringing up HUAC.

HUAC was the <span style='font-size: 26pt'><u>HOUSE</u></span> Unamerican Activities Committee.

<u><span style='font-size: 26pt'>SENATOR</span></u> McCarthy was never a member of the house of representatives, much less HUAC.

That the house democrooks were conducting a witch hunt to deflect their own weakness on national security ... what with VPOTUS Henry Wallace being on Stalin's payroll, the theft of the atom bomb secrets from under FDR's/Truman's noses, and 137 known Soviet agents in the democrook regimes ... and that witch hunt was HUAC.

Among those suspected of being communists were ... this is too good ... Ronald Wilson Reagan. At the same time they defended the likes of Alger Hiss.

Following that debacle, they have been attempting to rewrite history ever since, and the far left slime machine has maligned a great American, senator McCarthy, for over half a century.

And after being given all this time to come up with a single innocent victim of senator McCarthy ... the best they can muster is <span style='font-size: 11pt'>H-H-H-HUAC!!! HUAC WE SAY!!! H-H-H-HUAC!!!</span> ... remaining completely oblivious to the fact that constantly blaming HUAC is proving my point for me.

Doublethink is a fascinating thing to witness.

ugotda7
03-21-2011, 09:51 AM
Do you somehow get paid by the amount of words you post here? Or do you think you're more relevant with a lot of text?

Maybe you should become familiar with the saying - "I did not have time to write you a short letter, so I wrote you a long one instead."

You should try considering quality over quantity.....then maybe people will actually read what you post instead of merely looking at it and thinking to themselves - "there she goes again, [click]."


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <span style="color: #990000">A danger and a Disgrace! </span>

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/01/91478/some-conservatives-rewrite-history.html

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>WASHINGTON — The right is rewriting history.

The most ballyhooed effort is under way in Texas, where conservatives have pushed the state school board to rewrite guidelines, downplaying Thomas Jefferson in one high school course, playing up such conservatives as Phyllis Schlafly and the Heritage Foundation and challenging the idea that the Founding Fathers wanted to separate church and state.

The effort reaches far beyond one state, however.

In articles and speeches, on radio and TV, conservatives are working to redefine major turning points and influential figures in American history, often to slam liberals, promote Republicans and reinforce their positions in today's politics.

The Jamestown settlers? Socialists. Founding Father Alexander Hamilton? Ill-informed professors made up all that bunk about him advocating a strong central government.

Theodore Roosevelt? Another socialist. Franklin D. Roosevelt? Not only did he not end the Great Depression, he also created it.

Joe McCarthy? Liberals lied about him. He was a hero.

Some conservatives say it's a long-overdue swing of the pendulum after years of liberal efforts to define history on their terms in classrooms and in popular culture.

"We are adding balance," Texas school board member Don McLeroy said. "History has already been skewed. Academia is skewed too far to the left."

The effort in Texas and nationwide is controversial, however, even among many conservatives. McLeroy was defeated in a recent primary after he led the campaign for a more conservative version of history, a defeat that the National Review, a leading conservative organ, called "sensible."</span>


While even some conservative intellectuals say that some of the revisionist history is simply wrong, at the core, the effort reflects the ever-changing view of history, which is always subject to revision thanks to new information or new ways of looking at things, and often is viewed through a political lens.

"History in the popular world is always a political football," said Alan Brinkley, a historian at Columbia University. "The right is unusually mobilized at the moment."

"Part of the tide of history is that it's contested terrain," said Fritz Fischer, a historian at the University of Northern Colorado and the chairman of the National Council for History Education. "We should always be arguing and questioning what happened in the past."

It's not just historians who contest history, however. It's also politicians and pundits.

The left has done it.

Fischer cited the case of controversial former University of Colorado professor Ward Churchill, whose essay claiming that the 9/11 terrorist attacks were the fruit of illegal U.S. policies became a cause celebre. Fischer said Churchill "ignored a lot of evidence and made some up to promulgate a particular political belief."
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>
Now, it's the right.

