August 3, 2016

Who is hurt... who is helped...



... by this picture?

(Which I found on Facebook, here.)

There's also this:



As you contemplate the anti-Trump propaganda, please take into account the analysis of the editors of The Nation in "Against Neo-McCarthyism/In their eagerness to defeat Trump, liberal pundits are reviving a damaging discourse":
In their zeal to prevent Donald Trump from becoming president—a goal we share—representative voices of the liberal establishment have joined with the forces of neoconservatism to engage in what can only be described as McCarthyist rhetoric. This magazine, which has a long and proud history of standing up to the
 worst excesses of McCarthyism, repudiates this unwelcome echo of the past. Let us recall that McCarthyism impugned the loyalty of American citizens by accusing them of allegiance to the Soviet Union. This political defamation—often a joint undertaking of Congress and the media—suppressed democratic debate over alternative policies and ideas, and in the process destroyed lives by stigmatizing those whose views were deemed insufficiently loyal to Cold War–era orthodoxies. The overall effect was to poison, chill, and censor the political discourse of the nation....

83 comments:

AJ Lynch said...

As a word lover Althouse, do you find it interesting "authoritarian" has become a popular way to tag a potential Trump presidency?


And I don't think the pictures hurt either candidate though Trump should point out how much loot Hillary and Podesta got from the Russians.

damikesc said...

Yeah, Hillary's campaign manager has gotten about $35M so far.

sojerofgod said...

The Nation huh?
Gee, I thought shame-silencing the opposition was not a bug, but a feature!
or,
It's only McCarthyism when it's used against your side!

tola'at sfarim said...

The nation still are supporters of the soviet union.

MikeR said...

Wow - kudos to The Nation. Always nice to see someone who actually has principles.

Hagar said...

Vladimir is derived from "world ruler."

Trump has had something to do with one or more beauty pageants in Russia?
At least to using his name in promotions?

Clinton, Inc. is tied to "facilitating" construction of major oil and gas pipelines in, and out of, Russia?

Which is the most serious?

GWash said...

The difference here it seems to me is that Trump overtly admires and supports Putin and his actions... where the excesses of McCarthyism were innuendo and association... Trump's 'love affair' with Putin is verbal and first person...

rehajm said...

Lefties are helped by bridging the gap until the morning Paxil kicks in.

Kate said...

Trump supporters believe that the press and the establishment are against us. When anyone from those groups open their mouths to bash Trump, we tune out. There they go again! Luckily for Trump, they can't help themselves. Every time Trump makes me cringe, the press attacks and renews my resolve.

The propaganda is pretty good art work. Fun.

Sydney said...

Agree with Kate on every point.

sojerofgod said...

Marshall McLuhan once famously wrote that "The media is the message"
I didn't understand that, taught to me in Journalism 101 back when I toyed with the idea of becoming a journalist. (1977) But now I think I do.

Since this was published by The Nation the viewer assumes knowledge of the bias and viewpoint of the source. Had this same article been published elsewhere, say the Washington Free Beacon, comments here would have taken on an entirely different, deferential, tone.

That said, my real comment is that I keep mentally reading the name "Washington Free beacon" as the "Washington Free Bacon"

...and muse to myself that this is so apropos of DC that I just have to share it.

SOG.

n.n said...

Damage control.

So, Obama, Clinton et al have a loving relationship with terrorists. Believing it is the Soviet Union, Obama, Clinton et al reset the cold war with Russia. Obama, Clinton, and Merkel, too, invite terrorists to prey on their women, children, and priests, too. Oh, and the Democrats are confirmed class diversitists (e.g. racists, sexists).

Someone pinned the tale on the donkey, and now we are forced to hear the braying... to its gods in the twilight zone.

Brando said...

I can't see the pictures from this computer for some reason, but if it's the usual memes I'm guessing they're going overboard as they often do. At a certain point, it gets so outlandish that it drowns out reasonable criticism.

A good article the other day pointed out the Left's "cry wolf" problem--they spent so many election cycles claiming that different Republican nominees (but mostly Bush) were existential threats to the country that a lot of people tune it out this year, when they say "THIS TIME, this guy really is beyond the pale!" Remember how Bush was undermining the Constitution, and ushering in Big Brother?

And even then, there were arguments to be made against Bush's policies, but when you start talking about it like the onset of the Nazis it's hard to take seriously. Overplaying your hand can blunt your own blade.

Big Mike said...

