McCarthy was right:

[Stinger]

Yes, a spy hunt is good. But the line is very thick where that ends and investigating Hollywood begins. They could have been pumping out "Hooray for Mao!" with Mamie Van Doren or "Better Red than Dead" with Jimmy Stewart and it's none of the government's damn business.

So you condem McCarthy for the investigations by the House Un-American Activities investigations into entertainers who were supporting the Communist causes?

 

[Stinger]

McCarthy was more than the messenger and it's incorrect to label him as such. He was an instigator, a perpetrator, and a jerk.

"Only forty" people? I'm sorry, one is too many. In his rabid plight to get rid of communism and its companion dictatorship model, he sure created one of the views he despised. This is America. Should folks want to be communists, sympathisize with Communism, elect or run as a Communist for a government position. They should be allowed to. Don't like people to have other points of view that aren't like your own? Fine. But running them out of the country, out of their jobs, and investigating them like criminals under the auspices of justice? That's not American.

First I don't recall the investigations into communist infiltration into government being about elected officials. They were carrier employees or appointees for the most part. That being said how about AlQaeda supporters today? What if evidence started to surface that AlQaeda had infiltrated high government offices. Would it be unreasonable to have a congressional investigation and to get anyone associated with AlQaeda out of government? How about agents for China, what if we found out people who support the expanions of China and Chinese communism into our country were in high positions in the State and Defense department?

 

[Stinger]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
So in other words you could not refute what he posted (which is factual) and can only offer hyperbole?

So was McCarthy wrong in the House Unamerican Activities Committe Hearings which investigated Hollywood?

Ummmmm....let me see if I can answer this without the offending hyperbole.

Yes.

Really so you object to Senator McCarthy's hearings in the House Unamerican Activities committee?

 

[shuamort]

So you condem McCarthy for the investigations by the House Un-American Activities investigations into entertainers who were supporting the Communist causes?

Yes, Yes I do:

1951 The second wave of HUAC hearings begins with McCarthy leading the charge. Over the next three years McCarthy is a mainstay in the public eye, and he subpoenas some of the most prominent entertainers of the era (e.g. Orson Welles, Lucille Ball, Dashielle Hammett, and Lillian Hellman) before HUAC, demanding "the naming of names."

 

[Stinger]

This is like taking the time to debate people who believe the Holocaust didn't exist. It's a waste of my time.

So you insist that Senator McCarthy was doing something wrong in the House Unamerican Activities committee?

 

[Stinger]

Quote:
So in other words you could not refute what he posted (which is factual) and can only offer hyperbole?

So was McCarthy wrong in the House Unamerican Activities Committe Hearings which investigated Hollywood?

Yes, of course he was.

Really? And what exactly do you object to as far as Senator McCarthy and the House Unamerican Activities Committee which investigated Hollywood?

 

[Stinger]

Well said! This is yet another in a continuing series of threads meant to stir up hate in this community.

Why would asking about Senator McCarthy and the claim that he was acting wrongly in the House Unamerican Activities Committee stir up hate? Do you believe he acted wrongly in the House Unamerican Activities Committee or that he wrong Hollywood stars through that committee?

 

[Stinger]

McCarthy turned his "investigation" into a "commie" witch hunt. I don't support anything that went on during that period. Especially the fact that people could get in trouble for even suggesting that communism might be a good idea.

How about people in government who were secretly supply information to our enemy, the Soviet Union. Who were behind the scenes actively supporting effort to change our government from one of freedom and liberty to one of communism?

What if we found out the same thing today but it was Alqaeda or China? What if evidence surfaced that someone in the State department was feeding information to China and the congress investigated and found out it was true and that in fact it was the 3rd highest official that was doing it. Would you call that a witch-hunt too?

 

[shuamort]

Really? And what exactly do you object to as far as Senator McCarthy and the House Unamerican Activities Committee which investigated Hollywood?

Hmm, I think it would fall under the "everything" umbrella there. I'll repeat my previous sentiments:
This is America. Should folks want to be communists, sympathisize with Communism, elect or run as a Communist for a government position. They should be allowed to. Don't like people to have other points of view that aren't like your own? Fine. But running them out of the country, out of their jobs, and investigating them like criminals under the auspices of justice? That's not American.