"There's clearly a political impetus behind this that connects to the issues of today," Fischer said, such as labeling President Barack Obama a socialist. "But when history is ignored to do it, that can be dangerous."

Here are five recent examples of new conservative versions of history:

JAMESTOWN

Reaching for an example of how bad socialism can be, former House of Representatives Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, said recently that the people who settled Jamestown, Va., in 1607 were socialists and that their ideology doomed them.

"Jamestown colony, when it was first founded as a socialist venture, dang near failed with everybody dead and dying in the snow," he said in a speech March 15 at the National Press Club.

It was a good, strong story, helping Armey, a former economics professor, illustrate the dangers of socialism, the same ideology that he and other conservatives say is at the core of Obama's agenda.

It was not, however, true.</span>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The Jamestown settlement was a capitalist venture financed by the Virginia Company of London — a joint stock corporation — to make a profit. The colony nearly foundered owing to a harsh winter, brackish water and lack of food, but reinforcements enabled it to survive. It was never socialistic. In fact, in 1619, Jamestown planters imported the first African slaves to the 13 colonies that later formed the United States.</span>

ALEXANDER HAMILTON

At the same event, Armey urged people to read the Federalist Papers as a guide to the sentiments of the tea party movement.

"The small-government conservative movement, which includes people who call themselves the tea party patriots and so forth, is about the principles of liberty as embodied in the Constitution, the understanding of which is fleshed out if you read things like the Federalist Papers," Armey said.

Others such as Democrats and the news media, "people here who do not cherish America the way we do," don't understand because "they did not read the Federalist Papers," he said.

A member of the audience asked Armey how the Federalist Papers could be such a tea party manifesto when they were written largely by Alexander Hamilton, who the questioner said "was widely regarded then and now as an advocate of a strong central government."

Armey ridiculed the very suggestion.

"Widely regarded by whom?" he asked. "Today's modern, ill-informed political science professors? . . . I just doubt that was the case, in fact, about Hamilton."

Hamilton, however, was an unapologetic advocate of a strong central government, one that plays an active role in the economy and is led by a president named for life and thus beyond the emotions of the people. Hamilton also pushed for excise taxes and customs duties to pay down federal debt.

In fact, Ian Finseth said in a history written for the University of Virginia, others at the constitutional convention "thought his proposals went too far in strengthening the central government."

THEODORE ROOSEVELT

Theodore Roosevelt was long an icon of the Republican Party, a dynamic leader who ushered in the Progressive era, busting trusts, regulating robber barons, building the Panama Canal and sending the U.S. fleet around the world announcing ascendant American power.

Fox TV commentator Glenn Beck, however, says that Roosevelt was a socialist whose legacy is destroying America. It started, Beck said, with Roosevelt's admonition to the wealthy of his day to spend their riches for the good of society.

"We judge no man a fortune in civil life if it's honorably obtained and well spent," Roosevelt said, according to Beck. "It's not even enough that it should have been gained without doing damage to the community. We should permit it only to be gained so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community."

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Actually, Roosevelt said, "We GRUDGE no man a fortune ... if it's honorably obtained and well USED." But either way, Beck saw the threat.</span>"Oh? Well, thank you," Beck said with scorn during his keynote speech to the recent Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. The presidential suggestion that the wealthy of the Gilded Age should contribute to the good of society was a clear danger that must be condemned, Beck said.
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>
"Is this what the Republican Party stands for? Well, you should ask members of the Republican Party, because this is not our founders' idea of America. And this is the cancer that's eating at America. It is big government; it's a socialist utopia," Beck said.

"And we need to address it as if it is a cancer. It must be cut out of the system because they cannot coexist. ... You must eradicate it. It cannot coexist."

There's no doubt that Roosevelt was a domestic policy liberal by today's standards. In a 1910 speech in Kansas, he acknowledged that his "New Nationalism" meant "far more active governmental interference with social and economic conditions in this country than we have yet had."

The 26th president insisted, however, that he wanted the government to guarantee opportunity, not a handout.

