IN DEFENSE OF SENATOR JOE McCARTHY ON HIS BIRTHDAY

.

.

INTRODUCTION :

.

In honor of Senator Joseph McCarthy’s birthday (Nov. 14, 1908), I have decided to show my few blog readers something they’ve occasionally heard about but never seen.

.

Some have heard that back in my glory days (oh, years and years ago), it was not unusual for me to take on Liberals who publicly denigrated Senator Joseph McCarthy and whup their asses somethin’ fierce. Why did I do it? Because when you’ve denigrated Superpatriot Senator McCarthy, you’ve gotten on ‘The Fightin’ Side Of Me’. [“Andy”, what would Merle Haggard say?]

.

See, for many years I have maintained a very strict 'Zero Tolerance For McCarthy-Bashing' policy. What you do when I ain’t around to police you, that’s your business. But spout a syllable o’ sh!t about McCarthy in my presence, and you have CALLED DOWN THE THUNDER!

.

Calling down the thunder

.

.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yX8jZ4JMbqU

.

I haven’t had a Loony Lib challenge me about McCarthy in nearly two years [Dec. 11, 2010], and prior to that last time, it had been at least three years. (Maybe they’ve gotten word not to call down the thunder?) Unfortunately, all of my “classic” McCarthy Internet debates have since been deleted from the World-Wide Web. However, just before the last one disappeared, I decided to copy it for posterity.

.

I’m posting the whole lengthy thing below, because I wanted to put up something special today in honor of my human hero and one of the greatest American patriots this country has ever known. So here it comes. It’s lengthy, VERY lengthy... maybe even boring. Read ‘til ya fall asleep.

.

NOTE: I’ve changed all the names (pseudonyms) because I feel I embarrassed this Lib sufficiently two years ago, and I don’t really want to do it again. Yeah, there’s a streak of mercy in me, and that’s one of the (many) things that makes me different from a liberal.

.

THE SET-UP :

.

In a political chat room on 12/11/2010, some Liberal – I’ll call him Redrum – challenged someone to name a genuine communist that Senator McCarthy “outed”.

.

Redrum: 
Which Marxist did McCarthy out, exactly?

.

A friend of mine, “SlicesAndDices”, mentioned about half-a-dozen names, and he followed up his roll call with the remark, "So, was that as good for you as it was for me?"

.

Naturally, his closing question cracked me up, and so I posted my first-ever comment on that website. I wrote:

.
Ha! Now THAT was classic!

To the list of names supplied by SlicesAndDices, I will add Owen Lattimore, Philip Jessup, John Stewart Service, Annie Lee Moss, Irving Peress, William Remington, and John Carter Vincent. And I’m not even warmed up yet!

.
That is just a small sampling of some of the more well-known Joseph McCarthy “victims” who have been shown beyond any resonable doubt whatsoever to have been communists or Soviet espionage agents who were on the Federal payroll and most of whom played instrumental roles in helping to shape American foreign policy.

.
Various types of evidence against the aforementioned McCarthy “victims” includes, but is not restricted to, the Venona decrypts, sworn testimony from ex-communist government informers, FBI undercover agents, and the now released official records of the former Soviet Union.

.
I love it when uninformed, non-researching, mainstream media-trusting liberals attempt to denigrate Senator McCarthy and to debate the issue of “McCarthyism”. They always start out so loud and cocky but end up slinking away so quietly.

.
But that’s what they deserve for not objectively fact-checking their (lying and misrepresenting) liberal sources before spewing the commonly accepted McCarthy myths. Defeating these “innocents” in debate is a simple matter; it’s like shooting fish in a barrel... with a shotgun!

.
~ D-FensDogg
‘Loyal American Underground’

.

THE “DEBATE” :

.

Well, later that same day, some loony liberal – I’ll call him Red Dog – decided to call my bluff. The only problem for him, however, is that I was NOT bluffing! DOH! (Don’t they hate it when that happens?)

.

12-11-2010, 03:05 PM

RED DOG:

That list is just about every single one. McCarthy's successes were few (totaling maybe 40), and consisted of mostly minor players.

.