Convenient of The Nation to forget that a great many of those accused of owing allegiance to global communism actually were active on behalf of the Soviet Union and worked to undermine the United States. In journalism there was Walter Duranty, inside the federal government there was Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, and Harold Glasser.

But right now I don't believe for a moment that Trump is a tool of Vladmir Putin. I do believe that Putin has bribed Hillary Clinton and is in a position to blackmail her. As to the pictures, they are such crude photoshops that they probably help Trump more than they hurt him.

MikeR said...

"The difference here it seems to me is that Trump overtly admires and supports Putin"...
There's another big difference. Russia is not currently an enemy of the United States. We were in a state of war with the Soviet Union, which was heading a criminal conspiracy to take over the world. Perhaps Trump feels that our traditional alliance with NATO, which dates to the Cold War, is no longer the best way to deal with the issues between Europe and Putin's Russia. That is a defensible position, and is certainly not treason.
Would someone have issue with Trump (or Clinton) having financial ties to France? Treason!

Henry said...

The Nation worries that associating Trump with Russia will give communism a bad name.

n.n said...

With their negative insinuation, these pictures were clearly created by "homophobes" and class diversitists.

Or the "homophobes" and class diversitists think that they can provoke a reaction. Little do they realize, it was always tolerance (given that transgenderism is not a progressive condition), and individual dignity, not congruence ("=") or selective exclusion (i.e. pro-choice).

EDH said...

This appears to be the role-out of the Clinton campaign's "Operation Projection."

Through the media, In gauzy fashion, attempt to jiu jitsu Hillary's negatives into Trump negatives.

You can visualize the Power-Point presentation she was shown:

1.) Hold Trump in contempt for the death of a US Muslim soldier in... 2004?

2.) Cast Trump as in the pocket of Putin.

Mick said...

For one McCarthy was right about the fifth column of traitors in the US. One only needs to observe what Hollywood is today.
Two, Russia does not want war with the US, as the warmonger HRC and the neocons in Congress do, and knows that the best chance of not engaging in war with the US is the election of Trump.

Mick said...

To see Trump as a "risk to the security of the US" is laughable. considering the deals that were made with the help of the Clinton Foundation to give Uranium mining rights within the US to Russia, Bill Clinton selling military secrets to China, Clinton's hackable email, and the Obama/ Clinton provoked invasion of this country by illegal aliens. Just to name a few.

Trump will wipe the floor with that coughing, lying old lady come debate time.

David Begley said...

Ben Rhodes must be laughing his ass off in the WH on how easy it is to manipulate the media with this story. Rhodes, the White House novelist and narrative writer.

Russia = Bad

Distract from the substance of the emails.

Why would the Russians be so stupid and leave fingerprints on their hack? It wasn't Russia. It was Israel.

Bob Ellison said...

Is that image of Putin attractive to men and women who like sex with men?

n.n said...

The Nation conveniently forgets the poisonous environment created by the worst excesses of the Twilighters in the late 20th century and early 21st century. They need to update their vinyl records and fix the tale on their players.

bagoh20 said...

McCarthyism wasn't always off the mark, and with the Soviet Union it was an unparalleled threat and true evil. Expecting and demanding absolute fairness and tolerance was at least as foolish and dangerous as McCarthyism itself. Totalitarianism from the left has never gotten the level of disdain it deserved, and had far too many fans in this country, which is still the situation. The most destructive, inhuman, murderous, culture killing ideology of all time. Any fan or apologist, while entitled to their opinion, is a fool, and their ideas so dangerous that they do deserve to be at the envelope-stretching limit of our tradition of free speech, yet still protected, as is my loathing of them.

I also love a good zucchini - small and fresh with salt and lemon.

Clyde said...

It wasn't Trump whose State Department sold a shitload of uranium to the Russians. It isn't Trump whose "charitable" foundation receives shitloads of money from foreigners. Think about it.

Michael McClain said...

The DemCong and their Running Dogs in the CriminalLiberalNewsMedia (redundant term) have taken us back to the days of "ChimpyMacHitlerBush." Everything old is new again.

Unknown said...

There is no propaganda that is more powerful and beneficial to the opposition, than what comes forth from Trumps's own mouth.

David said...

The horse is hurt.

Bonkti said...

My first reaction to the top picture was that Trump was "ridin' bitch" in biker parlance. But that flipped to "ridin' the bitch", perhaps because everything flips to Trump's advantage. Or, perhaps, the T penetrating P logo.

Unknown said...

