Essay: The New McCarthyism - 4.7.10

Opponents of health care reform are going after lawmakers who voted for it last month…including Michigan Congressman Bart Stupak. Michigan Radio’s Political Analyst Jack Lessenberry thinks some of the behavior is way over the line…

Hear Audio Story   

Nearly sixty years ago, American politics were terrorized by a reckless demagogue named Joe McCarthy, who had been an obscure United States senator from Wisconsin.

McCarthy was essentially a pathetic drunken wretch who wanted to be somebody big, and capitalized on the nation’s Cold War hysteria. He announced that the government had been infiltrated by Communists. He held a series of high-profile hearings in which people were hauled before his committee, interrogated, accused of being Communists, and thereby had their lives ruined.

Being called a Communist in 1954 was sort of like being called a child-molesting member of al-Qaeda today. In fact, McCarthy never exposed a single Communist. He did manage to ruin lots of innocent lives, and his tactics were widely copied. In Michigan, an innocent young veteran named Milo Radulovich was threatened with expulsion from the Air Force and loss of his education benefits because his immigrant father subscribed to a newspaper from his hometown in Yugoslavia.

Eventually, the press took on McCarthy, who then self-destructed. He was reprimanded by the Senate, and within a few years managed to drink himself to death.

But he left a dark stain on our politics that has never been completely washed away. And now a new form of McCarthyism is abroad in the land. This time it has nothing to do with Communism, which is as politically dead as the divine right of kings.

It does have to do with nasty, reckless and deliberate smear attempts, most often from the right, especially from self-appointed spokesmen for what the media call the Tea Party movement. These seem to be people who are arrogantly proud of their ignorance, and don’t want to be confused with the facts.

Right now, most of their energies seem to be centered around the just-passed health care reform bill. Now, it is perfectly legitimate to oppose this or any other bill, to criticize it, to call for its repeal.

But it should be out of bounds to spread reckless lies about what it does. It should be even more impermissible to demonize its supporters. That’s exactly what’s going on now, especially in regard to Michigan Congressman Bart Stupak.

A radical anti-abortion group called the Susan B. Anthony List is spending money to launch automated calls and radio ads against Stupak, who represents the Upper Peninsula and a big chunk of the western half of the lower. One ad says, “siding with the extreme abortion lobby, Bart Stupak’s health care vote forces us to pay for the deaths of unborn children. He should be ashamed.”

That is about as total a lie as I have seen in politics. Stupak is completely anti-abortion. He voted for health care only after the President signed an executive order affirming that it was and would be illegal to use any federal funds for abortion.

Stupak made a difficult decision, and is being called a baby killer for it, behavior I think borders on the criminal in a nation where lots of unstable people have access to guns.

If you disagree, imagine that a liberal group ran ads saying that George W. Bush was a fascist killer of Muslim children and had to be stopped. Our leaders in both parties owe it to the nation to denounce this behavior in the strongest possible terms.

Otherwise, they, and we, may reap the whirlwind.

Comments

[Nathan F, Lansing]

Interesting article can't wait for the classic straw man response that usually comes in the next few hours. My guess is some kind of pro McCarthy information (and there is some of this to go along with all the bad). It could also be some sort of dirt about Stupak. I could also see some kind of tea party spin, who knows.

[Anonymous]

This is funny. If you Google the phrase, "George W. Bush was a fascist killer of Muslim children," you will come up with not only Jack Lessenberry's comment on the webpage of Michigan Radio (operated by the Regents of the University of Michigan - isn't that special?), but you will also get this link, at a left-wing site called "crooksandliars" which features nationally-broadcast video of left-wing hatemonger Keith Olbermann saying, well, that George W. Bush was something like a facsist killer of Muslim children. It is surprising to me that Keith Olbermann hasn't been offered his own NPR radio program with comments like that.

http://crooksandliars.com/2008/02/14/countdown-special-comment-on-fisa-president-bush-is-a-liar-and-a-fascist#comment-407920

(Don't miss the Comments that follow the video.)

