1911Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts contended that Dean's "pandering" to the National Rifle Association gave him an inroad to "pander to lovers of the Confederate flag."

"I would rather be the candidate of the NAACP than the NRA," Kerry said in a statement.

Kerry is well known gun basher in Massachusetts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
865 Posts
Screw Dean and every other democrat candidate. History has proved the democrat party is full of incompetent and treasonous scum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
865 Posts
Yea, I'm pretty pissed off. It's probably because I'm reading the book "Treason, Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism" by Ann Coulter. It makes me pretty livid to find out that the official U.S. history still being taught in public school is pure BS concocted by liberal socialists to further their agenda. I was always taught that Joe McCarthy was a bad guy. But it turns out that because he outed Soviet spies that had been in high positions in the FDR and Truman administrations for over a decade -- spies that both FDR and Truman were aware of by name but refused to do anything about -- McCarthy was subjected to the same kind of liberal smear campaign that Ken Starr was subjected to. Anyone want a good education? I suggest you read Ms. Coulter's book, as she convincingly lays out the history that has been revised and covered up by the liberal establishment over the past 60 years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,105 Posts
;)

Coulter also details how McCarthy had nothing to do with most of the things used to demonize him and with which he is now associated in peoples minds.

She also points out that most of the "facts" used to smear McCarthy are attributed in the bibliography to a smear book and if you look at that smear book it refers to another smear book and back and back and back.

I have read it. Good book.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
622 Posts
Every word!

I especially like the line "Every word you've ever read in the New York Times, about Joe McCarthy, is a lie, including "and" and "the".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
172 Posts
I'm proud to say that McCarthy was my senator.. after reading Coulter's book, I visited his grave (in Appleton, WI) to pay my respects

as for my feelings about voting for Dean, Kerry, Clark, or any other democrat candidate (and most especially Hillary Rodham!).. I'm not impressed with how Dubya has handled the AWB, and a lot of other agendas that he could be pushing.. he's clearly trying to appease the leftists by moving to the center.. perhaps that's a smart move for now, given that the dems are screaming about everything he does.. look at the judicial filibusters as an example of how they refuse to even follow the constitution if they don't get what they want

but voting a democrat into the white house at this point would be disaster for the 2nd amendment.. I can't read a news article about a public gathering of democrats where the words "Bush" and "Nazi" aren't used together.. it's an unpleasant irony that these people call conservatives nazis, when they are the ones who would gladly resort to nazi tactics ('selective' free speech, and eliminating private ownership of guns).. putting a Dem into the white house would only empower these intellectually-challenged, but emotionally charged mobs
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
865 Posts
Well, I think most people don't agree with everything any president does. But the way I see it, if the liberal media is up in arms against a Republican president, that usually means he is doing something right that a Democrat presidents has screwed up in the past. If you believe the liberal media, GWB isn't doing anything right in Iraq as he ignors our mounting casualties and demoralized troops. In reality, GWB has a positive attitude that we will eventually prevail in Iraq and that our casualties are the price we have to pay for our security. And of course our troops are demoralized; they're away from home in a dangerous area of a foreign country; what did they expect when they enlisted? In the words of Ann Coulter, "Democrats start wars, refuse to fight, and then insist that everyone describe the wars as unwinnable." A case in point is Vietnam. Democrat President JFK started it, Democrat Presidents JFK and LBJ refused to fight; and then a Democrat-majority Congress snatched defeat from the jaws of Republican President Nixon's victory, the Paris Peace Accords, by cutting off aid to South Vietnam. And now the liberals are starting to make comparisons of Iraq to Vietnam. Well, there is no real comparison. After Republican President George Bush quickly won the first war by using overwhelming force, Democrat President Clinton blew everything by ignoring Sadam's refusal to honor the cease fire agreement. This necessitated the second war, which was quickly won by Republican President George W. Bush using overwhelming force. And now here the liberals go again, undermining our success in Iraq by trying to convince the American people that it is a hopeless situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,086 Posts
E4MC said:
In the words of Ann Coulter, "Democrats start wars, refuse to fight, and then insist that everyone describe the wars as unwinnable."
Dear E4MC,

