Moral McCarthyism

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by 108

"unintentionally" as in indirectly

The irony continues...

As the white house directly promotes intolerance of the Biblical view on homosexuality. All while there was no reason to believe Giglio would have commented on the subject at the inauguration...

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by Lawdog88

The real irony is that . . . McCarthy was gay.

[wargunfan]

Why doesn't The Obama regime select a Muslim, transgender, lesbian, cross dressing mullah to give Obama the oath of office on a Qur'an. They are missing a great opportunity here.

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by wargunfan

Why doesn't The Obama regime select a Muslim, transgender, lesbian, cross dressing mullah to give Obama the oath of office on a Qur'an. They are missing a great opportunity here.

Can't find someone who meets those qualifications?

[oragator1]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

The irony continues...

As the white house directly promotes intolerance of the Biblical view on homosexuality. All while there was no reason to believe Giglio would have commented on the subject at the inauguration...

That argument is like saying Truman promoted intolerance of the southern way of life when he integrated the military.

[QGator2414]

Originally Posted by oragator1

That argument is like saying Truman promoted intolerance of the southern way of life when he integrated the military.

Intolerance amoung races exists today...Sadly

[oragator1]

Originally Posted by QGator2414

Intolerance amoung races exists today...Sadly

I agree, and its not all a one way street.
My point was that justifying the idea of telling another group they can't have the same rights as you under the guise of social structure generally is a losing argument. That argument has already been lost on women, race, disabilities among many other issues and will be lost here too. It is seen as discrimination, even if it's under the umbrella of religion.
So to make the argument that the person telling someone else what they should and shouldn't be able to do from their safe perch holding all the rights they are wanting to deny someone else as the person being discriminated against, rings hollow.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by Lawdog88

The real irony is that . . . McCarthy was gay.

No. Evidence.

[bluelang]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

No. Evidence.

You?! YOU calling for evidence?

Follow the money and stop being so brainwashed by the government.

[northgagator]

The irony of this thread is that with the fall of the USSR documents from the KGB and other Soviet agencies that McCarthy did have some accuracy in identifying members of the Communist Party. Please note that many members of the Communist party were active agents reporting back to Moscow or were dupes unknowingly reporting to Moscow.

Intersecting dude note: Much was written how secretive and secured the Manhattan Project was conducted. Actually Stalin had a very good pipeline of info coming to him http://mobile.usnews.com/news/nation...uclear-program

I am not defending McCarthy.
Where McCarthy went wrong was that he labeled all Communist as un-American. Back before 1950 many Americans joined the American (or similar) Communist Party. Mainly out of political/social/economic beliefs and not as allegiance to the USSR. I do not agree with these people but not all if them were traitors.

[Lawdog88]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

No. Evidence.

Only. Stories. About. Him. Being. Queer (What. It. Was. Called. In. Those. Days.)

Other. Than. That.

Nothing.

[MichaelJoeWilliamson]

Originally Posted by rivergator

I always figured that all conservatives who railed against the other side were gay.

McCarthy "railed" against gays?

When, where and how?

[rivergator]

Originally Posted by northgagator

I am not defending McCarthy.
Where McCarthy went wrong was that he labeled all Communist as un-American. Back before 1950 many Americans joined the American (or similar) Communist Party. Mainly out of political/social/economic beliefs and not as allegiance to the USSR. I do not agree with these people but not all if them were traitors.

Excellent point. I've tried to explain that here before. Pete Seeger is a perfect example. He joined the Communist Party before WWII because, as he put it, "It's for labor unions and against racism. I'm for labor unions and against racism ..."

[Dreamliner]

Nothing has changed in America. going back to the 1700's Alexis de Touqueville remarked on how Americans were worse than any he'd seen at ostracizing others over beliefs.

[OaktownGator]

Originally Posted by northgagator

The irony of this thread is that with the fall of the USSR documents from the KGB and other Soviet agencies that McCarthy did have some accuracy in identifying members of the Communist Party. Please note that many members of the Communist party were active agents reporting back to Moscow or were dupes unknowingly reporting to Moscow.

Intersecting dude note: Much was written how secretive and secured the Manhattan Project was conducted. Actually Stalin had a very good pipeline of info coming to him http://mobile.usnews.com/news/nation...uclear-program

I am not defending McCarthy.
Where McCarthy went wrong was that he labeled all Communist as un-American. Back before 1950 many Americans joined the American (or similar) Communist Party. Mainly out of political/social/economic beliefs and not as allegiance to the USSR. I do not agree with these people but not all if them were traitors.