Contrast that with the number of people whose careers were ruined and it's quite clear that he is the spiritual predecessor of today's right wing heroes: Beck, Breitbart and Limbaugh.

.

And it was ON! This loony lib was throwing hanging curveballs right into my wheelhouse! The home runs were money-back guaranteed! I responded with this:

.

How could my list of seven include "just about every single one" if, by your own admission, a person could come up with 40 McCarthy successes? (Which, by the way, is true.)
.

And to think that I always thought MY math was bad!
.

And they were "mostly minor players"? What part of "played instrumental roles in helping to shape American foreign policy" did you not understand?
.

Don't you miss "the good ol' days" when communist defenders such as yourself could just say things like "McCarthy did not discover a single Communist" and you could actually get away with falsehoods like that because most of the public didn't know any better and couldn’t prove you wrong? Wasn't that so much fun? And ain't history a bitch when it makes a monkey out of a liberal?
.

Now you sad people are reduced to making far less strident comments like "McCarthy only found about 40 communist subversives, and they were mostly minor players." When compared with the statements of yesteryear, that's downright FUNNY!
.

Of course, the second half of that statement is still falsehood, as he exposed important subversives and, in fact, when we're talking about communists with access to classified American government information or who are in positions of influence, there's NO SUCH THING as a "minor player".

.
YOU:

"Contrast that with the number of people whose careers were ruined"
.

Name the innocent victims of McCarthy. We're all waiting. Give us all the names of the innocent individuals who McCarthy accused of being communists and/or security risks and whose careers were thus wrongly ruined. (This is where you people yak yourselves right into a corner. And I LOVE IT!)
.

Go ahead. Names please . . .
.

~ D-FensDogg
'Loyal American Underground'

.

The following day, Red Dog came back with this:

.

We will just start with the well documented, and very real, Hollywood "Blacklist".

.

Here's a nice link which debunks this whole silly theory that McCarthy was some sort of misunderstood patriot

.
http://blog.buzzflash.com/contributors/1148
.

There are more than a few names mentioned the link in conjunction with his Voice of America hearing.

.

McCarthy undoubtedly exposed some Communists spies. But, not all Communists, or former communists are spies. That's what you don't understand and it's what McCarthy didn't care about.

.

I replied as follows:

.

You're right, that is a nice link.
Gee, I didn't know about all that stuff.

Well, definitely some food for thought there.

.

And I let that sit there for most of the day, leading Red Dog to believe that he had an easy victory.

.

But in truth, I was at home and composing my in-depth reply – something not unlike Kirk Gibson’s home run in Game 1 of the 1988 World Series.

.

At 16:13 on 12-13-2010, I returned with my real response. I wrote the following:

.

AH!-HA!-HA!-HA!
Gotcha!

.

Red Dog, you thought it was over, didn’t you? Thought you had won? No, my friend, for you this nightmare has just begun!

.
I have been through this same drill with innumerable liberals before you. I have been having this same damned debate for years and they always end the same way. This one will end no differently. In fact, the outcome of this debate was decided before it had even begun, you just didn’t know that. Although you are about to find that out. However, unlike most liberals, you have spoken with a civilized tongue, and therefore I will not treat you harshly, as I have treated your comrades who preceded you in this debate with me. But you’re going to regret having shoved your nose into a fight that wasn’t yours and which you could have stayed out of.

.
RED DOG, you wrote:

McCarthy undoubtedly exposed some Communists spies. But, not all Communists, or former communists are spies. That's what you don't understand and it's what McCarthy didn't care about.
.

In the first place, not knowing the first thing about me, you ought to be careful in assuming you can guess what I understand and don’t understand. And secondly, any Communist is a potential spy, thus making him or her a “security risk”, and thus NO Communists should be holding down Federal jobs, let alone be working with confidential information or be placed in sensitive departments where they might be able to cause real harm to the nation on a whole. Only a suicidal Constitutional Republic would allow subversives (who wish to completely undermine the governmental form which the people benefit from and replace it with a wholly different form of government) to earn their livings on the backs of the taxpayers and leave them in potentially hazardous positions. THAT’S what Senator McCarthy “cared about”.