 

[Stinger]

The fact of the matter is he was prosecuting people for holding opinions.

It wasn't just for holding opinions. So say we found out Carl Rove was actually supporting Alqaeda and other terrorist groups. You would not object to him remaining in a high government position? You don't think the people would have a right to know that he was supporting the radical islamist?

 

[shuamort]

It wasn't just for holding opinions. So say we found out Carl Rove was actually supporting Alqaeda and other terrorist groups. You would not object to him remaining in a high government position? You don't think the people would have a right to know that he was supporting the radical islamist?

Major apples and oranges difference there.

 

[Stinger]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
It wasn't just for holding opinions. So say we found out Carl Rove was actually supporting Alqaeda and other terrorist groups. You would not object to him remaining in a high government position? You don't think the people would have a right to know that he was supporting the radical islamist?

Major apples and oranges difference there.

No it isn't. What is the difference? OK what if we found evidence that Condi Rice's assistant and many on her staff were in cahoots with Alqaeda or Communist China? You don't think the people would have a right to know that they were supporting the radical islamist?

 

[shuamort]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
It wasn't just for holding opinions. So say we found out Carl Rove was actually supporting Alqaeda and other terrorist groups. You would not object to him remaining in a high government position? You don't think the people would have a right to know that he was supporting the radical islamist?




No it isn't. What is the difference? OK what if we found evidence that Condi Rice's assistant and many on her staff were in cahoots with Alqaeda or Communist China? You don't think the people would have a right to know that they were supporting the radical islamist?

OK, show us where a communist country physically attacked the US.

 

[Stinger]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
It wasn't just for holding opinions. So say we found out Carl Rove was actually supporting Alqaeda and other terrorist groups. You would not object to him remaining in a high government position? You don't think the people would have a right to know that he was supporting the radical islamist?

you claimed it was apples and oranges


No it isn't. What is the difference? OK what if we found evidence that Condi Rice's assistant and many on her staff were in cahoots with Alqaeda or Communist China? You don't think the people would have a right to know that they were supporting the radical islamist?

OK, show us.........................

I asked direct questions please respond.

 

[shuamort]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
It wasn't just for holding opinions. So say we found out Carl Rove was actually supporting Alqaeda and other terrorist groups. You would not object to him remaining in a high government position? You don't think the people would have a right to know that he was supporting the radical islamist?

you claimed it was apples and oranges


No it isn't. What is the difference? OK what if we found evidence that Condi Rice's assistant and many on her staff were in cahoots with Alqaeda or Communist China? You don't think the people would have a right to know that they were supporting the radical islamist?

I asked direct questions please respond.

(nitpick)It's given difficult to understand where questions are with your coding here. (nitpick)

First off, apples and oranges. That's the all encompassing point here. Communist Russia never physically attacked the United States. Al Qaeda has. A failed Yalta accord does not equate to the attacks on 9/11. That's the difference. That's the difference if Condi Rice had been in cahoots with al Qaeda versus the Communist Party of Ohio.

Were the HUAC still around, voices of dissent such as Michael Moore would likely be squashed (although, I wouldn't mind if he had a big steaming cup of STFU, but that's not relevent).

The problem with McCarthyism in the Senate and the HUAC in the house wasn't its search for spies and traitors on the high level. Not at all. Rooting these out like a pig going for a truffle was good and would still be a good thing. However, the slippery slope was invoked and these idealogues took their ideas down with a toboggon full of slander and unamericanism. Moreover, many of the domestic spying techniques employed under Hoover's stewardship of the F.B.I. at this time were later ruled unconstitutional. (This was settled by the Supreme Court in the case: UNITED STATES v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, 407 U.S. 297)

 

[FinnMacCool]

Terrorists are those who attack innocents for political gain

Communists are those who follow the political beliefs of Marx.

see the difference?

 

[Stinger]

(nitpick)It's given difficult to understand where questions are with your coding here. (nitpick)

never been a fan of how the forum software works

First off, apples and oranges.

Sorry it is not, this is about our enemies infiltrating the government.

That's the all encompassing point here.

It's the all encompassing dodge here

Communist Russia never physically attacked the United States.