"1.) Hold Trump in contempt for the death of a US Muslim soldier in... 2004?"

The contempt wasn't for the death of Captain Khan or his service in the military, the contempt is for the derogatory things Trump has said a about American Muslims, even including those who are patriots of this country. The threats of putting American Muslisms on some government registry, the threats of banning all Muslims from enetering the country. Trump has since tried to walk back those outrageous comments, but it's too late, they are on record and won't soon be forgotten.

vicari valdez said...

i have to agree with the nation on this one. so depressing, but not surprising coming from the clinton camp.

Brando said...

"McCarthyism wasn't always off the mark, and with the Soviet Union it was an unparalleled threat and true evil."

Like a lot of blowhards, McCarthy picked up on something real (the Soviet menace and Communist sympathizers in the West who in some cases enabled our initial feckless response to Stalin) but made a mockery of it by lying about finding actual communists. Did he uncover one actual spy or traitor? Ultimately he was brought low by other anti-communists who were embarrassed by him, not by leftists. Nixon at least nailed Alger Hiss and promoted Ike's generally skillful handling of Khruschev.

Just as today, we must distinguish competent allies from opportunistic blowhards.

Clayton Hennesey said...

The Trump pic is an update of this one.

Not sure the updated Trump version has the same effect, given this one.

Brando said...

"Russia is not currently an enemy of the United States. We were in a state of war with the Soviet Union, which was heading a criminal conspiracy to take over the world."

Well, we were never at war with the Soviets though they were an undeclared enemy. And we may not be "enemies" with Russia today to that same degree, but they are a tricky rival which we would be wise not to underestimate by assuming we can "charm" Putin. FDR thought he could "charm" Stalin too, and while Putin is no Stalin they both share a contempt for anyone thinking they can be won over, and a singular focus on expanding Russian power at our expense.

Gusty Winds said...

Professor. Thank you for being unafraid to call out the coordinated propaganda in this year's election.

It's unbelievable. The messages are coordinated. Truths completely distorted. Words and phrases repeated on all channels by 'journalists'. This is Animal Farm shit.


cubanbob said...

Unknown said...
There is no propaganda that is more powerful and beneficial to the opposition, than what comes forth from Trumps's own mouth.

8/3/16, 8:37 AM"

You really should take your blinders off and give Hillary her due.

Unknown said...

There are legitimate questions about Trump's connections to Russia, his lies regarding having met Putin and Manafort's ties to Russia. Why did the Trump campaign change the anti Russia stance of the GOP plank? How many investments does Trump have on Russia and how much money does Trump owe Rusisian banks? The smell of rotten fish is wafting out of the garbage can that is the Trump campaign

Darrell said...

Khrushchev said "We will Barry you" then. Putin couldn't pull the trigger on Hillarying us now.

damikesc said...

The difference here it seems to me is that Trump overtly admires and supports Putin and his actions... where the excesses of McCarthyism were innuendo and association... Trump's 'love affair' with Putin is verbal and first person...

Trump allegedly supports while Hillary directly helped him. Wonder why she is getting such a free pass.

Ben Rhodes must be laughing his ass off in the WH on how easy it is to manipulate the media with this story.

It's helped by the media's desire to be manipulated by Dems.

There is no propaganda that is more powerful and beneficial to the opposition, than what comes forth from Trumps's own mouth.

Hillary helping them control some of our uranium supply is more beneficial. Far more beneficial. As was Obama taunting Romney that Russia is not a foe or enemy at all.

the contempt is for the derogatory things Trump has said a about American Muslims, even including those who are patriots of this country.

Some KKK members, likely, were decent people. Didn't notice a lot of nuance in KKK criticism.

The threats of putting American Muslisms on some government registry, the threats of banning all Muslims from enetering the country.

It wasn't Trump holding sit-ins demanding that watch lists be used to limit Americans' rights.

There are legitimate questions about Trump's connections to Russia

Hillary's campaign manager got $35M from them. They gave the Clinton Foundation millions and got our uranium in exchange.

I guess those aren't questionable.

cubanbob said...

Unknown said...
"1.) Hold Trump in contempt for the death of a US Muslim soldier in... 2004?"

The contempt wasn't for the death of Captain Khan or his service in the military, the contempt is for the derogatory things Trump has said a about American Muslims, even including those who are patriots of this country. The threats of putting American Muslisms on some government registry, the threats of banning all Muslims from enetering the country. Trump has since tried to walk back those outrageous comments, but it's too late, they are on record and won't soon be forgotten.

