home

"Good Night, and Good Luck"

by Last Night in Little Rock

I saw "Good Night, and Good Luck" (see imdb.com) tonight, my first movie in weeks, which is bad for a movie buff, but I work too much.

I am old enough to remember some of Edward R. Morrow's broadcasts. This movie takes place between 1953 and 1958, and it centers on CBS News getting to guts to take on Senator Joseph McCarthy and his trampling of civil liberties. But, it is more about the fear of Americans to question McCarthy, and CBS's own trepidation of taking him on, but they did.

Throughout, I saw this movie as a methaphor for today and the attitude of the Bush Administration: "If you're not with us, you're against us." Everybody feared crossing or questioning McCarthy because they would be targeted if they did. The press questioned itself back then as being in lockstep with McCarthy, afraid to say or do anything that would cause the public to think they were giving "aid and comfort to the enemy." Then, it was communists. Finally, Morrow and his producer, Fred Friendly, decided it was time for Morrow's show to go after McCarthy before he did any more damage to civil liberties in America.

The parallels to today are uncanny. Today, it is the War in Iraq, and dissent is still questioned by the Neo-Cons as giving "aid and comfort to the enemy."

Like McCarthy's final fall from grace when the public wised up, George Bush's popularity is in free fall. Edward R. Morrow helped to wise up the public, and he was attacked for it. CBS was attacked back then as being the 50's version of the "liberal media" for questioning McCarthy. Finally, McCarthy was ignominiously censured by the Senate, and he faded away. Near the end of the movie, there is a great piece of film of President Eisenhower also talking about the strength of America to endure the likes of McCarthy.

We can thank George Clooney and Grant Heslov for the screenplay, but Morrow's words were all his own. David Straithairn does an uncanny portrayal of Morrow, and he delivers the lines just as Morrow did.

In the closing scene, Morrow reminds fellow broadcasters as he is receiving an award of their duty to objectively educate the public and not just entertain.

The reviewers are right: See this movie. It reminds you why you must "question authority."

< Support the Bingaman Amendment and Save Habeas | Italy Seeks to Extradite CIA Agents, Germany Could Be Next >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:02 PM EST
    I saw this movie yesterday and it's seemed so apropos for today. It's scary. Terrorists/Islamic extremists are the new communists. Scary scary.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#2)
    by cpinva on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:02 PM EST
    it's "murrow", not morrow. murrow wasn't a celebrity journalist, he actually believed in finding and reporting the truth. he didn't socialize with the people he reported on, or live next door to them. he wasn't perfect, but was a damn sight better than what passes for journalists today. i think he would be appalled at the wedding of the MSM and those they report on, the conflicts of interest would be glaringly obvious to him.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#3)
    by Darryl Pearce on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:02 PM EST
    ...when I was in college going to Humboldt State University, the bumpersticker that caught my eye was... "Become Authority" We liberals should take that to heart I think.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Oh, another commment on GN&GL, the film of Einsenhower talking about habeas corpus.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#5)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Two statements by Murrow that the Bush League (and their apologists that troll here) would be wise to contemplate as they play their losers game:
    "We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home." "To be persuasive we must be believable; to be believable we must be credible; to be credible we must be truthful."
    Throughout history power structures built on corruption, lies, and deceit inevitably prove unsustainable. They last in some instances for a short time, in others, longer. In the end they always collapse, insupportable because their foundations, like McCarthyism, are illusions with no substance or value to offer to those who are awake, and to those who, like Murrow, awaken others, one by one. ----- "If you don't trust the people, you make them untrustworthy." --Lao Tzu, (551-479 BCE)

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Murrow *was* a celebrity journalist. He had high ratings for CBS. If that is not the definition, then offer one. Many of his interviews were of movie stars and other celebrities of his day. Yes, he took on McCarthy and did Harvest of Shame. Yes, he was a war correspondant in WWII in London. But, it is wrong to believe that he was only a serious journalist.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#7)
    by Andreas on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    The WSWS published a movie review:
    Murrow’s worst fears about the use of television to delude a mass audience have long since come to pass. While his own outlook, as expressed in his 1958 speech, did not go beyond an appeal to the consciences of the corporate leaders, this in no way minimizes the significance of his career. Good Night, and Good Luck accurately depicts an important episode in American history, and it deserves a far wider audience than it is likely to get.
    A timely film on Murrow and McCarthy By Peter Daniels, 8 November 2005

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#8)
    by Steven Sanderson on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    I've long been an admirer of Edward R. Murrow. I remember the later years of his program, "See It Now," and I recall being stunned when I watched the original broadcast of "Harvest Of Shame" in 1960. Recently I purchased the 4 DVD set, "The Edward R. Murrow Collection," and thouroughly enjoyed the trip down memory lane. One of the DVD's in the set is "The McCarthy Years" and it contains the Murrow programs, in their entirety, that confronted "Tail-Gunner Joe." This collection is priceless in my estimation. The parallel between McCarthyism and today's political climate is truly astonishing.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#9)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Was the movie at least honest enough to point out that there really were secret Communists sneaking about, trying to infiltrate the culture and government?