.
As for what I understand . . .

.
I understand that I wrote, “I love it when uninformed, non-researching, mainstream media-trusting liberals attempt to denigrate Senator McCarthy and to debate the issue of “McCarthyism”. They always start out so loud and cocky but end up slinking away so quietly. But that’s what they deserve for not objectively fact-checking their (lying and misrepresenting) liberal sources before spewing the commonly accepted McCarthy myths.”
.

And the first thing you did was go Internet surfing, found some article by a liberal, Pamela Troy, living in San Francisco (the ‘Frisco home should have been the first tip-off that you would be in trouble if you relied on her information in a debate with me), and without doing any of your own research, without “objectively fact-checking your liberal source”, you posted a “nice link” to her liberal nonsense and thought this debate was over with.
.

Hell, I said right from the start that this sort of approach would only hurt someone in a debate with me, but you went right ahead and tried it anyway. Dude, if you are “smarter than the average bear”, it sure didn’t show in that ill-conceived tactic!
.

I studied the subject of Joe McCarthy for years and years and years. I have on my bookshelves all of the A-List books published on him (yes, including the anti-McCarthy books, because I believe in studying the opposition’s viewpoints, too). I have some of the B-List books as well, and I have articles and copies of the Congressional Records which pertain to McCarthy. I am “on a mission from God” to set the McCarthy story straight for those who really wish to know it.
.

You, Red Dog, were in deep doo-doo the moment you got it into your mind that you could post a link to some brief, libby-authored article and best me in a debate with it. And you were in even deeper doo-doo when you selected Pamela Troy’s article, which relies so heavily on the Thomas Reeves biography “The Life And Times Of Joe McCarthy”.

.

While there is some valid information in Reeves’ book, it is so outdated and so full of misinformation, misinterpretations, significant omissions, and liberal truth-twisting, that it’s barely worth the paper it’s printed on. Working 5 days a week, 8 hours a day, it would take me until this time next month to go through the Thomas Reeves biography and point out every incorrect item in it. Suffice to sum it all up this way:

.

 After writing 674 pages of text, Reeves arrives at this conclusion: “The cliché is true: he [McCarthy] did not discover a single Communist.”

.

You yourself know that is bunk, as you have conceded that McCarthy found at least 40 communists (of which no less than 5 were certifiable espionage agents).
.

I will now go through the useless, truthless Pamela Troy article, hitting all of the significant points, ignoring the minor ones because I have other things to do, like put up and decorate a Christmas tree. And then I’ll wait for you to post the names of some “REAL” McCarthy “victims” (for me to also correct you about).

.
Pamela “Truth-Twisting” Troy:

McCarthy was viewed with contempt not just by liberals and leftists, but by many conservatives and anti-Communists … In reality, many of McCarthy’s most ardent critics were anti-Communist liberals and conservatives who were themselves concerned about Communists spying for the Soviets.
.

The fact of the matter is that many so-called “conservatives” in Washington were conservatives in name only, and the same goes for many of the so-called “anti-Communists”. As McCarthy well knew and pointed out repeatedly, a lot of Communists pretended to oppose Communist ideology and would speak out against it in general terms, but when it came time to really root out the Commies and to single out and name the Communist front groups, suddenly these same anti-Communists were doing everything in their power to undermine those very efforts.
.

True, some fellow conservatives did not like McCarthy, but that usually pertained to personal issues and personality conflicts. Some genuine but lukewarm anti-Communists caved in to pressure from the White House and State Dept. and made concessions and compromises for the sake of their political careers. That’s one reason I care so much about McCarthy; here was a genuine anti-Communist patriot who wouldn’t sell-out and compromise.

.
Pamela “Truth-Twisting” Troy:

New York Post editor James Weschler, for instance, was an ex-Communist turned anti-Communist … Wechsler’s concerns about espionage did not prevent him from being an early and vehement critic of McCarthy …
.