Neither has Communist China which is why I threw that one in vis-a-vis your dodging. But the fact is Russia did attack us, haven't you ever read the history of the cold war? There were many military encounters between the US and the former Soviet Union.

Were the HUAC still around, voices of dissent such as Michael Moore would likely be squashed (although, I wouldn't mind if he had a big steaming cup of STFU, but that's not relevent).

If evidence surfaced that Michael Moore was being funded and supported by our enemies you don't think that would be a proper thing to investigate?

The problem with McCarthyism in the Senate and the HUAC in the house wasn't its search for spies and traitors on the high level. Not at all. Rooting these out like a pig going for a truffle was good and would still be a good thing. However, the slippery slope was invoked and these idealogues took their ideas down with a toboggon full of slander and unamericanism. Moreover, many of the domestic spying techniques employed under Hoover's stewardship of the F.B.I. at this time were later ruled unconstitutional. (This was settled by the Supreme Court in the case: UNITED STATES v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, 407 U.S. 297)

McCarthy was not an FBI agent. And the "slanders" for the most part proved to be factual. The Soviet Union was very actively infiltrating our government, it was a good thing that was exposed.

 

[Stinger]

Terrorists are those who attack innocents for political gain

Communists are those who follow the political beliefs of Marx.

see the difference?

Sure, and Russians are different from Arabs but they are specious distinctions and have nothing to do with my example and just to keep things on track I offered up China.

The fact is the Soviet Union and the United States were are war, granted a different kind of war but war none the less. They were our enemies and they were infiltrating our government for the purpose of bringing it down and placing the yoke of communisim on us all.

 

[FinnMacCool]

The fact is the Soviet Union and the United States were are war, granted a different kind of war but war none the less. They were our enemies and they were infiltrating our government for the purpose of bringing it down and placing the yoke of communisim on us all.

So we're talking about foregin spies then. That doesn't mean that we should crack down on socialists.

 

[shuamort]

Sorry it is not, this is about our enemies infiltrating the government.

Define "enemies". The dispute of whether or not the USSR was violating the Yalta conference had no direct affect on the US nor US politics.

Neither has Communist China which is why I threw that one in vis-a-vis your dodging. But the fact is Russia did attack us, haven't you ever read the history of the cold war? There were many military encounters between the US and the former Soviet Union.

There were no casualties as a direct result of USSR's actions. Sorry, that ship don't float.

If evidence surfaced that Michael Moore was being funded and supported by our enemies you don't think that would be a proper thing to investigate?

Nope, neither being funded by nor supported by violates US law. (If he were to fund an organization however, then he would be).

McCarthy was not an FBI agent.

Never said he was. The methodology used to acquire knowledge about the "unamerican" folks were done in part by the FBI. The techniques used during McCarthy's investigations have been proven to be unconstitutional. That's the link.

And the "slanders" for the most part proved to be factual. The Soviet Union was very actively infiltrating our government, it was a good thing that was exposed.

And I agreed with you there. As I said in the post: Rooting these out like a pig going for a truffle was good and would still be a good thing. The problem was, it crossed a huge line. You keep ignoring that part.

 

[mixedmedia]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
So in other words you could not refute what he posted (which is factual) and can only offer hyperbole?

So was McCarthy wrong in the House Unamerican Activities Committe Hearings which investigated Hollywood?




Really so you object to Senator McCarthy's hearings in the House Unamerican Activities committee?

Absolutely. Since when is free expression tantamount to traitorous acts? Like many human endeavors, the HUAC may have started as an earnest attempt to make some things right, but face it, Joe McCarthy was a lunatic and the whole thing got way out of hand. And the silencing of the Hollywood Ten was a blatantly shameless act of mass paranoia. A 20th century witch hunt.

 

[26 X World Champs]

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when a college professor tells one of their students the troops should shoot their superiors?