Ann Coulter is wrong. The last two wars that can really be considered as "US" wars were the two world wars which we won. We had Democrats in the White House for both of them. All the major wars since that time (Korea, Vietnam, and Desert Storm) were all UN wars fought to achieve the goal of keeping one country out of another. They were never intended to result in the total defeat of the country being fought against. Iraqi Freedom is sort of an in between war since the President used Iraq's violation of UN resolutions as partial justification for it, while the UN did not specifically authorize it. Hopefully it will be ended better than the other UN fiascos have. Stay safe, Gary
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,060 Posts
< McCarthy was subjected to the same kind of liberal smear campaign that Ken Starr was subjected to. Anyone want a good education? I suggest you read Ms. Coulter's book, as she convincingly lays out the history that has been revised and covered up by the liberal establishment over the past 60 years.>

I'm old enough to know, to have read, and have viewed the newsreels of the way McCarthy, and Nixon, and Roy the hatchet lawyer brought forth some of the greatest screenwriters, playrights, directors, actors, producers before his committee and said the most nasty and disgusting things about 'em, disparaging them in the process and ending many a career and life.

No wonder why McCarthy died right after that fiasco. He deserved it. My grandmother used to say: 'I spit on Joe McCarthy's grave'.

What do you want to do next? Re-write freakin history? Joe McCarthy was an obnoxious, ignorant, power hungry politician with a definite little man complex. He was a bully, simple as that. And he's someone's hero? Coulter looks up to him with respect?

Know what? For what he did to many great people of this great country, I hope he rots in his grave.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
90 Posts
When Sen. McCarthy was in business, communism was a real threat to the United States. Remember Comrade Nikita beating on the table and saying they would bury us? What did all the great "screenwriters, playrights, directors, actors, producers" do to stop the threat back then? I imagine they were about as helpful as their descendants are today. End of rant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,105 Posts
Climb14er said:
I'm old enough to know, to have read, and have viewed the newsreels of the way McCarthy, and Nixon, and Roy the hatchet lawyer brought forth some of the greatest screenwriters, playrights, directors, actors, producers before his committee and said the most nasty and disgusting things about 'em, disparaging them in the process and ending many a career and life.
I dont feel bad for those communists. All they had to do was tell the truth and live with the consequences of being a communist publicly or take the fifth.

By the way McCarthy wasnt on HUAC with Nixon. McCarthy was in the Senate not the House which is what the H stands for in the acronym. But regardless, what did any of these investigatory committees do other than expose people as communists, and try to prevent Soviet agents from working in our government (McCarthy mostly being involved with the later)? Most of the problems with our country at present are a direct result of having nobody around to ferret them out. I like this interchange from a HUAC interview of Ronald Reagan, it reveals the methods used (public exposure), and it also reveals a recognition of the lines that should not be crossed:

STRIPLING: Mr. Reagan, what is your feeling about what steps should be taken to rid the motion picture industry of any communist influences?

REAGAN: Well, sir, 99 percent of us are pretty well aware of what is going on, and I think, within the bounds of our democratic rights and never once stepping over the rights given us by democracy, we have done a pretty good job in our business of keeping those people's activities curtailed. After all, we must recognize them at present as a political party. On that basis we have exposed their lies when we came across them, we have opposed their propaganda, and I can certainly testify that in the case of the Screen Actors Guild we have been eminently successful in preventing them from, with their usual tactics, trying to run a majority of an organization with a well organized minority.