Wechsler was a valid subject for McCarthy’s Committee to question in regards to the Voice Of America (VOA) Reading Center probe, as he had been fervently and very vocally pro-Red at one time, and his books were found in the overseas Reading Centers. Wechsler is a prime example of the aforementioned “Anti-Communist In General Terms Only”. Although he claimed and wrote that he was now a reformed former Commie, it was odd how he seemed to also oppose genuine efforts to expose and remove Communists when it got down to the real details of that work. He opposed the FBI, he opposed former Commie government informers, and he opposed McCarthy. Because he wrote so disparagingly of McCarthy, it was a poor P.R. move on McCarthy’s part to call him as a witness and to grill him, as it appeared to be “revenge” (which it probably was to some degree). Nevertheless, McCarthy had valid reasons to question Wechsler.

.
Pamela “Truth-Twisting” Troy:

It’s interesting to note that one non-leftist critic of McCarthy who is mentioned in Conservapedia is not cited as a critic, even though she was one of McCarthy’s most famous detractors. In Conservapedia’s reference section is a link to Republican Senator Margaret Chase Smith’s June 1, 1950 “Declaration of Conscience,” …
.

In the first place, although Margaret Chase Smith was a Republican, she was hardly a conservative. And secondly, she was a widow who evidently had “a thang” for Joe McCarthy. Even the liberal (author) Reeve’s admits that “Mrs. Smith’s attack on McCarthy may have had roots deeper and more personal than her devotion to civil liberties.” Joe occasionally flattered her and evidently she took it too seriously and wrote him personal letters in which she alluded to having something more than just good professional thoughts about him. Joe ignored these allusions, and so, although she would deny it, there were some who viewed her “Declaration of Conscience” as mostly the fury of a woman scorned.

.
Joe would later refer to Margaret Smith and those who signed her “Declaration of Conscience” as “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs”. Ha! God knows I love McCarthy!

.
“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

As anyone actually familiar with that exchange is aware, Welch was not shocked and angry at the news that Fred Fisher had been in the Lawyer’s Guild. He was shocked and angry because McCarthy had violated an earlier private agreement that McCarthy would not bring up Fred Fisher if Welch would not bring up McCarthy aide Roy Cohn’s military record. … In fact, Welch’s response makes it plain that he was aware of Fisher’s affiliation with the Lawyer’s Guild. 
.

Now, here, “Truth-Twisting” Troy actually mixes a little truth with falsehood. It’s true that Roy Cohn had a private agreement with Joe Welch not to go into the Fred Fisher issue if Welch would agree not to mention that Cohn had failed to meet some military physical ability standards.

.
Joe knew of the agreement and, unfortunately, he broke it in a moment of anger. Welch had Cohn on the stand and he was goading him and mocking him unmercifully - teasing Cohn about his anti-Communist work and playing up the idea that Cohn was not serious about it and lax in performing it, and that he [Welch] was actually more concerned about rooting out Communist subversives than was Cohn.
.

Finally, McCarthy couldn’t stand it anymore and he, in essence, told Welch that if he were REALLY so concerned about communists, he ought to speak with a lawyer in his own law firm named Fred Fisher who belonged to a well known Communist legal organization. This information was nothing new, as Welch himself had previously revealed the Fred Fisher situation to reporters, and a few articles mentioning it had run in newspapers some weeks earlier.
.

But where “Truth-Twisting” Troy twists the truth is when she writes: “Welch was not shocked and angry at the news that Fred Fisher had been in the Lawyer’s Guild. He was shocked and angry because McCarthy had violated an earlier private agreement…”
.

That’s bald-faced balderdash, as this secret agreement between Cohn and Welch wouldn’t become generally known until Cohn revealed it in his 1968 biography of McCarthy. Welch was playing up the information about Fisher for all it was worth, acting for the TV audience as if McCarthy had just outed Fisher in public for the first time, doing some terrible, reckless, injustice to Fisher.
.

Welch’s own words to McCarthy PROVE this point: “Little did I dream you could be so reckless and so cruel as to do an injury to that lad. …I fear he shall always bear a scar needlessly inflicted by you.”
.

Well, that part was wrong too. Fisher remained with the law firm and went on to have a very long, successful, and prosperous career in the legal profession.