Gee, did you ever think you'd see the day that a well known religious leader would call for the assasination of a head of state?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the President would start a war against a country that was contained and was not a threat against the USA?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the Vice President would go on Meet The Press and say "the insurgency in Iraq is in its final throes" and years pass and the insurgency grows?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the President would blurt out to the head of FEMA "You're doing a heckuva job Brownie" less than a week before he was fired?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the President in a speech this week in Philadelphia cited 30,000+ Iraqi deaths in the war and then less than 60 seconds later he cracked a joke?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the President would be so unpopular that more than half the country thinks that he lied to start a war?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when a Republican President would spend more money than any previous President, increase the size of the government and create the largest deficit in our history?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when 98% of Black Americans disapprove of the President of the USA?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when a President would run for office promising that he does not believe in nation building and then proceed to attack another country unprovoked?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the Chief of Staff of the VP, the Speaker of the House and majority leader of the Senate were all under indictment or investigation?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when people would be so ignorant to start a thread supporting Joe McCarthy at the very time there's a popular movie called "Good Night & Good Luck" that again exposes the evilness that defined Joe McCarthy?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the Red Sox & White Sox won the World Series in back to back years?

 

[26 X World Champs]

Why would asking about Senator McCarthy and the claim that he was acting wrongly in the House Unamerican Activities Committee stir up hate? Do you believe he acted wrongly in the House Unamerican Activities Committee or that he wrong Hollywood stars through that committee?

:yt :werd :2no4:

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Gee, did you ever think you'd see the day that a well known religious leader would call for the assasination of a head of state?

Did you ever think you'd see the day where U.S. citizens would side with their nations enemy ie Chavez?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the President would start a war against a country that was contained and was not a threat against the USA?

Did you ever think you'd see the day where our elected officials would deliberately mistate the facts that led us up to the war in Iraq after they voted for the use of force for their own political gain?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the Vice President would go on Meet The Press and say "the insurgency in Iraq is in its final throes" and years pass and the insurgency grows?

Did you ever think you'd see the day when Iraq would become a Democracy where millions of people risked the wrath of an insurgency to excercise their right to vote?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the President would blurt out to the head of FEMA "You're doing a heckuva job Brownie" less than a week before he was fired?

Did you ever think you'd see the day when people would use a national tragedy as partisan political fodder?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the President in a speech this week in Philadelphia cited 30,000+ Iraqi deaths in the war and then less than 60 seconds later he cracked a joke?

Did you ever think you'd see the day when a U.S. Senator likened our troops to terrorists?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the President would be so unpopular that more than half the country thinks that he lied to start a war?

Did you ever think you'd see the day when the fifth estate became a fifth column?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when a Republican President would spend more money than any previous President, increase the size of the government and create the largest deficit in our history?

Did you ever think you'd see the day where a Democrat dared to lecture a Republican on overspending?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when 98% of Black Americans disapprove of the President of the USA?

Did you ever think you'd see the day that a president nominated an African American to the Secretary of State?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when a President would run for office promising that he does not believe in nation building and then proceed to attack another country unprovoked?

Did you ever think you'd see the day where Democrats still deny the Iraqi-AlQaeda connection despite all the evidence presented to the contrary?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the Chief of Staff of the VP, the Speaker of the House and majority leader of the Senate were all under indictment or investigation?

Did you ever think you'd see the day where Delay was totally exonerated and proof has now risen that Libby recieved the info from a journalist and not from Cheney?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when people would be so ignorant to start a thread supporting Joe McCarthy at the very time there's a popular movie called "Good Night & Good Luck" that again exposes the evilness that defined Joe McCarthy?

Did you ever think you'd see the day when people would cite a movie as evidence rather than to dispute the facts presented in this thread ie the Venona intercepts?

Did you ever think you'd see the day in this country when the Red Sox & White Sox won the World Series in back to back years?

Go White Sox!!!!

 

[cnredd]

Gee, did you ever think you'd see the day that a well known etc., etc., etc,...

This just proves my point...

When I posted those lines it just showed that saying "Did you ever think...." is a pitiful statement that can get twisted in any way, shape or form to appease one's own mind...

A zoologist can easily say, "Did you ever think you'd see the day when we would integrate wolves back into the Rockies?"...

An astronomer can say, "Did you ever think you'd see the day when we'd have a telescope in space?"

Doctors can say, "Did you ever think you'd see the day when spinal cord injuries can be partially healed through umbilical blood stem cells?"

See?....You can say that about ANYTHING....It becomes pointless...I could just as well say a few things about certain political affiliations and it doesn't mean a damn thing...

That fact that you had to retort by thinking up 12 of them shows that pointlessness was missed and you just wanted to bash...

Status quo...:shrug: