Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
292,431
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 91:
Line 91: + + +
→Your comments below, please: in the long run, much of the McCarthy article needs to be scrapped.
===Your comments below, please===
===Your comments below, please===
This certainly is interesting, well researched and balanced. The sentence, "Eisenhower Administration cabinet officials told Flanders to “lay off,” while President Eisenhower sent Flanders a brief note of appreciation for his speech, but did not otherwise confer with him or explicitly support him" is fine. Recently I read Eisenhower's account in his ''Memoirs'', Eisenhower moreless indirectly takes credit for bringing down McCarthy. I have no objections to inserting this material.
Let me add, it was peculiar circumstances with a now de-Sysoped Sysop that led to the current shape of the Joe McCarthy entry, which ''still'' emphasizes McCarthy in his own time, that is, from 1950 to 1954. In the long run, that is to say, in the context of American history this will need to be revised, and we need to get away from McCarthy's failings, and emphasize what McCarthy investigated, Communist Party USA activity for the two decades ''prior'' to anyone every hearing of McCarthy. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:18, 12 December 2007 (EST)