.
“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

The fact that he cited 205 “members of the Communist Party” in the State Department one day, 57 “card-carrying Communists” a day or two later, and 81 on the floor of the Senate a week or two later matters less if you think of everyone on those lists as guilty anyway.
.

To begin with, McCarthy was using numbers and not names to protect the identities of these suspects until more information could be obtained through standard, legal, Congressional investigative methods. (He refused to do what the Democrats were literally demanding he do, which was to commit “McCarthyism” by naming suspects before they could be fully investigated and a solid determination of their guilt or innocence could be arrived at. The Congressional Record shows that despite the demand of Democrats to “name the names” McCarthy refused and said, “If I were to give all the names involved, it might leave a wrong impression. If we should label one man a Communist when he is not a Communist, I think it would be too bad.”)
.

Also, the whole question about the numbers of Communists and security risks that McCarthy was initially aware of and claimed to have is one of the longest, most well-worn myths of liberal, anti-McCarthy dogma. That question has been well put to bed. The Wheeling Intelligencer newspaper ran an article on Feb. 11, 1950, the day after McCarthy’s speech in Wheeling, West Virginia, when he dropped the bomb about Communists and security risks in the Federal government, and the article clearly states that he said there were “over fifty” known Communists still in the State Dept. at that time. That same day, after his speech in Denver, The Denver Post specifically printed that McCarthy stated there were “57 Reds” he was concerned about. It also said that the 205 number that he used related not to known Commies but to “bad risks” or security risks. This whole nonsense about the numbers McCarthy used is a dead issue. Only the most dishonest or uninformed McCarthy-haters still mention it.
.

Finally, we get to the question of the names of the “innocent” McCarthy victims I asked you to provide me with:
.

“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

So who are some of these innocent victims? Carl Greenblum, an engineer at the Monmouth facility of the Army Signal Corps. While being cross-examined by Roy Cohn, Greenblum, whose mother had died two days before, broke down and wept and had to be led, visibly upset, from the closed-door session. McCarthy announced to the press that “I have just received word that the witness admits he was lying the first time and now wants to tell the truth.” Greenblum’s name was leaked and he and his family were harassed, a hammer and sickle was painted on the door of their house. Greenblum explained that he'd been upset about the death of his mother and that after he’d broken down he’d “sent word that I wanted to go back and tell my story from the beginning. That may have been interpreted to mean I was lying but that certainly was not the case.” Greenblum was fired from his job, but reinstated in 1958.
.

Of the Monmouth Investigation, only 39 of the 126 persons were questioned in public sessions. The rest were carried on in private, executive sessions. And Carl Greenblum was not questioned publicly. Notice how McCarthy is quoted as saying, “...THE WITNESS admits he was lying the first time and now wants to tell the truth.” McCarthy did not reveal Greenblum’s name. It has never been conclusively determined who publicly named Greenblum, but I think we can probably safely guess it was some Democrat, because they, from the beginning, wanted all of the suspects’ names released to the public before all of the facts could be determined privately to see whether or not they would be convicted or cleared. They were hoping that by releasing names, some of them would be cleared and it would all backfire on McCarthy. In other words, it was the Democrats who wanted McCarthy to commit “McCarthyism”.
.

Now, what your “Truth-Twisting” savior, Pamela Troy, conveniently left out of her little story is the fact that, although Greenblum did continue to deny being a Communist himself (and was likely telling the truth), he also admitted that, although under oath, he had not been forthcoming in his first session; that he had been deceptive in that first round of questioning. Greenblum later admitted [and I quote]: “I want to explain the circumstances of coming here and trying to hide an association with Levitsky, whom I know to be a Communist… because he told me he was a Communist.”
.

You see what kind of trouble you get yourself into when you trust liberal writers to tell you the truth about McCarthy? You see why you need to do your own in-depth research and fact-checking before you start publicly slinging mud about a massive story you know little to nothing about?

.
“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

A teacher named Julius Hlavaty testified at the VOA hearings, and refused to answer whether he had been a Communist or had tried to recruit students to the Communist Party. He lost his job as a distinguished public school teacher and had to take a job at Columbia University.
.