"The fundamental thing to do for every man is to give him a chance to reach a place in which he will make the greatest possible contribution to the public welfare," he said.

"Give him a chance, not push him up if he will not be pushed. ... Help any man who stumbles; if he lies down, it is a poor job to try to carry him; but if he is a worthy man, try your best to see that he gets a chance to show the worth that is in him."</span>In his autobiography three years later, Roosevelt went on to dismiss the tenets of socialism as taught by Karl Marx as "an exploded theory."

"Too many thoroughly well-meaning men and women in the America of today glibly repeat and accept," he wrote, "various assumptions and speculations by Marx and others which by the lapse of time and by actual experiment have been shown to possess not one shred of value."

In addition, Roosevelt didn't advocate government ownership of the means of production, the definition of socialism.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT

It's long been debated how well Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal government programs countered the Great Depression, but now a prominent conservative has introduced the idea that Roosevelt CAUSED the Depression.

"FDR took office in the midst of a recession," Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., told the Conservative Political Action Conference in February. "He decided to choose massive government spending and the creation of monstrous bureaucracies. Do we detect a Democrat pattern here in all of this? He took what was a manageable recession and turned it into a 10-year depression."

A year before, Bachmann went to the House floor to blame FDR and what she called the "Hoot-Smalley" tariffs for creating the Depression.

"The recession that FDR had to deal with wasn't as bad as the recession (President Calvin) Coolidge had to deal with in the early '20s," she said.

Coolidge cut taxes and created the roaring '20s, Bachmann said.

"FDR applied just the opposite formula: the Hoot-Smalley act, which was a tremendous burden on tariff restrictions. And of course trade barriers and the regulatory burden and of course tax barriers.

"That's what we saw happen under FDR. That took a recession and blew it into a full-scale depression. The American people suffered for almost 10 years under that kind of thinking."

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The truth? Historians agree that tariffs hurt trade and worsened the depression.

However, the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act — not Hoot-Smalley — was proposed by two Republicans, Sen. Reed Smoot of Utah and Rep. Willis Hawley of Oregon. A Republican House and a Republican Senate approved it. President Herbert Hoover, a Republican, signed it into law.</span>

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The facts also show that the country was in something far worse than a "manageable recession" in March 1933 when Roosevelt took office.

Stocks had lost 90 percent of their value since the crash of 1929. Thousands of banks had failed. Unemployment reached an all-time high of 24.9 percent just before Roosevelt was inaugurated.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>JOE MCCARTHY

Sen. Joseph McCarthy, R-Wis., burst onto the national stage in the early 1950s with accusations that he had a list of names of known Communists in the federal government. He didn't name them, was censured by the Senate eventually and his name became synonymous with witch hunts — McCarthyism.

Now, the end of the Cold War has opened up spy files and identified many Communist spies who operated inside the government during the era. Some conservatives argue that this proves not only that McCarthy was right, but also that he was a hero and that he was smeared by liberals, the news media and historians.

"Almost everything about McCarthy in current history books is a lie and will have to be revised," conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly said.

"Liberals had to destroy McCarthy because he exposed the entire liberal establishment as having sheltered Soviet spies," conservative commentator Ann Coulter said in one interview.

"The myth of 'McCarthyism' is the greatest Orwellian fraud of our times," she said in another. "Liberals are fanatical liars, then as now. The portrayal of Senator Joe McCarthy as a wild-eyed demagogue destroying innocent lives is sheer liberal hobgoblinism. ... If the Internet, talk radio and Fox News had been around in McCarthy's day, my book wouldn't be the first time most people would be hearing the truth about 'McCarthyism.' "</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>Yet even some prominent conservatives say that McCarthy's defenders go too far, and that even from a conservative perspective, McCarthy was no hero and damaged the country.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>
"A dangerous movement has been growing among conservative writers to vindicate the late Sen. Joseph R. McCarthy and his campaign to expose Soviet spies in the U.S. government," Ronald Kessler wrote for the conservative Web site Newsmax.com.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>"The FBI agents who were actually chasing those spies have told me that McCarthy hurt their efforts because he trumped up charges, unfairly besmirched honorable Americans and gave hunting spies a bad name."