8/3/16, 8:46 AM"

You assume there is some near universal acceptance in this country that allowing Muslims without vetting into the country is a good thing.

Unknown said...

Is Trump in debt to Russia?

http://time.com/4433880/donald-trump-ties-to-russia/

But it is Trump’s financing from Russian satellite business interests that would seem to explain his pro-Putin sympathies.

The most obvious example is Trump Soho, a complicated web of financial intrigue that has played out in court. A lawsuit claimed that the business group, Bayrock, underpinning Trump Soho was supported by criminal Russian financial interests. While its initial claim absolved Trump of knowledge of those activities, Trump himself later took on the group’s principal partner as a senior advisor in the Trump organization.


Unknown said...

Journalists who’ve looked at the Bayrock lawsuit, and Trump Soho, wonder why Trump was involved at all. “What was Trump thinking entering into business with partners like these?” Franklin Foer wrote in Slate. “It’s a question he has tried to banish by downplaying his ties to Bayrock.”

But Bayrock wasn’t just involved with Trump Soho. It financed multiple Trump projects around the world, Foer wrote. “(Trump) didn’t just partner with Bayrock; the company embedded with him. Bayrock put together deals for mammoth Trump-named, Trump-managed projects—two in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a resort in Phoenix, the Trump SoHo in New York.”

But, as The New York Times has reported, that was only the beginning of the Trump organization’s entanglement with Russian financiers. Trump was quite taken with Bayrock’s founder, Tevfik Arif, a former Soviet-era commerce official originally from Kazakhstan.

Darrell said...

Do you think Hillary will have a chance after WikiLeaks releases the memos showing that Hillary armed ISIS?

sojerofgod said...

Cuban Bob:

Feeding a troll just makes them stronger...

The Left keeps pushing the racist angle on immigration because it is the gold standard of silence-shaming insults.
FACT:
No person not a US citizen has a right to entry in to this country.
The President has the authority to bar entry to any person, group, religion, race, hair color, whatever who, in the sole opinion of the president, constitutes a threat to the security of the nation. Period.
Whether that is good or bad, or indifferent is a political question not a legal one.

Brando said...

"You assume there is some near universal acceptance in this country that allowing Muslims without vetting into the country is a good thing."

Is there really "no vetting" at all? Are we actually just seeing people come in at the airports and saying "you say you're a refugee, come on in, hope you're not a terrorist" or are we doing something more than that? Because to watch this election you'd thing that was what the Obama administration was doing, or you'd think we were doing perfect vetting and could use no improvement. But because this election isn't really about policies or details, I have yet to see someone saying "here's the status quo, and here's what I'd do to improve it" (and no, saying "no Muslims in here until we fix it" doesn't answer the question, as it doesn't clarify how we determine who Muslims are when they come in, or what would constitute "fixing it". That's staking out cultural ground, not presenting a plan).

I want to make sure we're not bringing in terrorists (or other criminals) as much as anyone. But until someone points out what we can do to improve our system (e.g., check against native country databases, check personal references, tracking systems, etc.) it sounds just like bluster.

Mike Sylwester said...

Let us recall that McCarthyism impugned the loyalty of American citizens by accusing them of allegiance to the Soviet Union. This political defamation ... suppressed democratic debate over alternative policies and ideas ... The overall effect was to poison, chill, and censor the political discourse of the nation.

The Nation tries to shut people up by calling them racists

Unknown said...

Trump's connections to Russian financiers are far deeper than previously known. In the coming weeks we will be hearing more about them and the Russian connection will be clearly in evidence. Those who continue to hook their wagon to Trump will go down with him. That's why we are hearing about one Republican after another jumping ship.

n.n said...

Hillary [and Obama] armed ISIS

Not only did they arm Islamic State, Mexican drug cartels, and a few fortunate criminals, but they secured the arms through a sodomy session and abortion session for both Gaddafi, our ambassador, and a few forgotten Americans ("What difference..."). Then they exported their exported their friends and allies to carry out terrorism in Europe and America, too, against women, children, and at least one priest. The old controversies pale in comparison to their progressive corruption.

Unknown said...

“Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets… we see a lot of money pouring in from Russia.”~ Donald Trump Jr.

MikeR said...