In opposing those people, the best thing to do is make democracy work. In the Screen Actors Guild we make it work by insuring everyone a vote and by keeping everyone informed. I believe that, as Thomas Jefferson put it, if all the American people know all of the facts they will never make a mistake. Whether the party should be outlawed, that is a matter for the government to decide. As a citizen, I would hesitate to see any political party outlawed on the basis of its political ideology. However, if it is proven that an organization is an agent of foreign power, or in any way not a legitimate political party -- and I think the government is capable of proving that -- then that is another matter. I happen to be very proud of the industry in which I work; I happen to be very proud of the way in which we conducted the fight. I do not believe the communists have ever at any time been able to use the motion picture screen as a sounding board for their philosophy or ideology.

CHAIRMAN: There is one thing that you said that interested me very much. That was the quotation from Jefferson. That is why this committee was created by the House of Representatives: to acquaint the American people with the facts. Once the American people are acquainted with the facts there is no question but what the American people will do the kind of job that they want done: that is, to make America just as pure as we can possibly make it. We want to thank you very much for coming here today.

REAGAN: Sir, I detest, I abhor their philosophy, but I detest more than that their tactics, which are those of the fifth column, and are dishonest, but at the same time I never as a citizen want to see our country become urged, by either fear or resentment of this group, that we ever compromise with any of our democratic principles through that fear or resentment. I still think that democracy can do it.

Climb14er said:
My grandmother used to say: 'I spit on Joe McCarthy's grave'.
Sounds like a real sweetheart. Im pleased to be able to say my Grandmother was neither a communist nor a communist sympathizer.

Climb14er said:
What do you want to do next? Re-write freakin history?
There isnt any need to rewrite history. The record is there for anyone to look at. What needs to be done is set peoples understanding of what happened straight, because that understanding is shaped by what has been written about McCarthy by his enemies, the very communists he hunted in many cases. Read any account or synopsis regarding McCarthy and it will be claimed that none of his accusations were ever proven. Not true, and that is the extent of most peoples education regarding McCarthy. McCarthys accusations against high level people in the State Department and other US government agencies have been proven to be true with the release of the Venona intercepts and also from research into KGB files since the fall of the Soviet Union. He was smeared by the Democrats because they feared he would reveal the level to which communists had infiltrated their party. He was then thrown to the wolves by the Republicans because he made a fool of President Eisenhower and the Secretary of the Army. He revealed that communist infiltration was so rampant and background checks against people working for the government so poor that they had members of the Communist party working in the coderooms of the Pentagon.

PS. John F. Kennedy himself called McCarthy a "Great America Patriot" and was purposefully absent in order to avoid having to go along with his party when they censured McCarthy in the Senate. JFK never could play ball. Thats probably why him and his little brother got whacked in the 60s when the commies took over the Democrat party lock stock and barrel.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,060 Posts
There you go again, lumping every writer, novelist, screenwriter, producer, actor into the name game of calling them all a communist.

This is what the American public objected to back in the fifties.

That's the same as calling everyone from the east coast a liberal and all westerners right wing. There is a middle ground of dissent and that's what makes this country great.

It was a WITCH HUNT of the highest degree back in the late 40's and early 50's. People talk about free speech, first amendment rights, etc. Those were violated by McCarthy's henchmen.

McCarthy's problem and that of others including Coulter was that just because someone did something that was 'associated' with writing, then all of a sudden they were Communists.

The way McCarthy assassinated writers was documented in many channels of history as being one of the low points of the twentieth century.

To call Joe McCarthy a hero is anathema to what most ethical people believe in. His OWN collegues censured him! At the time, he was only the fourth person in the Senate to have been censured! Both Republicans and Democrats turned their backs on him.

The only people who are bringing McCarthy back in good light these days are people who are trying to rewrite history and make good of what was bad. Sought of what the Chinese, Japanese, Arabs, Koreans have been doing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,105 Posts
Climb14er said:
There you go again, lumping every writer, novelist, screenwriter, producer, actor into the name game of calling them all a communist.
No Im not. They were called to testify whether or not they were communists. They could either answer truthfully, or take the fifth amendment. Most of them wound up taking the fifth because they knew it could be proven they were communists and they didnt want to suffer the economic consequences of admitting it publicly. The American people wouldnt support communists by watching their movies or buy their products at the time and they knew it!