The Voice Of America was a program run by the State Dept. It was a taxpayer-funded program meant to spread the word overseas about American principles and to engender good will between the U.S. and other nations.
.

So, Hlavaty felt that although he refused to testify about any Communist connections he had, on the grounds that his testimony might incriminate him and be used against him (claiming his 5th Amendment right), he still had a right to work on the behalf of the U.S. and collect a paycheck from American wallets while engaging in VOA programs meant to promote the “American” cause?
.

As McCarthy correctly said several times: A government job is a privilege, not a right.
.

And then when he lost his Federal job with VOA he was forced to take a job at COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY? Man, what a “VICTIM”! I wish I had a job at Columbia! I would sure as hell be making more money than I do right now and with far better medical and dental benefits. If that’s what happens to McCarthy “victims” then sign me up to be “victimized”! [11/14/2012 Note: Coincidentally(?), back in McCarthy’s day, Columbia University was known to be a hotbed for Communist subversives.]

.
“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

Critics say that McCarthy should have ignored Communists making broadcasts on VOA because exposing them might have personally embarrassed them.
.

Oh, yeah, what a shame if Communists are personally embarrassed while using American taxpayer’s equipment to broadcast un-American ideas and to promote Communist propaganda! Boo-Hoo! Well, I have already established that Pamela Troy is dishonest, but now we see she is a raving idiot, too!
.

And by the way, McCarthy’s investigation into the VOA overseas libraries showed that there were approximately 30,000 taxpayer-purchased books found on those bookshelves that were written by Communists and pro-Red writers - including Earl Browder, General Secretary of the Communist Party USA. Many of the books were nothing more than Communist propaganda and anti-American disinformation campaigns.

.
“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

Note the manner in which Conservapedia trivializes the firing of Hlavaty, implying that he had been a Communist at the time of the broadcast (Dr. Hlavaty denied this)
.

Yeah, yeah. They ALL denied being Communists. Not one person suspected of Communism said, “Well, yep, you got me, Joe. You’re right, I am a Communist”. All of the true Communists questioned by Joe lied about being Communists or took advantage of their 5th Amendment right.

.
“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

The hundreds of employees who endured McCarthy’s investigation of the presumed sabotage of equipment at the VOA were also more than “personally embarrassed” by their experience. Many found themselves being interrogated by McCarthy’s committee, not about the placement of transmitters, but about their personal religious and political beliefs.
.

The only time questions of this nature were asked was when they directly pertained to the charges or the suspicions that had been reasonably raised against the person being interviewed… for instance Reed Harris.
.

“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

After being grilled about a book he’d written twenty years before, VOA employee Reed Harris turned in his resignation. The Director of VOA’s religious programming was asked if he were an atheist. (“I believe in God,” he explained to the Committee) and questioned about his church attendance.
.

Reed Harris was asked these questions because he was in charge of the religious programming and (as “Truth-Twisting” Troy forgot to mention) he was an open supporter of known Communists and the Soviet Union, and he had written a book that slandered the U.S. in general and denigrated organized religion. There were damn good reasons the taxpayer-funded Harris was questioned by the Committee about both his Communist connections and his views on religion.

.
“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

Edwin Kretzmann, a VOA policy director, “was assailed for having told a supposedly closed-door conference of Voice officials that an order by Dulles to cooperate with the subcommittee was ‘rather depressing'."
.

Just prior to Korean elections, Kretzmann appeared to be using VOA facilities to oust the anti-Communist Snyghmann Rhee and by default promote Rhee’s rivals. His actions were worth questioning!

.
“Truth-Twisting” Troy:

That level of pressure puts in context the case of one of McCarthy’s most well known victims, VOA engineer Raymond Kaplan. After being summoned to testify before McCarthy’s committee, he killed himself by jumping in front of a truck. The suicide note he left for his son explained, “once the dogs are set on you everything you’ve done since the beginning of time is suspect.”
.