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Roy: Oh, no, The "sneaking communists"!!!!! They wouldn't have had to be "sneaking" if the government hadn't forced them underground in the first place, through a campaign of misplaced fear. And, besides, communism was completely beside the point - it was the whipping boy du jour - just like Islamoterrorism is today. The point is about the use of fear to subvert a democratic government and, thereby, accumulate power the old-fashioned way. But, you already knew that.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#11)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    I really want to see this movie but will probably have to wait until it comes out on DVD. The small Texas town I currently reside in, apparently, don't fool with them there commy lovig glitterati types. But anyway, the timing of this movie couldn't be any better. And not just because of the ominous parallels with the Bush Administration. Wanna talk about historical revisionism? Try how hard the neocons have been working, over the last five or so years, to portray McCarthy as a great American patriot. That is just sick. But then, it probably won't be long beofre they ass Reagan's mugshot to Mount Rushmore, so nothing much surprises me anymore.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#12)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Lavocat writes:
    They wouldn't have had to be "sneaking" if the government hadn't forced them underground in the first place, through a campaign of misplaced fear.
    Uh, that is one of the dumbest comments I have read in a while. Lavocat. Do you understand that the Rosenbergs were spies of the Soviet Union? That they gave the Soviets critical information that allowed them to produce an atomic bomb much faster than they could have on their own? Do you understand that the Soviets were bound on world domination? That they truly did sieze eastern Europe and build an "Iron Curtain" as Churchill so aptly noted? Do you understand that there were many others in various branches of government, but particularly in the State Department? Do you understand that these people were loyal to the Soviet Union and worked for the interest of the Soviets? In addition to the outright spies, there were numerous "fellow travelers" who supported what ever line the Soviets were pushing. Read some history and watch how, as the Soviets signed a treaty with Germany they went from attacking Germany to being friends to being enemies as Germany attacked the Soviets. Understand the war in Spain for what it was. A defacto war between the Left and Germany. Hollywood has long made a cottage industry of attacking McCarthy. He presented a rich and easy target because of his methods. I never found McCarthy's methods very effective, but he was right on the fact that there were communists and fellow travelers in government and Hollywood. As to the accuracy of McCarthy’s numbers, I do not know. Two spies giving away atomic weapon information were two too many. Now that the Soviet Union has crumbled, much information from both governments has been made available. Some of this information is available in a book titled "Vernona, Decoding Soviet Espionage in America." It was complied from information forced from the government through FOIA requests by the authors with the help of Senator Monynihan, and from Soviet Archives. It details how our intelligence people cracked the Soviet's most secret code in during the WWII war years, and has page after page of intercepts, discussions about loyalty to the Soviets by American citizens, military and diplomatic secrets. It specifically names 349 US citizens, immigrants and permanent residents. It details how a personal assistant to Pres. Roosevelt, "Lauchin Currie, warned the KGB that the FBI had started an investigation of one of the Soviets' key American agents, Gregory Silvermaster." It completely puts to rest any questions about the Rosenbergs and Hiss. Educate yourself. The book is non-political and is available from Amazon, perhaps in your local library. “Vernona, Decoding Soviet Espionage in America,” by John Earl Haynes and Harvey Klehr, Yale University Press. It should be taught if every high school in this country. In addition, much information is available from the NSA via their website. . PBS made a long special on the book about 7 years ago. They may still have VHS tapes available if you care to contact them.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Jimaka: Thanks for the expected rant and lop-sided history lesson. While you take your meds, I'll continue to stand by my post.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#14)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    being a communist and being a spy who's a communist are 2 different things. There is nothing illegal about being a communist or attending a meeting or speaking about why the workers should own the means of production. mccarthy presented zero evidence, resulted in zero porsecutions and did nothing but ruin lives and careers by slime and intimidation. Of course there were commie spies in the US, just like we had spies in russia, on overflights ... etc.
    Do you understand that the Soviets were bound on world domination?
    Do you understand that the US was (and is) bound on world domination? While I prefer to live under the republic we have here, there is no moral high ground if you are doing the same things your 'enemy' is.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#15)
    by Mike on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    I also saw the movie the other day and wrote about it: Good Night and Good Luck I liked the movie, but found it somewhat bereft of context...especially for younger viewers. I also think that a larger message is not getting attention. It's the same message as in the movie "Network", that the media is going to hell in a handbasket.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#16)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Heh, I knew somebody would interpret me asking a simple question as an endorsement of McCarthyism. It's just a matter of context. You get a more accurate understanding of McCarthy's overbroad and illegal tactics if you know that in addition to people asking "should the workers own the means of production", there was an overganized effort to help the USSR steal secrets, expand into neighbors' terrority, and kill. Sort of like how when you're considering the modern War of Terror, you should remember the various terrorist attacks (9/11, the Cole, London's subways, ...) and state-sponsored terrorism (Afghanistan, not Iraq). Maybe you just consider them long enough to say "that's doesn't justify X'. I just think context is good. Was curious if the movie provided it. Seems like the sort of thing Hollywood would leave out. (It's also important to present the ruined careers and such as context, but judging by the commercials Hollywood does fine in that area)

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#17)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Sorry to double-post, but I just noticed something above could be interpreted as rather inflamatory. "Maybe you just consider them long enough to say 'that doesn't justify X'." isn't support to be snarky. I realize it's legit thing to do. My point was considering the context is better than not considering the context.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#18)
    by Andreas on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    I think it is appropriate to defend Julius and Ethel Rosenberg here. First I quote from a letter which was sent some years ago to the NYT by David North, now chairman of the editorial board of the WSWS. Second I quote from an article published on the 50th aniversary of the execution of the Rosenbergs.
    That the reputation of Senator McCarthy would profit from an encounter with issues of historical truth is too preposterous a claim to require serious rebuttal. Even were it to be definitively established that one or both of the Rosenbergs were involved in espionage, it would hardly detract from the indisputable fact that McCarthyism was steeped in lies and distortions that have left an enduring and devastating mark on the political and intellectual climate of the United States. For Mr. Radosh to minimize this essential element of McCarthyism speaks volumes about his political agenda.
    Letter to the New York Times from David North A reply to article on "Rethinking McCarthyism" 24 October, 1998 ***
    Information has surfaced in recent years suggesting that Julius Rosenberg was involved in passing some form of intelligence to Soviet officials during the Second World War. According to the Soviet intelligence agent who claimed to have dealt with Rosenberg during the war years, this information pertained not to the bomb, but rather to electronics. In any case, the idea that he divulged the “secret of the atomic bomb” is preposterous on its face. Scientifically speaking, there was no such secret. The Soviets already had a program to develop atomic weapons, and it was understood within the US government and among American scientists that it was only a matter of time before they achieved their goal. Relaying any useful information on the Manhattan Project would have required the transfer of scores of volumes of scientific material, something that never happened and, indeed, was beyond the ability of the Rosenbergs or anyone else charged in connection with the alleged spy ring. It should be noted that at the time of the alleged conspiracy, the Soviet Union was a wartime ally of the United States, not its enemy. Aiding the Soviet Union, which was carrying out a life-and-death struggle against Nazi aggression, was hardly seen as a crime by most Americans, and many suspected that the Western powers were content to see the Soviet people bled by the Nazis. Within the Roosevelt administration and among the scientists most directly involved in the American effort to develop an atomic bomb, there were many who expressed the opinion that information on the weapon should have been shared with the Soviets, and that any weapons developed by the US should have been placed under the control of an international commission with Soviet participation. There was grave concern that attempts to conceal information about the bomb would only exacerbate tensions with Moscow and lead inevitably to an atomic arms race.
    50 years since the execution of the Rosenbergs By Peter Daniels and Bill Vann 19 June 2003

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#19)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    Sailor - Your problem then appears to be that old standby of the Left. You find that the actions of the Soviets are equal to the actions of the US, and you see us as no better than them. Okay. Now you have defined yourself. Let is hear no more about "patriotism" and support for the troops. BTW - I never said anything about McCarthy except that I disapproved of his methods, and that his claims of spies and communists in government were correct. Andreas writes:
    I think it is appropriate to defend Julius and Ethel Rosenberg here.
    Defend away. The facts are clear that they were spies. McCarthy, or whoever, has nothing to do with that fact. They were convicted in a court of law. The evidence in "Vernona" confirms the conviction as just and correct. Lavocat - Standby all you like. It doesn't make your position accurate. You would do well to read the book. As I noted, it is non-political and deals only with information that can be verified in the intercepted and then decoded, Soviet messages, and information from Soviet archives. i.e. True no spin. Just facts. Mike - I agree. Context is very important, and always controls the real information being given. Hollywood doesn't like context because it would demand that books like Vernona be considered, and the fact that McCarthy was correct, even though is methods were not.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#20)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    So what do you suggest, secret arrests with no due process? No one to hear the tree fall, must make no sound, right ppj? Out of sight out of mind?
    and the fact that McCarthy was correct, even though is methods were not.
    Obviously, you support the Bushco tactics because they are less visible than McCarthy's. What a fool you champion of the Patriot Act, and Enemy Combatant status. No tears will be shed by any of us when they come after you. You have reached a new low, try different meds, they may help keep your grandchildren safe from arbitrary arrest without due process.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#21)
    by Repack Rider on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:03 PM EST
    PPJ: Do you understand that the Rosenbergs were spies of the Soviet Union? That they gave the Soviets critical information that allowed them to produce an atomic bomb much faster than they could have on their own? Jim, Do you realize that the person who exposed a CIA agent working to control weapons of mass destruction was a Republican? "Communism" is a politial philosophy, in the same sense that being a Republican is a political philsophy. Our country is supposed to permit anyone to espouse anything they like, and punishment is meted out only for breaking laws, not for having unpopular ideas. Let me ask you this. Do you suppose it is barely possible for someone to be communist and not be a spy?

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#22)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Squeak - The persons being discussed were Julis and Ethel Rosenberg who were investigated, charged, indicted, stood trial and were convicted. My point was that McCarthy's charges were correct. I stated that his methods were not acceptable. I think you are most ignorant of what the situtation was in the US at that time, and the anger the general public felt when they learned that Soviet spies, American citizens, had sold out their country. But even then the government restrained itself. As for your not be concerned "when they come for me," please, you make me laugh. We are starkly and totally opposed to each other. Why should you "care?" Rest assured that I do not. Keep on smearing, Squeak. RePack - First we have to agree if Mrs. Wilson was a covert agent. She was not. Then we have to see if anyone has been charged with "outing" anyone. They have not. Then we need to agree on if she was "outed" at all by the Noval article, or if she and her husband had previously done that by their actions. She and her husband had done so. And your point was? The punishment you speak of, and you should read the book, was for various acts of espionage. i.e. Giving away secrets. As for your last question, why should I answer such an obvious stupid one that is supposed to do nothing but allow you to try and demonstrate your cleverness? But being in a very good mood today... If you will read the book, you will see that it is very explicit in its charges, and they are based not on philsophy, but on actions. But for you to admit this would require a revision of your world view. I don't see that happening. Your eyes are wide shut.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#23)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    ppj-dodging questions again?
    I stated that his methods were not acceptable.
    Once again, what are acceptable methods? Is your silence an endorsement of eliminating due process and keeping arrests secret, like we have now?

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#24)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    his claims of spies and communists in government were correct.
    Uhhh, I claim there are birds in the sky and fish in the sea, so what? BEING A COMMUNIST IS NOT ILLEGAL! And there are always spies in the gov't, just ask cheney. mccarthy smeared innocent americans and caused their destruction for his own political gain. There is a reason we have the term 'mccarthyism'.
    McCarthy's charges were correct.
    They will always be accurate. Stating a given does not prove one's point.
    Your problem then appears to be that old standby of the Left. You find that the actions of the Soviets are equal to the actions of the US
    The right's problem is that they think it's OK if the US does it, but wrong if someone else does it. If it's wrong, it's wrong.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#25)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Now you have defined yourself. Let is hear no more about "patriotism" and support for the troops.
    I didn't vote to cut vets benefits, rethugs did, I didn't refuse to supply or even reimburse armor for our troops, (which they STILL don't have), the rethugs did, I'm not cutting food stamps and school lunches for the children of our troops, rethugs did. I didn't send troops into a war based on a lie about WMDs, I didn't lie about where the weapons were in tikrit, I didn't lie about ... ohh screw it. ppj, just because we disagree vehemently about the course the country is taking is no reason to declare me (or anyone else) unpatriotic. You owe me an apology.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    My liberal friends here are mistaken. We should not beat around the bush but openly acknowledge that, in the fifties there were many dangerous individuals who were working to undermine the US government and its culture. Two of these men were Joseph McCarthy and Roy Cohn. They undermined trust in government by lying about commies in the State Department. They crippled a major American by causing the blacklisting of entertainment professionals. They polluted the discourse by employing the ignorant rhetoric of paranoid rightwing populism. With their baseless charges, their foul demagoguery, and their sheer incompetence, they set a standard of bad governance that took America nearly fifty years to surpass. Make no mistake: McCarthy and Cohn aided and abetted the enemies of America. Anyone remotely famiiar with history knows that those attempting to rehabilitate these creeps has to lie and distort in order simply to make McCarthy appear intoxicated and obsessed, rather than roaring drunk and clinically insane. Fortunately, the American people came to their senses. By the time of the first Murrow/McCarthy broadcast, the drunken liar who gleefully ruined the careers of honest Americans without remorse, was on the wane. Murrow didn't exactly go out on a limb, which the film hinted about. But his behavior was courageous nevertheless. He could have ignored the McCarthy issues entirely.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#27)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Sailor:
    ppj, just because we disagree vehemently about the course the country is taking is no reason to declare me (or anyone else) unpatriotic. You owe me an apology.
    He and his kind have every reason to declare you unpatriotic, because he DOES NOT disagree with you, Sailor. He lies. He agrees with you, but cannot admit it, because admitting even one small untruth will cause the whole deception to unravel. For the same reason you will never hear George Bush admit a mistake. The only way they can survive is to endlessly repeat the big lie, and make you doubt yourself. He and his kind owe you, the entire country, and the entire world an apology, and much more. ----- "Why of course the people don't want war ... But after all it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship ... Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger."Hermann Goering “See, in my line of work you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda.” — George W. Bush, May 24, 2005 ----- "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." --George Orwell

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#28)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Squeak - I would have perferred the traditional investigation/charge route. I have never believed in baseless attacks and smears. As you wrote:
    Posted by Squeaky at September 19, 2005 11:19 PM Rove never needed proof for his smear machine, why should I.
    Tell us dear Squeak. What difference is there between your methods and McCarthy's? Hmmmmm????? sailor - As long as you claim this country was no better than the Soviets, I owe you nothing. Too many good people died fighting that cancer on the face of the earth. BTW - Benefits have gone up about 57% under Bush, and I have seen no proof that anyone needing armour doesn't have it. Fact is, the military has a long history of not having what they need/want. I can remember using WWII equipment in the mid 60's. Who do we blame for that? On a more recent note, the military suffered under Clinton, and Kerry voted for cuts time after time. The military in 2001 was ill prepared to fight an actual war. You blame Bush. I blame the people who ran it into the ground. triestro writes:
    With their baseless charges
    Wrong. Very badly wrong. So wrong that it is a disgrace for you to claim this. Read the book. Read the intercepts decoded by the Vernona team.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#29)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    ppj-off his meds again.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#30)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    edgey - Of all the dishonest methods of debating, the one at the top of the list is claiming to know what the other person believes. In many cases psycho babble is used. You, Darkly and Squeak are masters at that. You, of course know nothing, and can't refute my point that McCarthy's charges were accurate, but his methods wrong. Indeed, as I pointed out to Squeak, your smear attemps would make McCarthy proud. I am sure he looks forward to discussing techniques with you at some distant point in the future. Read the book, edgey. Redeem yourself with knowledge.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#31)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Squeak - I am LOL. You have just been exposed in front of God and the Internet and your reply is that I am off my meds. You wrote what you wrote, squeak. Enjoy.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#32)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    ppj-troll all you want, you only look more the fool than ususal.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#33)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    and can't refute my point that McCarthy's charges were accurate, but his methods wrong.
    All: Mind-boggling, isn't it? That there are still people defending McCarthy? Let's see....how many convictions did McCarthy's crusade result in? Oh, really, zero? edger: Great quotes all. Especially the Goering one. I wish Jim would read it. Hell, I wish every American of all stripes would take a deep breath and just read that paragraph, and think about it for a few minutes. sailor: You should be used to having your patriotism questioned by GOP apologists, buddy. That's the number one tactic. Old hat, though. They're gonna have to come up with something else in 2006.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#34)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST

    Whizzy writes:

    edgey - Of all the dishonest methods of debating, the one at the top of the list is claiming to know what the other person believes.
    I see... something like this what you meant, whizzy?:
    Squeak - I would have perferred the traditional investigation/charge route. I have never believed in baseless attacks and smears.
    Or like this, whizzy?:
    Sailor - Your problem then appears to be that old standby of the Left. You find that the actions of the Soviets are equal to the actions of the US, and you see us as no better than them.
    Your attempts at attributing your own methods to others is one of your consistent ways of lying, whizzy... you are so transparent you're nearly invisible now... and you continue to marginalize yourself, along with your bush buddies. What is it, about 69 - 70 percent of the population now aginst you now? The pain must be exquisite.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#35)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    ppj:
    Sailor - Your problem then appears to be that old standby of the Left. You find that the actions of the Soviets are equal to the actions of the US, and you see us as no better than them.
    And when you start with the assumption that we are "better than them", you end up concluding that you are right. It is a very short step from that point of view to concluding that our spies wear white hats, while the others' wear black ones. Is it OK in your mind for the US to have spies everywhere? And when we impose our will on others, naturally, it is for their own good, not ours, right? That's why it was OK for the US contribute to the overthrow of an elected Communist government in Chile, right? At what point do you ever allow yourself to question the essential selfishness of the US position in seeking to impose its politcal will around the globe? Does starting from a "belief" in capitalism as a fundamental principle absolve you from the need to question anything the US does in the name of its economic self-interest? Will you at least admit the possibility that the US is no more culturally superior to the rest of the world than Rome, Spain, or Britain were at the height of their imperial power -- as history will eventually prove, no doubt?

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#36)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Jim, "...it is a disgrace for you to claim this." Just as I would have been greatly honored if McCarthy had accused me of being a communist, I am similarly honored by your holding my opinions in disgrace. That anyone would be so intellectually dishonest and/or ignorant as to defend McCarthy, that drunken, lying, paranoid, lout or his sleazy familiar, Roy Cohn, is simply beyond belief. The world could do with a lot more Murrows and and a helluva lot less McCarthys and Cohns.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#37)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    M. waved papers around like he had proof, his famous lists of names, and there was NOTHING there, as is clear from his refusal to allow anyone to examine his 'evidence.' Bush PROMISED that Hussein had WMD -- and PROMISED that he would share the PROOF he had with us at the proper time. He's a liar; McCarthy was a liar; Jim is a liar; and roy is a liar. It's all switcheroo -- McCarthy was a stinking liar, but there were spies -- STOP THE DAMN PRESSES! That's why the US had an FBI in the 1950s. What was the Junior Senator of Wisconsin doing trying to be a G-man? The same thing Frist was doing to poor Michael Schiavo. Shafting the innocent over politicized suspicions that were BASELESS. Demagogic BS then and now. Jim, roy, after all, at long last, have you no shame, have you no shame left? The movie itself is clumsy in several ways. But it is also a very measured display of ... what it displays, and it has a super jazz vocals score (complete with D. Reeves, a superstar), and btw, it's a helluva cigarette ad. Cold War Cancer Sticks never looked more mandatory.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#38)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Squeak - You have stated that you use smear tactics, and then you condemn McCarthy's smear tactics? What's the difference between you? Look like a fool? I think not, Oh One Trapped By His Own Words. I think not. Look in a mirror, Squeak. tristero - Again. Read the book. The fact that his base charge was very accurate does not mean you can't condemn his methods. The problem is, you are stating an opinion against demostratable, proven facts. That makes you look, well, bad. edgey - Not at all. The comment is that Sailor's problems appear to be.... And then I follow it up with comments based on Sailor's own recent verfiable remarks.
    Do you understand that the US was (and is) bound on world domination?
    My remarks based on his statement are neither a smear, nor a statement that I know what his beliefs are. Big difference, eh? Keep on claiming, edgey. And as you do, remember how your side has been losing national elections for a long time. Because, just as in '04 when the Left enjoyed the bounce created by their convention, the lead will vanish away as the truth is put back in front of the American People. From FTN:
    SCHIEFFER: President Bush accused his critics of rewriting history last week. Sen. McCAIN: Yeah. SCHIEFFER: And in--he said in doing so, the criticisms they were making of his war policy was endangering our troops in Iraq. Do you believe it is unpatriotic to criticize the Iraq policy? Sen. McCAIN: No, I think it's a very legitimate aspect of American life to criticize and to disagree and to debate. But I want to say I think it's a lie to say that the president lied to the American people. I sat on the Robb-Silverman Commission. I saw many, many analysts that came before that committee. I asked every one of them--I said, `Did--were you ever pressured politically or any other way to change your analysis of the situation as you saw?' Every one of them said no.
    Cymro writes:
    And when you start with the assumption that we are "better than them",
    You ignore the fact that the US took no territory during WWII and spent billions in the Marshall Plan to restore Europe. The Soviet seized control of eastern Europe and killed hundreds of thousands of people under control. If you can't understand that this action by them made them undeniably an "Evil Empire," then you can understand nothing. Assume? Assume hell. Those are facts. Study some history. God knows you need to.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#39)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    PIL - Watch your potty mouth. Your ignorance can be tolerated, to an extent, but when you keep on ignoring what was written and then calling me a liar is unacceptanle. Again, dummy. His charge was accurate. That is undeniable, and has been proven. His methods were not acceptable. Now. Keep on looking foolish by making false claims.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#40)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Whizzy, Your continual attempts at deflection, diversion, and switching are also some of your consistent ways of lying... and leave you even more transparent. It's time for you to make a choice.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#41)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    JIm, I'm not going to dignify your defense of an indefensible drunken incompetent scoundrel by "engaging" in a discussion over him and the full extent of McCarthy's and Cohn's indisputable and monstrous lies. OTOH, Murrow was a very great man who did the world a great favor by helping takedown this ugliest of ugly Americans. McCarthy was a danger to his country, to democracy, and to freedom. He was the menace he feared. Now, Murrow wasn't the first, by any means, to denounce McCarthy, but he was one of the most important. By all means, watch the original broadcasts and read a biography of Murrow or Fred Friendly's memoirs. They are a wonderful antidote to McCarthy's sleaze.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#43)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    "In times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." --George Orwell

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#44)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    ppj:
    You ignore the fact that the US took no territory during WWII and spent billions in the Marshall Plan to restore Europe [1]. The Soviet seized control of eastern Europe and killed hundreds of thousands of people under control [2]. If you can't understand that this action by them made them undeniably an "Evil Empire," then you can understand nothing [3]. Assume? Assume hell. Those are facts. Study some history. God knows you need to [4].

    1. My point was clear -- the US acts in its own economic self interest. Your example supports this. The Wikipedia conclusion on the Marshall Plan is: "Today, the general consensus ... is ... that the United States was acting in its own self-interest by aiding Western Europe, but most believe the plan had an important and beneficial effect on both Western Europe and the United States."

    2. In the past, white US immigrants killed hundreds of thousands of Native Americans under their control, and siezed their land, allowing settlers to occupy them. Wasn't this one of the factors that led to the rise of Jacksonian politics?

    3. Will you label the US an "Evil Empire" because of its history of Native American genocide? Why should the US receive a pass when you are dispensing your righteous judgements?

    4. History? What will be the place of the US in history? You did not even repond to my question about the comparison between the US and the place of other historical empires? What makes you think that the US will be immune from their fates?



    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#45)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    edgey - The facts are that you have been beaten badly in this discussion, as has tristero and Squeak, and Darkly and PIL because you continue to ignore the truth. As proven time and again, McCarthy's claims about communist spies in government were and are true and correct. No one is arguing with you about his methods. Yet you contunue to mouth about them. Why? By denying the truth you make yourself look bad. tristero - Murrow was great? Perhaps. So what? Everyone knows that McCarthy's methods were not acceptable. You have beaten that horse into the ground. So. Tell me why you deny the fact that there were communist spies in the US government? You can certainly condemn the crime will also condemning the police's methods. Darkly - Are you so stupid that you have not read the 2000 or so words that I have written here? How many times should I be expected to say that McCarthy's methods were wrong, but his claims true? Your attacks are unwarranted and unsupported by anything that I have written, just as PIL's were. It is apparent that you only want to attack and make some type of show for your friends on the "corner." How sad that you are your own worst enemy.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Cymro - Typical leftist nonsense. The native americans ran into a more advanced civilization and were destroyed. We would condemn this today, but I see no reason to condemn what they did in the past. Different times, different rules. BTW - You do understand, don't you, that the Native Americans that our fore fathers took the land away from also took the land away from someone else. You do understand that, don't you? Read, "The Contested Plains." Educate yourself. As for the Marshall Plan, your information reflects the view of an elitist group, not the view of Joe and Jane six pack who's taxes paid for it. Never the less, and no matter what the reason, the Marshal Plan was a first in the world's history. A pity that the Left can't see any good in it. The facts are plain. We are not perfect, but we are the best that has ever been seen on the third planet from Sol. And history will show that.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#48)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Jim, your comment:
    On a more recent note, the military suffered under Clinton, and Kerry voted for cuts time after time. The military in 2001 was ill prepared to fight an actual war. You blame Bush. I blame the people who ran it into the ground.
    You showed no proof as usual. It is sad that you can’t see through Republican talking points. These are actually propaganda. I can’t believe you thought they were true. From CNN in 2001:
    Rumsfeld said the two-war requirement led to one of the Army's top divisions as being rated unready for war last year -- not because of lack of training or equipment, but because it was busy with peacekeeping chores in Bosnia.
    and
    President Bush used the example cited by Rumsfeld during the campaign to back up allegations that the U.S. military was neglected by the Clinton administration.
    See Jim, propaganda. And:
    Rumsfeld's view appears to coincide with what the Pentagon argued last year: That there was not a readiness problem in the Army, but rather a problem with listing units already deployed as the first to fight in a major war.
    Time magazine in 2001:
    Bush rarely spoke of restructuring again and retreated into vagaries about strengthening the U.S. military after "years of neglect" by the Clinton Administration.
    See, Jim just trying to get your vote. Fox:
    Secretary, at the beginning of the year, you were talking about getting $38 billion in additional defense expenditures. Now you're scrambling to get $18 billion. Snow: Now, during the campaign, the president and Republicans criticized Bill Clinton for sending troops to a number of theaters of war abroad. But we're not pulling out of any of them, are we? Rumsfeld: Well, no.
    and in the Journal:
    Contrary to the expectations of many in the military and in Congress, the administration's 2002 budget devotes relatively little to military modernization beyond what the Clinton administration had planned.
    See, Jim you should think before parrot right-wing talking points. A little history lesson:
    McCarthy continued his anti-communist barrage until 1954. Unlike other congressional investigators, McCarthy seemed not to notice that the administration had changed in 1952. With Dwight D. Eisenhower in the White House, McCarthy's campaigns against subversion in the government became an attack on his own party and an increasing liability for Republicans. In the spring of 1954, however, the tables turned when McCarthy charged that the United States Army had promoted a dentist accused of being a Communist. The ensuing hearings proved to be McCarthy's downfall. For the first time, television broadcast allowed the general public to see the Senator as a blustering bully and his investigations as little more than a misguided scam. In December 1954, the Senate voted to censure him for his conduct and to strip him of his privileges. McCarthy died three years later, but the term "McCarthyism" lives on to describe anti-Communist fervor, reckless accusations, and guilt by association.


    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#49)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    ppj:
    The facts are plain. We are not perfect, but we are the best that has ever been seen on the third planet from Sol. And history will show that.
    Your response is a perfect illustration of the ignorance, arrogance and lack of introspection that makes Americans so disliked around the world. The sad thing is that people like you cannot see yourselves and how you appear to others. Attitudes like yours are what will hasten the downfall of the modern American empire. This insufferable chauvinism could perhaps be corrected by requiring all Americans to spend 3 years living and working overseas. Maybe this could be the new Marshall plan? I'm sure that Romans once said "We are not perfect, but we are the best that has ever been seen". Different times, but ultimately the same rules apply in the end. Yes, might makes right, but only in the short term.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#50)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    "The Soviet seized control of eastern Europe and killed hundreds of thousands of people under control. If you can't understand that this action by them made them undeniably an "Evil Empire," then you can understand nothing." If the Vietnamese soldier death toll was written on a wall like the (500 foot) US one, IT WOULD BE NINE MILES LONG. And that's just soldiers. Abetting the massive poisoning of Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia with the rainbow chemical agents is a war crime so heinous that 'Evil Empire' hardly fits. But leaving that excuse for a Jim distraction aside, the claim that (only) 'McCarthy's method was wrong' thinly veils the TOTAL LACK OF ETHICS in those attacks, his LACK of evidence, his DEMAGOGUERY, which is despicable, and the character assassination of innocent people, which disgusted the entire country.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#51)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    ...the TOTAL LACK OF ETHICS in those attacks, his LACK of evidence, his DEMAGOGUERY, which is despicable, and the character assassination of innocent people, which disgusted the entire country.
    Well then no wonder why PPJ regards him as a personal hero (and apparent role model) of his.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#52)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Sorry, an error, the nine mile wall would be including civilians. Blowing away tens of thousands of innocent civilians in Iraq, destroying the national library, the Koran-Torah Repository, looting the national museum -- these are acts of genocide which are the work of another demagogue liar. McCarthy wasn't the only one to ever use a Senate seat to arrogate false power through demagoguery. Lyndon Johnson was a RENOWNED demagogue who also destroyed lives with similar tactics, as Robert Caro has amply documented. And he didn't invent the Red Scare. But to view these TRAVESTIES of American politics to be considered as noble purposes is EXACTLY the kind of lying nonsense that Georgie tried to sell Mrs. Cindy Sheehan, before he destroyed her family.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#53)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Whizzy: "The facts are that you have been beaten badly in this discussion...By denying the truth you make yourself look bad." I hadn't noticed, whiz. Give me a second here to take a stroll through the posts since I was last here... ''' Whew... well, I'm back... sorry if I kept you waiting, whiz. Now where were we? Oh yes.. you were gnashing your teeth and hissing and mumbling something about "badly beaten", and "denying the truth". Well, hmmmm. I can see that you have managed to win over to your point of view Squeaky, DA, Cymro, Paul, Ernie, glanton, tristero, and Debbie... What can I say? I guess I'll have to concede the heavyweight championship to you, whiz. Your're waaaay too much for me... McCarthy must be so proud of you... But look, I do appreciate you coming out to play today, whiz, I really do! We'll have to do this again some time, ok? :) TTFN, Whizzy.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#54)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    Jim, here is another economic lesson and history lesson. Communism is an economic policy. There are three and they have to do with “who owns the machines”. Communism – government owns the machines, socialism – people own the machines, and capitalism – the machines are owned by a few. In America, we have all three. Capitalism – our privately owned companies, socialism – energy co-op’s or other services, and communism – the post office. Next time you go to the post office, you better cover your head or you might be branded a spy. See, Jim just because a person considers themselves a communist does not mean they support the Soviets or that they are a spy. There is still a communist party in America, but there is no Soviet Union. Like someone said above – being a communist is not illegal. Arthur Miller wrote “The Crucible” because he saw that the practices of the Salem “witch hunt” trials were similar to those employed by the “red hunt” congressional committees. Here from our government:
    In January 1954, in what were to be the first televised hearings in American history, McCarthy obliquely attacked President Eisenhower and directly assaulted Secretary of the Army Robert Stevens. Day after day the public watched McCarthy in action -- bullying, harassing, never producing any hard evidence, and his support among people who thought he was "right" on communism began to evaporate. Americans regained their senses, and the Red Scare finally began to wane. By the end of the year, the Senate decided that its own honor could no longer put up with McCarthy's abuse of his legislative powers, and it censured him in December by a vote of 65 to 22.
    You wrote:
    As proven time and again, McCarthy's claims about communist spies in government were and are true and correct.
    Name some Jim. Provide some examples of communist “spies” in the government that were tried and convicted?

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#55)
    by Edger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:04 PM EST
    BERKELEY – Politically conservative agendas may range from supporting the ... war to upholding traditional moral and religious values to opposing welfare. But are there consistent underlying motivations? Four researchers who culled through 50 years of research literature about the psychology of conservatism report that at the core of political conservatism is the resistance to change and a tolerance for inequality, and that some of the common psychological factors linked to political conservatism include: * Fear and aggression * Dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity * Uncertainty avoidance * Need for cognitive closure * Terror management ... The avoidance of uncertainty, for example, as well as the striving for certainty, are particularly tied to one key dimension of conservative thought - the resistance to change or hanging onto the status quo, they said. The terror management feature of conservatism can be seen in post-Sept. 11 America, where many people appear to shun and even punish outsiders and those who threaten the status of cherished world views, they wrote.


    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#56)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    Jim, Everyone should know that the lies, distortions, and wholesale damage to loyal American's by the drunken McCarthy and his sleazebag henchman Cohn are despicable. But they don't. Likewise, everyone should know how great a journalist Murrow was, if for no other reason than that heroes are few and far between. But they don't.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#57)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    Being a communist is not a crime but believing in it makes you naive or foolish. You pick. Communism has never worked and everytime it is tried it leads to dictators and the mass murder of innocent people. Lets go to the poles: China - millions dead. USSR - millions dead. North Korea - millions dead. Cuba - thousands dead. If they had millions they'd be dead but it's simply not that big. To compare the war on terrorism with the track record of communism when it is instituted into a goverment is reckless, naive, silly...etc. It would take the Bush Administration 10,000 years of "killing" people (even if we accepted the exagerated body counts of the ACLU) to catch up to the countles millions of people who suffered under Communism. McCarthy was overzelous and was rightly brought down but that should never be used as a mask to hide the true evil that is applied communism. And now 50 years later it is equally lame to trot out "McCarthyism" every time somebody tells the left that they are wrong about something.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#58)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    tristero - And everyone should know that George Washington was a great hero, but they don't. So what is your point? That we shouldn't point out the facts correctly? I'll give Murrow the benefit of the doubt and say that if he were alive today, he would include the facts that we know now, in the story. debbie - You wrote:
    See, Jim just because a person considers themselves a communist does not mean they support the Soviets or that they are a spy.
    debbie, your sneering attempt to explain something that I doubt you even begin to understand falls on deaf ears. If you do not understand that the conflict with the Soviets wasn't driven by our dislike of their political beliefs, but rather by their stated desire to enslave the world, and the fact that they killed millions of their own citizens as well as people in the countries they seized after WWII, then there is little I can do for you. Are you familiar with Soviet Premier Krushchev remark in the UN, “We will bury you.” They were an Evil Empire. As for your request for communist spies, I shudder that your knowledge base is apparently so lacking. I'll give you three of the top of my head. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg and Alger Hiss. And, since you seem incapable of reading the thread before commenting:
    Some of this information is available in a book titled "Vernona, Decoding Soviet Espionage in America." It was complied from information forced from the government through FOIA requests by the authors with the help of Senator Monynihan, and from Soviet Archives. It details how our intelligence people cracked the Soviet's most secret code in during the WWII war years, and has page after page of intercepts, discussions about loyalty to the Soviets by American citizens, military and diplomatic secrets. It specifically names 349 US citizens, immigrants and permanent residents. It details how a personal assistant to Pres. Roosevelt, "Lauchin Currie, warned the KGB that the FBI had started an investigation of one of the Soviets' key American agents, Gregory Silvermaster." It completely puts to rest any questions about the Rosenbergs and Hiss.
    Want more? I doubt that you do. Anyway, read the book. Amazon has it. Or buy the tapes from PBS. Or go to NSA's website and search "Vernona."

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#59)
    by jimakaPPJ on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    edgedy - There you go again, using psycho babble as a smear tactic. debbie - One more point, or rather a question. Why is the Left afraid to admit that there were spies in the government? As I have repeated time and again, why try and leave out the facts while condemning McCarthy? Is it because you can't admit that the communists were there, and hoping to overthrow the US? Is it because you favor the economic system? Why, debbie? Why can't you face the truth?

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#60)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    slad-Have you been following the news. Your senator Graham and his cronies have just passed a bill eliminating Habeas Corpus. Your president and vice president are arguing for the right to torture prisoners held in secret gulags without any due process.
    Communism has never worked and everytime it is tried it leads to dictators and the mass murder of innocent people.
    Ideologies do not inherently lead to fascism. Evil and corrupt leaders, like the criminals in our current administration, create fascist societies. Oh, and they couldn't do it without the help of lapdogs like you.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#61)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    Squeky Even if I accept that your statements are true they compare nothing to communism. A rational arguement can be made for the tactics the administration is pursuing. And a rational one against them can equaly be made. I'm willing to accept that we can disagree etc... What I can't accept is comparing them to the policies of Castro? KJI? Stalin? Lenin? etc...? It is so inconceivable that you could even make that comparison that it renders you argument false. If you believe that the administration is behaving badly then just say so but everytime you compare it to the tactics of communism you make your arguement weaker. And every time someone even half heartedly defends communism or the ideals that it stands for that argument is weaker still. As for you statement that only people make for bad government explain to me why every country that has tried communism has murdered millions of it's own people? Name me one time in the history of thw world that true communism has been applied successfully? If you can't how many examples of what a bad idea it is do you need before you reject it? Sure the idea of communism might not be evil as it stands. But when applied by humans or by society it just doesn't work. point to attack conservatives.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#62)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    My point, dear JIm, is very simple. The post was about a film detailing the confrontation between a drunken rightwing hypocrite and a courageous reporter. You want to redirect the conversation away from that into a general discussion in which McCarthy's tactics are to be deplored but not his intentions. I see no reason to do so. McCarthy was scum. His intentions, to gain power through smearing innocent people, were despicable. Murrow's intentions were honorable. He saw a genuine danger to his country. Unlike McCarthy, he didn't booze up 235 threats that didn't exist. Murrow saw a threat to America, he was in a position to help confront that threat, and he did so. Murrow a hero. McCarthy was trash. That's what the movie was about. It also has resonance for today, now that TV and other news media have been entirely subverted in precisely the way Murrow warned. Now what you are attempting to talk about is completely off-subject and I see no reason to "engage" you on it at this time.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#63)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    Apparently, I know a lot more than you, Jim. I asked you to:
    Provide some examples of communist “spies” in the government that were tried and convicted?
    You said Alger Hiss came to your mind, but he was not tried and convicted as a spy.
    Alger Hiss was a US State Department official and Secretary General to the founding charter conference of the UN. Following accusations that he spied on behalf of the Soviet Union, Hiss was convicted of perjury.
    There was a secret intelligence project called "Venona." A single document, dated March 30, 1945, referred to an agent code-named "Ales," a State Department official who had flown from the Yalta Conference to Moscow. An anonymous footnote, dated more than 20 years later, suggested "Ales" was "probably Alger Hiss."
    Still no proof – it says probably. You also answered my request for examples of communist “spies” in the government that were tried and convicted with the Rosenbergs. Jim, they were not in the government, so you have given zero names to prove your post:
    As proven time and again, McCarthy's claims about communist spies in government were and are true and correct.
    I wish you would read my posts you might learn something. Communism is an economic policy. Our “beef” has been with the Soviet Union. They were the evil empire and our enemy not communism. See, Jim just because a person considers themselves a communist does not mean they support the Soviets or that they are a spy. Read my economic lesson above. I’m still waiting for those names of communist “spies” in the government that were tried and convicted.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#64)
    by Dadler on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    Jim, There were spies in our government, there were spies in their government. There ARE spies in our government now, there ARE spies in their government now. There. And McCarthy is still one of the most destructive, wretched human beings to ever stain the history of this nation. His intentions were selfish, his methods were criminal. He practiced exactly the thing he claimed to be fighting. Spies are not Orwellian Inquisitors. And the latter is much more damaging to a DEMOCRACY than snoopers. Because when an adversary causes you to p*ss on the fabric of your society without firing a shot or setting foot on your territory, well, that's a pretty big failure on our side.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#65)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    slad-Gosh your commiephobia is nostalgic. Sadly the US is now the country most feared throughout the world. From human rights violations (torture) in secret gulags to imperial conquest for world domination we now have cornered the world market of fear that the soviet dictators once vitalized.
    A rational arguement[sic] can be made for the tactics the administration is pursuing.
    Hitler had a rational argument for his misdeeds, I do not think he was a fan of communism. Franco, hmmm, not communist either. We have supported many right wing dictators who kill their own people as well as others, namely Saddam Hussein, Noriega, Pinochet, The Saudi Kingdom et al, the list is quite long. Chavez, now there is a commie if I ever saw one. Gee instead of rewriting the laws so he can open up secret gulags to legally torture he is redistributing oil profits money to the poor in his country. Bush is a liar and we are heading for fascism, with your help. Your participation, along with a great minority of Americans, is turning America into a fascist police state. Can you understand what it means to eliminate Habeas Corpus? That is what a dictator wants, a free hand to indefinitely imprison anyone he names a threat to the state with no checks or balances. Do you want to turn over that power to someone like Bush who consistently lies to his own people. Ideologies do not kill, pathological liars aka madmen like Bush, Hitler and Stalin do.
    Name me one time in the history of the world that true communism has been applied successfully?
    Name one time in history that true capitalism has been applied successfully? Humans tend to mess up all those isms that look so good on paper when they try to put them into practice.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#66)
    by Sailor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#67)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    PiL,
    He's a liar; McCarthy was a liar; Jim is a liar; and roy is a liar. It's all switcheroo -- McCarthy was a stinking liar, but there were spies -- STOP THE DAMN PRESSES!
    That'll learn me to ask a simple question. Which, btw, nobody answered before jumping on me. How are Communists portrayed in the movie? I'm trying to avoid taking two hours to get an answer somebody could punch in in ten seconds. And mine wasn't so much "stop the presses" as "continue the story on page 2".