'Well, we were never at war with the Soviets though they were an undeclared enemy. And we may not be "enemies" with Russia today to that same degree, but they are a tricky rival which we would be wise not to underestimate by assuming we can "charm" Putin.' Uh, right. They were an undeclared enemy. And right, we are not enemies with Russia today. Tricky rival is not the same as an enemy. I am not assuming we can "charm" Putin, I am saying that Russia is not our enemy, and ties to it are not treasonous. There is nothing wrong with that, any more than there is anything wrong with ties to France or Belgium. I don't know why this is in question.

Darrell said...

Should everyone around the world that has been harmed by ISIS come after Hillary with an axe handle?
Probably.

Unknown said...

Hold the propaganda presses! It was the Democrats, afterall. Trump is their tool to destroy the Republicans, lol...or maybe not.


http://reverbpress.com/world/donald-trump-russian-mafia-manchurian-candidate/

Suspicions of the shadowy relations between Trump and Russia’s oligarchy and it’s dictator, Putin, have heightened since last year, when the Republican essentially received an endorsement from the Russian President. On the HBO show “Real Time with Bill Maher”, Salman Rushdie had already expressed his theory of Trump being a Manchurian candidate, but one that was intentionally planted by the Democrats in order to destroy the Republicans. But as outlandish as that is, there is another theory that is beginning to seem more and more likely – the theory that Trump actually is working for the interests of Russia’s oligarchy. And this is no wild eyed, Alex Jones style conspiracy theory – there’s solid evidence that this could well be true.

Let’s start with Felix Sater, whose father is a Russian Organized Crime boss, and who is one of the direct links between the Republican party Nominee for the Presidency of the United States of America, and Russian Organized Crime. Sater, the Russian √©migr√© and a felon convicted twice over ties to the Mafia, has appeared in many photos with Trump, and reportedly carried a Trump Organization business card with the title of ‘Senior Advisor to Donald Trump’. Sater also served time in prison for a 1991 assault at El Rio Grande restaurant in New York. He is also an executive of Bayrock Group LLC, a real estate development firm that has partnered with Trump in different projects; the founding chairman of Bayrock, Tevfik Arif, is known for its ties with Russian organized crime. In 2010 he was even charged in Turkey for the crime of smuggling underage girls into the country for prostitution purposes (something, it’s worth noting, very similar to what Trump’s friend and fellow billionaire, the pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was convicted of – the same Jeffrey Epstein whom Trump is accused of raping a 13 year old girl with).

Darrell said...

Wasn't Jeffrey Epstein the guy raping with Bill Clinton?

Hillarybots need to remain focused. . .

n.n said...

A violent coup in Ukraine to reset the cold war with the Soviet Union...

Backing violent coups in Egypt, Yemen, Syria, and Libya.

Destroying the native people's homes and creating refugee crises, then exporting terrorism to Europe and America for democratic leverage.

It's not a coincidence that the Party of abortion, cannibalism (Planned Parenthood et al), and twilight religion is also the premier Party of war since the early 20th century.

Darrell said...

Hillary has sacrificed a lot.
If you add up all her human sacrifices since the 1970s, she would get Satan's Lifetime Achievement Reward.

Brando said...

"Uh, right. They were an undeclared enemy. And right, we are not enemies with Russia today. Tricky rival is not the same as an enemy. I am not assuming we can "charm" Putin, I am saying that Russia is not our enemy, and ties to it are not treasonous. There is nothing wrong with that, any more than there is anything wrong with ties to France or Belgium. I don't know why this is in question."

I'm not assuming you assume we can "charm" Putin--it's just odd that so many presidents and presidential candidates seem to believe they could do so (Bush, Obama, Clinton, now Trump). Just once I'd like to see one come out and say "yeah he's a sneaky bastard, I'll keep my eye on him."

Foreign ties in and of themselves aren't treasonous, of course. What matters is the nature of those ties. If an American does business with or otherwise supports Israel, that's one thing. If they help Israel spy on us (which allies sometimes do to each other) then just look at Jonathan Pollard.

I don't know what Trump's connection with Russia is--he's backtracked on his ties with them and maybe puffed them up for a while anyway. I doubt he did anything to compromise our security, but he may very well be in debt to people tied to Putin. It would be hard to do business there without such ties.

buwaya puti said...

I see that a new directive has gone out in the new journo-list.
The machine responds.

Sebastian said...

"This magazine, which has a long and proud history of standing up to the
 worst excesses of McCarthyism, repudiates this unwelcome echo of the past." Hey, that's nice. Except their heroes did actually aid the USSR. So have Hill, Kerry, and O. Not Trump, not yet.

It's very odd, even by Dem/MSM standards, to put out this meme that Putin wants Trump etc., since O has been cozying up to the Russians again himself.

Dust Bunny Queen said...

There's another big difference. Russia is not currently an enemy of the United States. We were in a state of war with the Soviet Union, which was heading a criminal conspiracy to take over the world. Perhaps Trump feels that our traditional alliance with NATO, which dates to the Cold War, is no longer the best way to deal with the issues between Europe and Putin's Russia. That is a defensible position, and is certainly not treason.

Exactly. Russia is not at war with the US. They are certainly an "adversary" or opponent. Trump wants to deal with an adversary or opponent. You may be able to find common ground with your adversary and make some deals that benefit everyone. I find this encouraging.

You can, however, turn an adversary into an "enemy" or antagonist quite easily. An enemy is someone you cannot deal with or compromise with. This seems to be the Clinton strategy for now. Painting Russia and Putin as the epitome of evil and tossing out unfounded accusations. I expect that Russia will get tired of this pretty soon.

Which would you prefer? An adversarial relationship with your neighbor or outright enmity of your neighbor?

NATO is an outdated organization that had its purpose and use decades ago. The world has changed and so should the terms and organization of NATO. This is not treason. It is a logical response to changing conditions.

Paul Snively said...

Big Mike: Convenient of The Nation to forget that a great many of those accused of owing allegiance to global communism actually were active on behalf of the Soviet Union and worked to undermine the United States. In journalism there was Walter Duranty, inside the federal government there was Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, and Harold Glasser.

I was just going to point out that to still say McCarthy was wrong post-Venona-decrypts is pretty rich. You can add the Rosenbergs to the "yep, actually guilty" list. That Soviet mole Harry Dexter White was our representative at the Bretton Woods negotiations just makes me sick to my stomach.

So good for The Nation, I guess, but they operate from a false premise: that actual 1950s "McCarthyism" was only, and ever, red-baiting. As others have pointed out, McCarthy wasn't always right. But he wasn't wrong as often as has been claimed.

damikesc said...

Like a lot of blowhards, McCarthy picked up on something real (the Soviet menace and Communist sympathizers in the West who in some cases enabled our initial feckless response to Stalin) but made a mockery of it by lying about finding actual communists. Did he uncover one actual spy or traitor? Ultimately he was brought low by other anti-communists who were embarrassed by him, not by leftists. Nixon at least nailed Alger Hiss and promoted Ike's generally skillful handling of Khruschev.

I'll defend McCarthy somewhat here. He actually tried to not make a huge spectacle of the names. He made one of the issue, but he frequently tried to investigate the name in closed sessions in Congress because, as he himself noted, some of them might well be innocent.

Democrats demanded the public airing of the names.

He didn't try and make a huge hue-and-cry about who was accused...just to see if it was legit.

Is Trump in debt to Russia?

Podesta made $35M from them. They likely have Hillary's emails. Hillary helped them get our uranium.

She couldn't be more in debt to Russia if she tried. She is pure blackmail bait.

Journalists who’ve looked at the Bayrock lawsuit, and Trump Soho, wonder why Trump was involved at all. “What was Trump thinking entering into business with partners like these?” Franklin Foer wrote in Slate. “It’s a question he has tried to banish by downplaying his ties to Bayrock.”

Look at Hillary's ties to Frank Giustra. Who would want to be involved with him?

Is there really "no vetting" at all? Are we actually just seeing people come in at the airports and saying "you say you're a refugee, come on in, hope you're not a terrorist" or are we doing something more than that?

Given that we give Mexicans no vetting, I see no reason to suspect we're more thorough elsewhere.

Brando said...

"I'll defend McCarthy somewhat here. He actually tried to not make a huge spectacle of the names."

I recall he kept changing the numbers of communists on his lists, and ultimately didn't have any real suspects. It was more publicity stunt than a serious investigation, which is unfortunate because there likely were real spies in our government at the time (and certainly were during the FDR days).

"Podesta made $35M from them. They likely have Hillary's emails. Hillary helped them get our uranium."

Hillary is absolutely corrupted by Russians (and likely other countries' functionaries) through her charity/influence buying scam. If people could focus more on what was going on there, I suspect we'd uncover some real quid pro quos.

"Given that we give Mexicans no vetting, I see no reason to suspect we're more thorough elsewhere."

I read though from mid-east countries there's a months-long process where they investigate. What isn't clear is what the investigation entails (or for that matter the more likely scenario--a terrorist not coming directly from Syria, but coming via a third country, like Canada, where our vetting may be more lax).