Kessler said the release of secret Cold War files under the Venona Project confirmed that there were Soviet spies in the U.S. government.

"The problem was that the people McCarthy tarnished as Communists or Communist sympathizers were not the real spies," Kessler wrote.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>"The cause of anti-communism, which united millions of Americans and which gained the support of Democrats, Republicans and independents, was undermined by Sen. Joe McCarthy of Wisconsin," wrote William Bennett, who was the conservative secretary of education under President Ronald Reagan.</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>
"McCarthy addressed a real problem: disloyal elements within the U.S. government. But his approach to this real problem was to cause untold grief to the country he claimed to love," Bennett wrote in his book "America: The Last Best Hope."</span><span style='font-size: 14pt'>
"Worst of all, McCarthy besmirched the honorable cause of anti-communism. He discredited legitimate efforts to counter Soviet subversion of American institutions."</span>

Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/04/01/91478/some-conservatives-rewrite-history.html#ixzz1816LFq8g </div></div>

pooltchr
03-21-2011, 09:54 AM
She seems to have some crazy idea that she is some sort of intellectual giant. The fact is, she is a lightweight.

Steve

Gayle in MD
03-21-2011, 10:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">McCarthy was Glenn Beck with power.

Q </div></div>

Or Peter King, McCarhy Reincarnated, trying to build a false case, against an entire group of people, because they're not Repiglicans.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Reagan got off, for turning in innocent people.

One thing you can always count on, whatever Repiglicans do, it's always another attempt to slander people, turn people against one another, spread lies, and all for more money and power.

Bottom line behind every single thing they do.

G.

G.

LWW
03-21-2011, 11:17 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">She seems to have some crazy idea that she is some sort of intellectual giant. The fact is, she is a <s>light</s>flyweight.

Steve </div></div>

I fixed that for you.

And, I may not post again in this thread ... I don't want to interrupt their search for an innocent victim of McCarthy.

I hear they are doing almost as well as OJ Simpson and Robert Blake searching for the real killers.

LWW
06-29-2011, 03:06 AM
All the talk about Ann Coulter reminded me of a couple of old threads.

Aitch, Snoopy, and Charlotte have all assured me that there was a laundry lst of innocent victims of senator McCarthy.

So far we have had several people named who were in fact victims of a democrook led witch hunt in the HUAC hearings ... such as Lucille Ball, Charlie Chaplin, Ronald Reagan, Alger Hiss, the Hollywood Blkacklist, and more.

Yet, no innocent victim of senator McCarthy has yet been found?

Any updates?

LWW
06-29-2011, 03:08 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">McCarthy was Glenn Beck with power.

Q </div></div>

Or Peter King, McCarhy Reincarnated, trying to build a false case, against an entire group of people, because they're not Repiglicans.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Reagan got off, for turning in innocent people.

G. </div></div>

Here we have Charlotte believing that Reagan was called before the McCarthy committee ... when actually it was the democrook led HUAC hearings, which led him to leave the D party.

Gayle in MD
06-29-2011, 03:37 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">From YOUR links.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> During the McCarthy era, the NLG was alleged by Attorney General Herbert Brownell Jr. and by the House Un-American Activities Committee to be a Communist front organization.[18][19] Federal Bureau of Investigation director J. Edgar Hoover repeatedly tried to get successive Attorneys General to declare the NLG a "subversive organization," <span style='font-size: 20pt'>but without success</span></div></div>

The NYT years later.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Frederick G. Fisher, 68; <span style='font-size: 14pt'>Was a McCarthy Target</span>

Frederick G. Fisher, a Boston lawyer who in 1954 became a target of Senator Joseph R. McCarthy at a dramatic turning point in hearings involving the Senator and the Army, died of a heart attack Thursday in Tel Aviv, Israel. Mr. Fisher, 68 years old, was at a lecture sponsored by the Israeli bar.