Very well put, northga.

Bottom line - if somebody is engaged in illegal, traitorous behavior, they should be investigated and prosecuted for it. But being a communist (or any other group) in and of itself doesn't qualify.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by Lawdog88

Only. Stories. About. Him. Being. Queer (What. It. Was. Called. In. Those. Days.)

Other. Than. That.

Nothing.

Indeed. That's how Leftists and communist sympathizers used to discredit and marginalize people back then. All they had to do was claim they heard "rumors". They didn't have to put forth any evidence, just "rumors". A media circus would have ensued if McCarthy attempted to defend himself from the allegations, and more people would have been introduced to the rumors, so he left it alone.

Maybe McCarthy was gay, but there's no supporting evidence to make the claim as if he truly was and it was open knowledge.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by northgagator

Where McCarthy went wrong was that he labeled all Communist as un-American. Back before 1950 many Americans joined the American (or similar) Communist Party. Mainly out of political/social/economic beliefs and not as allegiance to the USSR. I do not agree with these people but not all if them were traitors.

McCarthy was introduced to evidence from the FBI that indicated that the U.S. government had fallen victim to a conspiracy so large, so totally gigantic, that he felt a duty to warn the American people about it. And yes, this conspiracy was very real.

I suspect McCarthy initially thought that his warnings about this conspiracy would be welcomed by the press and the American people, and that many in government would support him once he came forward. Instead, he was shocked and devastated to find that the press seemed to be covering up for the conspiracy, and that the American people were largely disinterested in what he had to say (mostly because of the way the media mocked the warnings).

So McCarthy stepped up his attempts to warn the American people by becoming increasingly more vocal and reckless in attempting to draw attention to what he was saying. I liken his reaction to that of a person seeing a building on fire and rushing inside to warn the occupants, only to find that they don't believe him or refuse to pay attention. He simply couldn't believe the reaction he got. He was stupefied by it. He didn't know what to do.

This is what McCarthy is remembered and criticized for. Because he tried too hard and used aggressive tactics to wake the people from their slumber. He leveled accusations and questioned the wrong people. He basically jumped up and down like a maniac trying to get the message out. Nobody remembers the fact that he risked his life and career to warn the people about infiltration of their government. All they remember is his tactics.

[Lawdog88]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

Indeed. That's how Leftists and communist sympathizers used to discredit and marginalize people back then. All they had to do was claim they heard "rumors". They didn't have to put forth any evidence, just "rumors". A media circus would have ensued if McCarthy attempted to defend himself from the allegations, and more people would have been introduced to the rumors, so he left it alone.

Maybe McCarthy was gay, but there's no supporting evidence to make the claim as if he truly was and it was open knowledge.

Oh, sorry. I thought that was what HE was doing.

[ChartsandGrafs]

Originally Posted by Lawdog88

Oh, sorry. I thought that was what HE was doing.

Not really. McCarthy was actually trying to warn the American people about something real, while his opponents were just trying to get him to shut up about it and go away.

Perhaps you can see the difference?

[oragator1]

Originally Posted by ChartsandGrafs

Not really. McCarthy was actually trying to warn the American people about something real, while his opponents were just trying to get him to shut up about it and go away.

Perhaps you can see the difference?

Seriously, take an objective look at some of the things he did, particularly to guys like Drew Pearson (a reporter he attacked from the senate floor 7 times) Robert La Follette who he literally drove to suicide through false accusations, as well as getting Raymond Graham Swing fired from his job at the VOA for questioning him, among many many others.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAmccarthy.htm

One other note on his supposed homosexuality, this is in there too:

For some time opponents of McCarthy had been accumulating evidence concerning his homosexual activities. Several members of his staff, including Roy Cohn and David Schine, were also suspected of having a sexual relationship. Although well-known by political journalists, the first article about it did not appear until Hank Greenspun published an article in the Las Vegas Sun in 25th October, 1952. Greenspun wrote that: "It is common talk among homosexuals in Milwaukee who rendezvous in the White Horse Inn that Senator Joe McCarthy has often engaged in homosexual activities."
McCarthy considered a libel suit against Greenspun but decided against it when he was told by his lawyers that if the case went ahead he would have to take the witness stand and answer questions about his sexuality.

My honest take on McCarthy is that he was power hungry. At some point he might have convinced himself about a communist threat, but his motivation was personal not altruistic.