Ann Coulter Letter

McCarthyism: The Rosetta Stone of Liberal Lies

When I wrote a ferocious defense of Sen. Joe McCarthy in Treason: Liberal Treachery From the Cold War to the War on Terrorism, liberals chose not to argue with me. Instead they posted a scrolling series of reasons not to read my book, such as that I wear short skirts, date boys, and that Treason was not a scholarly tome.

After printing rabidly venomous accounts of McCarthy for half a century based on zero research, liberals would only accept research presenting an alternative view of McCarthy that included, as the Los Angeles Times put it, at least the "pretense of scholarly throat-clearing and objectivity."

This week, they got it. The great M. Stanton Evans has finally released Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies. Based on a lifetime’s work, including nearly a decade of thoroughgoing research, stores of original research and never-before-seen government files, this 672-page book ends the argument on Joe McCarthy. Look for it hidden behind stacks of Bill Clinton’s latest self-serving book at a bookstore near you.

Evans’ book is such a tour de force that liberals are already preparing a "yesterday’s news" defense — as if they had long ago admitted the truth about McCarthy. Yes, and they fought shoulder to shoulder with Ronald Reagan to bring down the Evil Empire. Thus, Publishers Weekly preposterously claims that "the history Evans relates is already largely known, if not fully accepted." Somebody better tell George Clooney.

The McCarthy period is the Rosetta stone of all liberal lies. It is the textbook on how they rewrite history — the sound chamber of liberal denunciations, their phony victimhood as they demean and oppress their enemies, their false imputation of dishonesty to their opponents, their legalization of every policy dispute, their ability to engage in lock-step shouting campaigns, and the black motives concealed by their endless cacophony.

The true story of Joe McCarthy, told in meticulous, irrefutable detail in Blacklisted by History, is that from 1938 to 1946, the Democratic Party acquiesced in a monstrous conspiracy being run through the State Department, the military establishment, and even the White House to advance the Soviet cause within the U.S. government.

In the face of the Democrats’ absolute refusal to admit to their fecklessness, fatuity and recklessness in allowing known Soviet spies to penetrate the deepest levels of government, McCarthy demanded an accounting.

Even if one concedes to on-the-one-hand-on-the-other-hand whiners like Ronald Radosh that Truman’s Secretary of State Dean Acheson didn’t like communism, his record is what it was. And that record was to treat Soviet spies like members of the Hasty Pudding Club.

Rather than own up to their moral blindness to Soviet espionage, Democrats fired up the liberal slander machine, which would be deployed again and again over the next half century to the present day. In hiding their own perfidy, liberals were guilty of every sin they lyingly imputed to McCarthy. There were no "McCarthyites" until liberals came along.

Blacklisted by History proves that every conventional belief about McCarthy is wrong, including:

– That he lied about his war service: He was a tailgunner in World War II;

– That he was a drunk: He would generally nurse a single drink all night;

– That he made the whole thing up: He produced loads of Soviet spies in government jobs;

– That he just did it for political gain: He understood perfectly the godless evil of communism.

Ironically, for all of their love of conspiracy theories — the rigging of the 2000 election, vote suppression in Ohio in 2004, 9/11 being an inside job, oil companies covering up miracle technology that would allow cars to run on dirt, Britney Spears’ career, etc., etc. — when presented with an actual conspiracy of Soviet spies infiltrating the U.S. government, they laughed it off like world-weary skeptics and dedicated themselves to slandering Joe McCarthy.

Then as now, liberals protect themselves from detection with wild calumnies against anybody who opposes them. They have no interest in — or aptitude for — persuasion. Their goal is to anathematize their enemies. Blacklisted by History removes the curse from one of the greatest patriots in American history.

Sign Up
  • http://www.facebook.com/stefan.dwight.1 Stefan Dwight

    What a bunch of crap! Joe was a paranoid old man that bullied people who he thought were Communists on little more than heresay evidence! He is responsible for putting the illegal words: “In god we trust” on our coins & adding the equally objectionable phrase “One nation under god” to our pledge!

  • ItalicizedMalice

    As satire, this is wonderfully perfect

  • Steven

    Perhaps the other two commenters should read up on the Venona Project. We were reading the Soviet diplo mail during the time – and McCarthy got a partial list, with false names added too, to protect sources and methods, but it turns out most of the names on that list – and MANY others not on the list – were, TA DA, actually Soviet spies.

    The project was declassified in the early 90′s and all this was known since then.

  • Adam Jones

    So what McCarthy did was only bad if it was proven that no Russian spy ever attempted to infiltrate the US gov’t? I don’t think anyone ever doubted the existence of Russian Spies. The idea is almost cliche.

    McCarthy used an existing problem to create fear and attempt to gain personal power. He used the same witch hunting tactics that he did on his crusade to rid the Fed Gov’t of homosexuals, something missing from this letter, and probably the book as well.

    There really were Russian spies, just like there really are terrorists in present day. The same logic that says if Russian spies exist, we can use that fact to harass and bring down anyone who we don’t like is the same logic that says because terrorists exist, we can torture and detain certain people indefinitely. Ms. Coulter obviously subscribes to both lines of thinking.

    The most disturbing thing though, is the subtext of this article. She never even says that IF he did what pretty much everyone thinks he did, THEN he would be a bad guy.

    She acts as if she’s defending one man against slander, but thats not really true. She loved McCarthy before this book came out, its not like this new info changed her mind. She’s always loved him, and not because she’s had a radically different understanding of the man. She’s always loved him for the same reason most of us find him despicable.

    Just like she loved Abu Ghraib, she loves Gitmo, she loves torture. She loves the idea that America is inherently better than everyone else, so we don’t really need to BE better in our actions, after all we ARE better, so we can just use any tactic, no matter how despicable, because the rest of them are worse.

  • AG Dot Com!

    Wow. What a classic example of liberal definition of “McCarthyism” – thank you for providing such a strong representation of exactly what the author is discussing – the liberal (nee socialist) tactic of anaethmatizing one’s enemies. Bravo.

  • AG Dot Com!

    Yup. Some of that is on display at Ft. Mead.

  • bbob

    Adam, If what you say can be proven that would change everything but it appears that the narrative above lists sources that cannot be successfully challenged.

  • Adam Jones

    So you are defending Joseph McCarthy, while accusing me of anathematizing my “enemies”? I won’t hold my breath while you try to figure out how ironic that is.