This is another one of those issues that Libs and Commies try to twist 180-degrees the other way. Raymond Kaplan was eager to testify before McCarthy. He felt McCarthy had discovered some significant problems at VOA and he actually sided with McCarthy. He didn’t get that chance to testify because it seems he was being pressured by some “mysterious” others who were concerned about what he might say. And he was afraid that he would be made out to be the “patsy” by these mysterious others.
.

But even Kaplan’s co-worker Dorothy Fried testified after his death that he was actually eager to testify:
.

Roy Cohn:

As a matter of fact, from what he said to you, he [Kaplan] was anxious to testify?
.

Dorothy Fried:

Yes.
.

Cohn:

Rather than being anything to be afraid of, he would show up very well. Isn’t that the impression you got from him?

.
Fried:

Yes.
.

And now, Red Dog, we get to your own statement: 
“We will just start with the well documented, and very real, Hollywood "Blacklist".
.

McCarthy had nothing whatsoever to do with that. What you are referring to are investigations conducted by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). McCarthy was a Senator, not a Congressman from the House of Representatives.
.

It just so happens that HUAC did a lot of excellent, excellent work over the years. They also, in my opinion, got a bit too carried away with the investigations into Communists and Communist propaganda emanating from Hollywood.
.

There were many Congressional investigations of Communist infiltration of the government both before and after Joseph McCarthy, but McCarthy is responsible only for those investigations in which he took part. A lot of you liberals like to try to blame every improper thing that may have been done in the name of Congressional investigations into Communist subversives on McCarthy and categorize it all as “McCarthyism”. But since when is a person guilty of the things that others may have done?
.

I must answer for my own actions and no one else’s, as I have no control over others and no way of dictating what they can or can’t do, will or won’t do. Each person is responsible for their own deeds and that is all.
.

However, if you insist on labeling McCarthy guilty of everything anyone else ever did in the (false) name of “McCarthyism”, then I am going to call you somewhat responsible for every misdeed perpetrated in the name of “Liberalism”, since you too are a liberal. That's a sword that cuts both ways! If McCarthy is even partly guilty for anything the HUAC did, then you are also partly guilty for the approximately 100 million persons murdered in the name of “Communism”. As well as for those who were tortured and wrongly imprisoned in the name of “Communism”. If McCarthy is guilty, then so are you. “GUILTY! Thank you. That is all.”
.

Now then… now that I have wasted a large part of my day correcting “Truth-Twisting” Troy’s B.S. which you incorrectly thought was going to help you in your debate with me, I am going to try to catch up on all the chores and errands I am now behind on.
.

But any time you feel you can supply us with all these many names of supposed “REAL”, authentic McCarthy victims, please be sure to post them here, and I will give them the same sort of treatment that I gave to the pseudo-victims you have thus far come up with.
.

I can save you some time, however, by telling you that there is no Internet article you can find to help you in this – you will need to do your own SERIOUS research. And I can save you even more time by telling you that THERE WERE NO INNOCENT McCARTHY VICTIMS, because if there were, I would not be a McCarthy fan and defender.
.

Also, I could recommend some good books to you that will teach you THE TRUTH about Senator Joseph McCarthy. But I’m already sure that you haven’t the slightest desire to learn the truth about McCarthy. Sadly, I’ve yet to meet one liberal whom I consider to be genuinely intellectually honest.

.

.

.

.

And that, ‘Ferret-Faced Fascist Friends’ fans, was the conclusion of the so-called “debate”. What about Red Dog? He never posted another comment on that thread. I told him at the beginning of the debate that the debate would end with him “slinking away so quietly”, and that’s exactly what he did.

.

Been there, done that, seen it before... many times - it was easy to predict.

.

And that, you Loony Liberals, was an example of what happens when you “Call Down The Thunder”.

.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY, SENATOR JOE!

“Well done, thou good and faithful servant.”

.

I’m still standing, and I’m still ready to defend your honor against anyone at any time.

.

~ Stephen T. McCarthy

.

YE OLDE COMMENT POLICY: All comments, pro and con, are welcome. However, ad hominem attacks and disrespectful epithets will not be tolerated (read: "posted"). After all, this isn’t Amazon.com, so I don’t have to put up with that kind of bovine excrement.

.