In all the furor over the "no Muslims!" policy, we seem to be skipping over any specifics for fixing what we're currently doing. And Hillary is skating by without mentioning it either--as though whatever we're doing now is perfect.

mockturtle said...

@Snively As others have pointed out, McCarthy wasn't always right. But he wasn't wrong as often as has been claimed.

True, but not according to Newspeak. Or the current educational agenda.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Oh fuck that. The pro-Stalin Left in the US complained about McCarthyism while lots of them actively supported the enemy. McCarthy was a bully and a jerk and out of step with the American tradition, but he wasn't wrong--lots of high-ranking Lefties were working for the USSR.
The Nation wants you to believe they repudiated McCarthyism. What they actually repudiated, and fought, was anti-communism. The free pass the pro-communist, pro-Stalinist Left gets is so fucking ridiculous.

By the way, does the Nation or any other left-wing mouthpiece have any problem with modern day "blacklists" against people with non-Lefty ideological beliefs (conservatives, say, or people who don't fully embrace the current day's Left-approved ideas on gender or homosexuality)? I haven't heard anything from them. Give me a break, Nation.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

These same assholes never stop telling me I should have to apologize for Hitler and the Nazis (quick tip: the men in my family fought on the US' side against the Nazis), but never ONCE do they feel any obligation to apologize for the USSR, for Stalin, for Mao, even for Castro or Che.
The Nation will never, NEVER fail to bring up Chile and El Salvador. The total number of people killed in those countries having anything to do with US actions--even by the Left's wildly inflated accounting--is less than a rounding error when totaling up the worldwide deaths (mainly of their own people) nations that embraced Communism suffered. The total from those two countries over years would probably not amount to a slow week during Stalin or Mao's more active months.

But hey, don't go too anti-Communist, now, don't let the Red Scare sweep you up!
Fuck the Nation, seriously.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Does Robert Cook subscribe to the Nation? Some of his comments sometimes remind me of that "The Nation" POV. Could be my imagination.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Brando said... which is unfortunate because there likely were real spies in our government at the time (and certainly were during the FDR days).

Likely?! Brando, it's a documented, verified fact. Soviet archives have been opening up over the last 25 years or so, we know for a certainty that high level government employees and prominent private citizens were working for the enemy/against America. Some were active participants, some were stupid, idealistic dupes, but there is no question at all that the Soviet intelligence operation was massively successful.
I first got into reading about this stuff when researching the history of US nuclear weapons development. Soviet spying gained them at least 5 and probably more like 10 years of research time--they just took what we'd done, thanks in part to successful US and British spies, but also in part to SYMPATHETIC US scientists (they felt it would be safer if nuclear tech. knowledge was shared with the world!).

It's depressing stuff, but it's not really a secret or in much doubt any more. McCarthy may have been wrong about individual cases, but he was absolutely correct that the Soviets had large, successful programs to infiltrate all sorts of offices and institutions.

Brando said...

"The Nation wants you to believe they repudiated McCarthyism. What they actually repudiated, and fought, was anti-communism."

I'll add that they didn't mind a sort of "McCarthyism" that was directed against sympathizers of Nazis or other (perceived as) "non-leftist" dictatorships. So Dalton Trumbo gets to be a hero, Elia Kazan gets to be a sellout, but if Trumbo and his ilk were extolling the virtues of Hitler (or even Franco) it'd be perfectly okay to destroy his career.

The hard Left simply could not see Communism as something evil to be taken seriously.

Brando said...

"Likely?! Brando, it's a documented, verified fact. Soviet archives have been opening up over the last 25 years or so, we know for a certainty that high level government employees and prominent private citizens were working for the enemy/against America. Some were active participants, some were stupid, idealistic dupes, but there is no question at all that the Soviet intelligence operation was massively successful."

By the '50s, though? I wouldn't be surprised if there were, I'm just not aware of any actual traitors in our government that were exposed at that time (like an Alger Hiss, or (for Britain) Kim Philby).

ADempsey said...

The Althouse image is another version of this one from a few years ago. Putin and his horse have been busy apparently.

http://www.websophist.com/Putin_ObamaHorseRideCr500O.jpg

mockturtle said...

Brando, David Horowitz tells in his autobiography, Radical Son that his parents, both high school teachers, were members of the American Communist Party until 1956.

Brando said...