Climb14er said:
This is what the American public objected to back in the fifties.
Not true.

McCarthy was always very popular, even at the height of the controversy surrounding him. Maybe even more popular than Eisenhower in fact, which is probably part of the reason why his own party threw him to the wolves, after he embarrassed Ike.

His censure was not the result of a grassroots movement. It was a result of the howling of the media, entertainment and political elite who were being exposed as communists, or being humiliated for their complicity.

Climb14er said:
That's the same as calling everyone from the east coast a liberal and all westerners right wing. There is a middle ground of dissent and that's what makes this country great.
You are missing the entire point. It was never illegal to be a communist. What they were doing was publicly exposing them as communists. Something that needs to be done again with these so called liberals. In fact they too are communists and if the American people were educated as to that fact there would likely be consequences for taking such extreme left wing positions now as there were then.

But regardless, most of McCarthys communist hunting was done against high level officials in the State Dept and other government agencies who have since been proven to have been Soviet agents.

Are you suggesting that we should have let ideological allies of communism, outright Soviet agents, and other security risks work for the US goverment during the Cold War?

Or that we should allow people to publicly espouse one ideology and secretly believe something entirely different and use that ignorance on the part of the public to work behind close doors with other conspirators to sell concepts and ideas that undermine the Constitution?

That has taken place, and communist domination of entertainment and other mass media is responsible for the accelerated deterioration of this country over the past 40 years.

Climb14er said:
His OWN collegues censured him! At the time, he was only the fourth person in the Senate to have been censured! Both Republicans and Democrats turned their backs on him.
So if a bunch of whores ridicule a virgin for her chastity that reflects badly on the virgin? Your logic isnt.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,060 Posts
One reason why I rarely ever post commentary in this portion of the forum is because guys like Mus seem to articulate their own views, whether or not others understand his point which he bends to fit his perspective, right or wrong.

You're telling me I'm wrong about this and that, and that's your opinion.

Mus said: <No Im not. They were called to testify whether or not they were communists. They could either answer truthfully, or take the fifth amendment. Most of them wound up taking the fifth because they knew it could be proven they were communists and they didnt want to suffer the economic consequences of admitting it publicly. The American people wouldnt support communists by watching their movies or buy their products at the time and they knew it! >

The people who were called to testify had three options. One, if they did not, they were BLACKLISTED. Their careers and lives were runied. I don't see any positives of choice #1. Second option is that they were asked about naming names. Most solid citizens do not rat out friends and business associates! Second choice was also unacceptable. Plus the way they were harrangued in the meetings. It was UN-AMERICAN! Third option, people named names. Most of these people, and not all, lost their friends and many, their family. But they did save their jobs. They were rats. ie: Elia Kazan. You're changing history.

Mus said: <McCarthy was always very popular, even at the height of the controversy surrounding him. Maybe even more popular than Eisenhower in fact, which is probably part of the reason why his own party threw him to the wolves, after he embarrassed Ike. >

Where did you get this nonsense? In the midwest and the south, he was popular among the illiterate and uninformed! Elsewhere, he was considered by educated people to be a meglomaniac. You're changing history.

Mus said: <His censure was not the result of a grassroots movement. It was a result of the howling of the media, entertainment and political elite who were being exposed as communists, or being humiliating for their complicity.>

Again nonsense! He was an EMBARRASSMENT to every person who had decency to his life, including the politicians who distanced themselves from McCarthy. You're changing history.

Mus said: <You are missing the entire point. It was never illegal to be a communist. What they were doing was publicly exposing them as communists. Something that needs to be done again with these so called liberals. In fact they too are communists and if the American people were educated as to that fact there would likely be consequences for taking such extreme left wing positions now as there were then. >

I never said it was illegal to be a communist. There you go again, to quote Reagan, by saying that liberals are communists. See, you walked right into your own statement that I alluded to in my post that you highlighted. Are you trying to con the members of this forum by quoting this and that to fit your needs?