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#68)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    The movie is not about communists, Roy. The movie is about a great journalist, Edward R. Murrow, and his confrontation with Joseph McCarthy. If you like to watch commies - hey, we all have our kinks, Roy, far be it from me to judge - try Warren Beatty's "Reds." It's pretty good.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#69)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    Let me sidle into the argument just long enough to mention the positive social action being promoted by the company that produced the film (disclosure:my employer) - our site encourages people to take up citizen journalism and features bloggers from the film and relevant orgs like Free Press and Ourmedia. Report it Now

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#70)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:05 PM EST
    Jim, There are always spies, from many countries, even our friends (think Pollard). McCarthy was correct that there were spies for Russia. I would say that Russia still has spies in the US. The difference is that McCarthy LIED about having evidence of those spies. Instead, he went after people who had been fans of communism when the Commies were the only ones fighting Hitler. Most of these "fellow travelers" had given up on the reds when info came out about Lenin's collectivization program, and the resulting famine in the Ukraine. Those still left gave up on the Russians when Stalin's actions became public. If you want to point fingers, the US press had journalists who witnessed these events, and covered them up. I think that we would agree that this was despicable. Still, "tailgunner Joe" was a drunk who fabricated evidence to advance his own career. The real heroes were the nameless investigators who discovered the real spies, and Murrow, who outed McCarthy for the liar he was. Actually, McCarthy's stunts probably impeded the real spy investigations, by making them more careful.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#71)
    by roy on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:06 PM EST
    The movie is not about communists, Roy. The movie is about a great journalist, Edward R. Murrow, and his confrontation with Joseph McCarthy.
    Fair enough. I withdraw the whininess of my posts.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#72)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:06 PM EST
    Wow, it's like lancing boils. Posted by roy: "How are Communists portrayed in the movie?" They are not. The entire film takes place within the studio at CBS, with the exception of two brief scenes of studio-members at home (in bed, and 'cooking'). This film is not a historical document or particularly rhetorical. It's a gritty, super-tense drama, focussed on the deep circles around the eyes, rather than the various details of the historical circumstance. The footage of McCarthy is ACTUAL. That in itself is a shock to audiences, because WHEN have we seen such demagoguery since Coulter & Jim's 'Great Man' passed away?

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#73)
    by Slado on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:06 PM EST
    Squeaky, You really do believe this stuff don't you. You bypassed communism and went straight to Hitler in your comparisons of Bush. Wow. do you realize how silly that is? Hitler is responsible for the murder of 16 million people and has blood on his hands for the death of millions more by starting WWII. Do you know how idiotic it is to compare Bush to that? And I'll agree Bush lied when you admit Kerry, Clinton, Mrs. Clinton (bill), Kennedy, Edwards, Reid, Pelosi, Blair, Chirac, Powell and Byrd did too. The Liar argument is even more wrong then your comparing Hilter/Stalin to Bush.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#74)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:06 PM EST
    Slado, Bush is his own unique brand of awfulness. But you have a point. Even as a human monster, Bush is just as much a miserable failure as he is as a president. He's a joke and no one except a few diehards like yourself listen to him anymore. Note, fr'instance that he's been batting zero overseas in foreign policy. And it's not that he merely lies. It's that he lies about everything. All the time, nonstop. It's that the worldview he describes bears no relationship to consensual reality. It's that everything he does screws up. And then compounds the stupidity of his decisions by making up more lies. I'll gladly take a president who lies about a blowjob to one who lies about torture and wmd.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#75)
    by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:06 PM EST
    Slado-Give Bush a chance. You forget that the man still has three more years, and if congress voids the 22nd amendment who knows how much trouble he can cause.
    Hitler is responsible for the murder of 16 million people and has blood on his hands for the death of millions more by starting WWII.
    I agree with tristero about Bush's almost athletic ability to fail, a talent to be sure. What I am afraid of, and do not undersestimate, is how much more damage to civil rights, amassing of debt, economic redistribution, and prosecuting imperial wars the guy can 'fail at' before he tanks.

    Re: "Good Night, and Good Luck" (none / 0) (#76)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:06:07 PM EST
    Posted by Slado: "Hitler is responsible for the murder of 16 million people...Do you know how idiotic it is to compare Bush to that?" How about you compare Hitler in 1929 with Bush in 1999? It is as absurd to compare the final toll of a Hitler with the ONGOING TOLL of a Bush. If you can't understand why Bush looks like Hitler to many, then you aren't paying any attention to his string of lies in service to racist, for-profit war. Many compare the burning of the German parliament building with Nine-eleven, as causation used by would-be dictators to gain power. WHY DID NORAD FAIL TO PROTECT AMERICA, and how come not one general or anyone from the Pentagon, certainly not Donnie Rumsfeld, apologize or offer ANY explanation? You want to compare to Clinton -- but three planes weren't allowed to wander around in US airspace for up to an hour without confronting A SINGLE fighter jet during Clinton's term, OR THAT OF ANY OTHER PRESIDENT since flight was invented. Will Bush NUKE Iran? It's entirely possible. And if he does, he will move a LOT closer to Hitler's final toll. For now he is somewhere between Pinochet and Milosevich. Is that the new standard for American government? No, that's the old standard for a capital crime hanging.