Of course, there was also the 2006 feature motion picture, "Death of a President" which fantasized about the assassination of President Bush. Can you imagine the outcry of Jack Lessenberry if such a movie were made about an assassinated Barack Obama? Anybody remember Jack being outraged over the Bush-assassination movie?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0853096/

But back to Michigan. And Bart Stupak. And abortion. Where to begin in demolishing Jack Lessenberry's hysterical screed?

Let's just jump right in.

First of all, Bart Stupak's first challenge in the fall of 2010 has come not from the pro-life right. No, it came from the pro-choice left. In the person of Connie Saltonstall. Supported by money from Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America:

http://womensrights.change.org/blog/view/its_time_to_stop_anti-choice_stupak_elect_connie_saltonstall

No mention of that fact from Jack Lessenberry.

And then, of course, if somebody like Jack Lessenberry were really concerned with out-of-state special-interest money on the single-issue abortion vote, he might start with our own Senator Debbie Stabenow. Who, every six years, gets bankrolled by the pro-abortion group "Emily's List":

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00004118

Every month, Jack Lessenberry writes a handful of wonderful, historically informative columns about untold stories in Michigan. The rest of the time, it is a steady diet of the sort of slanted, low-brow standardized left-wing talking points that one would expect to see from a Metro Times columnist.

And that is a disgrace for a public broadcasting outlet; to have that kind of slant serve as the only representation of "political analysis." It would be my fervent hope that no one would supply this kind of public radio with their financial support. This is a contemptuous attitude on the part of an apparently insular editorial staff at Michigan Radio.

In a world where there is more newstalk than ever before, and where cable tv, the internet and yes even commercial radio support all manner of political discussion, Michigan Radio has gone in the direction of choking the airwaves with ever-more of the stuff. To the extent that Michigan Radio ever felt the need to supply classical music, arts and jazz programming (as it once did -- if one were to look at a programming schedule from 20 years ago), Michigan Radio has now abandoned that responsibility. It is now, and has for some time, been "Radio by liberals, for liberals, and others need not apply. Or listen."

[Ivoted Forobama]

Beyond your typical admonition Jack about not responding to anonymous posts-perhaps you should respond to Mr. Anon's latest. Seems to have ya cornered doesn't he?

[Jack Lessenberry]

he does not deny the truth of what I said, because he cannot. He does not use his name, because I am reliably told that he is paid (guess who by)to make those comments. So when confronted with the ugly reality, he responds "Michigan Radio is liberal." John Stuart Mill said once that to be liberal was to be fact-and-reality based. I plead guilty.

[Nathan F, Lansing]

WHAT?!? If you Google that you are correct, it confirms all the things in Jack's post. Just posting that you find articles with "George W. Bush was a fascist killer of Muslim children" does not prove anything except that you can type in a Google search. Now that you have set up a straw man, and I do have to admit it is a very very lame one at that, now proceed.

How does his first challenger have anything to do with the article again????? man even after I set you up you still walk right into it.
The article even has this in it' "and the Hyde Amendment already bars federal funding from being used for abortion anyway."

All Jack says is that the anti abortion group is telling a lie, yet you spin it to bash Stabenow as predicted.

And as I predicted, you go into a mass bash of Jack.

Can you come up with a new plan? it is so old and predictable to just set up straw mans and irrelevant points to bash Jack.

[Anonymous]

Jack Lessenberry is wrong. I am not paid for my comments. I am not paid in relation to my comments. I am not paid in any way or with any respect to this webpage, or any website, or any candidate, or any political party or political organization of any kind.

And so, when Jack Lessenberry tells you that he is "reliably informed," he is "not reliably informed." And when Jack Lessenberry asks you to believe that not only have I been paid for my comments (it is untrue), but also that he, and you, can "guess by who" I am paid, he is even further into the realm of error and false reporting.

Remember that about Mr. Lessenberry.