Mus said: <But regardless, most of McCarthys communist hunting was done against high level officials in the State Dept and other government agencies who have since been proven to have been Soviet agen>

Wrong again! It began as such, then escalated to include even the 'lowly' people working on the sets in Hollywood, forcing them to name names. The HUAC went after everyone they could connect even remotely to anyone else who had connections to a communist or party as far back as in the thirties. Rewriting history again!

Mus said: <Are you suggesting that we should have let ideological allies of communism, outright Soviet agents, and other security risks work for the US goverment during the Cold War? >

No, I never said such a thing!

Mus said:<That has taken place, and communist domination of entertainment and other mass media is responsible for the accelerated deterioration of this country over the past 40 years.>

I have heard the term Jewish domination, not communist domination. Did you in fact make a mistake with words? What are you implying by saying communist when NO ONE uses that term even loosely these days? Are you holding back because you're all of a sudden 'politically correct'?

I'm not some hick from the boonies you're writing to. I'm also not a Democrat which is what this thread began as. I believe in the Constitution and free speech for all. I personally don't like it when someone tries to ram nonsensical spew down my way when they infer one thing and in reality, mean another.

Joe McCarthy can still rot in hell as far as I'm concerned. As for the writers, directors, producers, screenwriters, etc, if you don't like their work, then don't go to their movies or read their books or watch their shows on TV or read their newspapers or magazines.

Afterall, according to you, THEY control everything! Right?

I understand.

:rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,500 Posts
MattB said:
I will sprinkle rock salt on hell to thaw it out before I vote for a democrat.
Yeah! You GO, Matt!!

:biglaugh: :biglaugh: :biglaugh:

Seriously, do NOT vote for Dean. He is a spoiler, and is playing both sides of the fence.

You may not like Bush--you may not have voted for him in the past election--but the devil you know is better than the devil you don't.

And, check this one out:

The way I see it, he is about to let the AWB expire next year, when he could very plainly let it continue.

Vote Bush, folks. Whaever he has done--or not done--he's a damn sight better than the alternative.

And, remember this well--do not be misled into voting for a more attractive candidate of a minority party. As much as it pains me to say it, every vote for a Libertarian candidate is a Democratic vote in disguise. Remember Perot? Had it not been for the votes he siphoned off, Clinton would never have made the White House.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,105 Posts
Climb14er said:
One reason why I rarely ever post commentary in this portion of the forum is because guys like Mus seem to articulate their own views, whether or not others understand his point which he bends to fit his perspective, right or wrong.
I suspect that even if that was a coherent thought rather than a rambling, nonsensical, runon sentence it would still be BS.

Wanna give it another shot?

Climb14er said:
Mus said: <McCarthy was always very popular, even at the height of the controversy surrounding him. Maybe even more popular than Eisenhower in fact, which is probably part of the reason why his own party threw him to the wolves, after he embarrassed Ike. >

Where did you get this nonsense? In the midwest and the south, he was popular among the illiterate and uninformed! Elsewhere, he was considered by educated people to be a meglomaniac. You're changing history.
No it is you who are changing history. At the time McCarthy was very popular with the common man. You can confirm this by looking back at the record. His popularity numbers only started to slip under months of constant media barrage. You are viewing the entire situation through the prism of 50 years of liberal smear.

That you view the average American of the 1950s as an illiterate uninformed person is revealing, but not true.

Climb14er said:
Mus said: <His censure was not the result of a grassroots movement. It was a result of the howling of the media, entertainment and political elite who were being exposed as communists, or being humiliating for their complicity.>

Again nonsense! He was an EMBARRASSMENT to every person who had decency to his life, including the politicians who distanced themselves from McCarthy. You're changing history.
Again it is you who are changing History. McCarthy was very popular with the American people. He was censured after he revealed that communists were working in very sensitive areas of the military and greatly embarrassed the Secretary of the Army and President Eisenhower.

