Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism by Coulter Ann

Author:Coulter, Ann [Coulter, Ann]
Language: eng
Format: mobi
Publisher: Crown Publishing Group
Published: 2003-06-23T16:00:00+00:00

10

COLD WAR EPITAPH:

THE HISS AFFAIR

AT THE END

OF THE COLD WAR

In the year 2003, the New York Times cheerfully announced the introduction of a new, “lighthearted” journal about Communism. This is an ideology responsible for nearly 100 million murders, or—as the Times put it—a “divisive” ideology.1 How about a “lighthearted” journal about suicide bombing or Nazism, also “divisive” ideologies? Or must an ideology commit ten times the murders of Hitler’s Nazi Germany before liberals call it lighthearted? In the inaugural issue of the “lighthearted” American Communist History, Robert Lichtman and Ronald D. Cohen wrote, “Is it ever justifiable in a democracy for the government to maintain a stable of paid witnesses to testify on its behalf about the political affiliations (almost always lawful and First Amendment protected) of individuals holding unpopular views?”2 They won’t quit. Paid agents of Moscow are described simply as individuals with “unpopular views.”

Incomprehensibly, there is no stigma to having wittingly supported a totalitarian regime that committed monstrous crimes and had atomic weapons pointed at U.S. soil. In a stunning demonstration of the power of propaganda, accusing someone of having been a Communist makes you the nut. You may as well intone darkly that someone was a “vegetarian” as a “Communist.” To this day, the label “Communist” is rather favorable, a little jaunty. After Nixon was destroyed, Hiss rehabilitated, and Barbra Streisand and Robert Redford made the movie The Way We Were, there was warm nostalgia for Communist traitors. They were hailed as martyrs, victims of “McCarthyism.”

When Republican Senator Trent Lott uttered a single off-the-cuff remark in praise of Senator Strom Thurmond on his hundredth birthday, there were urgent calls for Lott’s resignation as Senate majority leader. Fifty-four years earlier, Thurmond had run for president and, in a moment of bonhomie, Lott said the country would be better off if Thurmond had won. The problem was: Thurmond had run as a segregationist. A huge brouhaha ensued. If we had gone to war with Iraq around the time of Lott’s comment, no one would have noticed. The fuss was about one former Democrat praising another former Democrat for what was once a Democratic policy. (When asked who should replace Lott, Jesse Jackson said, “How about that hymie Lieberman?”)

Thurmond’s Dixiecrat Party was not the only extremist spin-off from the Democratic Party in 1948. In the apex of Moscow-directed subversion of U.S. politics, Henry Wallace, FDR’s vice president and agriculture secretary, left the Democratic Party that same year to form the Communist-dominated and Soviet-backed “Progressive Party.” Wallace’s Progressive Party was expressly pro-Soviet, excluding even the mildest criticism of Soviet aggression.3 Wallace met personally with KGB agents.4 And his platform, naturally, was supported by “many of America’s leading cultural celebrities.”5 The Progressives received one million votes nationwide, about the same as Thurmond’s Dixiecrat Party. Thurmond went on to reject segregation, become a Republican, and serve his country well as a United States senator. By contrast, running a Communist-dominated presidential campaign was Wallace’s last hurrah. An off-the-cuff remark praising Thurmond’s presidential campaign is

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.