..Mr. Fisher had told the firm when he was hired that he had been a member of the lawyers guild while at Harvard ''and for a period of months after.'' <u>The guild was not on the Attorney General's list of subversive groups, but it had been cited as a ''Communist front'' by the House Committee on Un-American Activities.</u>

Historians consider the McCarthy-Welch exchange a pivotal point in turning public opinion against the Senator, who was subsequently censured by his colleagues.

<u>Mr. Fisher went on to become a partner at the firm in 1958 and later organized its commercial law department. He also served as president of the Massachusetts Bar Association and as chairman of many committees of the American and Boston bar associations. He was a former trustee of the National Institute of Trial Advocacy and chairman of the Franklin N. Flaschner Foundation in Waban, Mass. </u></div></div>


Why do you subject yourself to this much embarrassment?


Q


</div></div>

Because, as Sara would say, he's too flippin' stupid to realize the victim of McCarthy, was the entire, United States Of America, same victim of all REPIGLICAN/FASCIST POLICIES!

G.

LWW
06-29-2011, 04:28 AM
Would that be the same Fred Fisher who had been outed by the New York Times as a communist before he was called before McCarthy's committee?

Would that be the same Fred Fisher associated with the "NATIONAL LAWYER'S GUILD" earlier?

Yes, the same NLG that was determined by the US Attorney General to be a front group under the control of the CPUSA ... which was under the control of the Soviets? The same NLG that was determined by the FBI to be a subversive group?

Oh, you forgot to mention also what happened to Mr Fisher over his associations ... what's that? Nothing happened to him?

Why do you subject yourself to this much embarrassment? Read what he linked. Learn something. All you have done is repeat the same old leftist lies ... and blame the dastardly acts of HUAC on a great American hero.

To quote the Army-McCarthy hearings ... "Have you no sense of decency, sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?"

Charlotte ... shot down. Again. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Fisher_(lawyer))

FACTS! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Lawyers_Guild) They are such stubborn things.


Now, please, save yourself and admit that you cannot name one ... not even <u><span style='font-family: Arial Black'><span style='font-size: 26pt'>ONE</span></span></u> ... innocent victim of senator McCarthy.

LWW

LWW
06-29-2011, 05:07 AM
This thread is yet another example of how the party elite can lead the mob around by the nose, simply personally an issue and giving them some hate filled images ... it doesn't take much to get the mob to ignore the truth. They simply feel they must fit in with the rest of the mob.

This forum, again, has it's own little Orwellian "TWO MINUTES HATE" moment.

LWW
06-29-2011, 05:49 PM
I can't wait to see the list of innocent victim's of senator McCarthy.

LWW
06-30-2011, 05:32 AM
Since none of the cabal has yet been successful, I decided to help out.

I was able to find an innocent victim of McCarthyism ... although not an innocent victim of the senator.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
http://images.wikia.com/wikiality/images/f/f2/Amvoices-a0a1g5-a.jpg

Qtec
07-01-2011, 02:43 AM
The guy was the worst example of a human being you can find and he is your hero. Says a lot about you.

truth that you won't accept (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-460953942838272185#)

'Have you no sense of decency Sir?'.

Q.......... shame on you.

Gayle in MD
07-01-2011, 07:25 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The guy was the worst example of a human being you can find and he is your hero. Says a lot about you.

truth that you won't accept (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-460953942838272185#)

'Have you no sense of decency Sir?'.

Q.......... shame on you.

</div></div>



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">'Have you no sense of decency Sir?'.

Q.......... shame on you.

</div></div>
Excellent comparison, but....

You have to have a conscience, in order to have any shame.

G.

LWW
07-01-2011, 09:24 AM
Speak Snoopy ... give me a name.

LWW
07-02-2011, 06:13 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Speak Snoopy ... give me a name. </div></div>

So I assume you still don't have a single instance of an innocent victim?

LWW
07-02-2012, 04:52 AM
How much longer must I wait for you to give me the name of even one innocent victim of senator McCarthy?