He should have known better (and probably did) to think he could get away with going after his own party, but I have to admire his bravery and dedication. He must have known that revealing their complicity would have drastic consequences.

Climb14er said:
Mus said: <But regardless, most of McCarthys communist hunting was done against high level officials in the State Dept and other government agencies who have since been proven to have been Soviet agents>

Wrong again! It began as such, then escalated to include even the 'lowly' people working on the sets in Hollywood, forcing them to name names. The HUAC went after everyone they could connect even remotely to anyone else who had connections to a communist or party as far back as in the thirties. Rewriting history again!
SENATOR Joseph McCarthy was not on the HOUSE Un American Activities Committee. He was not involved in the Hollywood Ten or many of the other things associated with his name.

Also he did accuse people who have since turned out to be actual Soviet agents. This is a fact confirmed by release of the Venona intercepts.

You are accusing me of rewriting history while at the same time you reveal a total ignorance of the basic historical facts involved.

Climb14er said:
Mus said: <Are you suggesting that we should have let ideological allies of communism, outright Soviet agents, and other security risks work for the US goverment during the Cold War? >

No, I never said such a thing!
Then why are you so opposed to McCarthy who mostly went after Soviet agents in the State Department and US Military?

Climb14er said:
I have heard the term Jewish domination, not communist domination. Did you in fact make a mistake with words? What are you implying by saying communist when NO ONE uses that term even loosely these days?
Im not implying anything you fool. I explicitly said communist and communist is what I meant. But thanks for trying to play the race card and revealing your inability to debate without trying to demagogue or pigeonhole your opponent.

By the way, the reason why nobody uses the term communist "loosely" (by which you also mean calling people who are actually communists communists) is because of the example the leftists made of McCarthy.

Climb14er said:
As for the writers, directors, producers, screenwriters, etc, if you don't like their work, then don't go to their movies or read their books or watch their shows on TV or read their newspapers or magazines.
I wont. And neither would most of the American people when they realize that those writers, etc are Communists feeding them propaganda. That was the whole point of revealing them to be communists in public at that time. It put them out of business because the American people wouldnt swallow their propaganda when they could recognize it as such. And that is why McCarthy was censured and why liberal historians have devoted 50 years to smearing him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
865 Posts
Quote by Climb14er

"I'm old enough to know, to have read, and have viewed the newsreels of the way McCarthy, and Nixon, and Roy the hatchet lawyer brought forth some of the greatest screenwriters, playrights, directors, actors, producers before his committee and said the most nasty and disgusting things about 'em, disparaging them in the process and ending many a career and life."

Well, Climb14er, you may have been old enough but, apparently, you were bamboozled like the rest of us. But don't feel bad; most of the American public don't know the truth, even if they were around back then. It was HUAC, the House Un-american Activities Committee, not McCarthy, that questioned the Hollywood people. Notice that the first word in HUAC is "House". McCarthy was a member of the Senate, not the House; he played no part in HUAC. McCarthy was on a totally different committee investigating Soviet espionage in government, and everyone brought before him has actually been incontrovertably proven to have been a Soviet spy. McCarthy was making his case that both FDR and Truman had Soviet spies in high positions in their administrations for over 10 years; that FDR and Truman had been advised who these spies were by name; and that FDR and Truman had chosen to disbelieve or ignore this advice or do anything about the spies. The liberals realized that this news would be disasterous for the Democrat party so they orchestrated a campaign to smear McCarthy and keep the American public from finding out the truth. Keep in mind that then, as now, the liberals controlled the media and hollywood, so they were able to manipulate what information got out to the American public. They painted McCarthy as a zealot on a witch hunt; in fact, he was quite the oposite. Then over the years, the liberals have rewritten history to lump McCarthy in with HUAC under the idea that if you tell a lie long enough, it becomes the truth. This is the same strategy the liberals used to smear Ken Starr. I suggest you read Ms. Colter's book. It's a real eye opener.
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top