"Brando, David Horowitz tells in his autobiography, Radical Son that his parents, both high school teachers, were members of the American Communist Party until 1956."

I don't doubt it--I also don't doubt that there were traitors in higher up positions, like at State. I was wondering though was anyone exposed in an investigation like Alger Hiss? There may have been, it just hasn't been publicized.

damikesc said...

I recall he kept changing the numbers of communists on his lists, and ultimately didn't have any real suspects. It was more publicity stunt than a serious investigation, which is unfortunate because there likely were real spies in our government at the time (and certainly were during the FDR days).

He was citing an FBI report on that topic.

I read though from mid-east countries there's a months-long process where they investigate. What isn't clear is what the investigation entails (or for that matter the more likely scenario--a terrorist not coming directly from Syria, but coming via a third country, like Canada, where our vetting may be more lax).

It relies on documentation from countries with little official documentation on anything. Little used for "vetting" is reliable.

I'll add that they didn't mind a sort of "McCarthyism" that was directed against sympathizers of Nazis or other (perceived as) "non-leftist" dictatorships. So Dalton Trumbo gets to be a hero, Elia Kazan gets to be a sellout, but if Trumbo and his ilk were extolling the virtues of Hitler (or even Franco) it'd be perfectly okay to destroy his career.

If they extolled Trotsky, they also got mad. The biggest supporters of HUAC, originally, were Communists.

By the '50s, though? I wouldn't be surprised if there were, I'm just not aware of any actual traitors in our government that were exposed at that time (like an Alger Hiss, or (for Britain) Kim Philby).

The people like Chambers who spilled the beans were mocked and laughed at ... but were also usually 100% correct.

I don't doubt it--I also don't doubt that there were traitors in higher up positions, like at State. I was wondering though was anyone exposed in an investigation like Alger Hiss? There may have been, it just hasn't been publicized.

Truman was not very good at actually investigating his people for this. And FDR was totally blind to the issue (his VP Wallace in 40 was a Communist, though not on the payroll). And who would hold them to it? Plenty of journalists were also spies.

Quaestor said...

The Nation boasts of its "long and proud history of standing up to the
 worst excesses of McCarthyism." What was what, exactly? Most people who denounce Joe McCarthy cite examples from the hearings of the Un-American Activities Committee, which did not include McCarthy among its members. Or they talk about the Hollywood blacklist. McCarthy was a senator from Wisconsin, he was in no position to blacklist anyone.

What's wrong with blacklisting Communists that isn't wrong about blacklisting Nazis? The Nation reader will say something about the Holocaust, which is a good reason to keep Nazi-inspired movies from being seen by impressionable children. (BTW, did you know an Arabic-dubbed version of Der Ewige Jude is popular children's entertainment in Gaza?) What that reader will not mention is the Communist holocaust, the terror famine inflicted on Russian and Ukrainian peasants. I don't see any moral difference between the slaughter of 6 million Jews for being Jews and the slaughter of a like number of peasants for being peasants. Perhaps someone will explain it to me one day.

Jim at said...

Why, it's almost as if Trump gave Russia a nice, shiny Reset Button and not ...

Wait. What?

Sammy Finkelman said...

It wasn't McCarthyism to accuse Henry A. Wallace in 1948 of favoring the Soviet Union. (although that was actually before McCarthy got started on Communism)

It isn't eotehr to wonder exactly what's going on between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin.

The qauestion, of course, is the standard of proof.

Sammy Finkelman said...

Hillary and Vladimir broke up sometime around February, 2014.

mockturtle said...

Hitler killed millions. Stalin killed tens of millions.

Johnny Sokko said...

Homophobic?

Annie said...

I saw the same photos but with Obama, while he was running.

Jeff Hall said...

It's the horse I feel sorry for.

rcocean said...

I find the constant denigration of Putin interesting. Evidently, we're supposed to think of him as some sort minor league Hitler who's OUT TO CONQUER THE WORLD!!! and a ruthless dictator.

Except he's not a dictator and he was elected - in more or less - free elections.
And he doesn't interested in conquering Kyrgyzstan let alone marching on Berlin.

Yet, we're all supposed to hate him, and get all worked up about anybody who even pretends to like him.

I always wonder why? And then I wonder why we're not supposed to hate the Head of China, who's a COMMUNIST and wasn't elected by the Chinese people. Or get upset about the ChiComs 60 year illegal conquest of Tibet.

But evidently, we're not supposed to think but just hate Putin.

Unknown said...

Eurasia has always been at war with Oceania.