679
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 425:
Line 425: + + + + + + + +
→McCarthy edits
:Here's it is, [http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/mccarthy/telegram.htm McCarthy to Truman 11 February 1950]. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:40, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
:Here's it is, [http://www.english.uiuc.edu/maps/mccarthy/telegram.htm McCarthy to Truman 11 February 1950]. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 15:40, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
Thank you for your kind words.
Everyone who is the subject of an article here is a human being instead of monster or animal, including Hillary and Bill Clinton and Salvador Allende. Their family and friends, like Joseph McCarthy's, also have accounts that conflict with what their detractors say. And yes, I've heard that in person, even some of his opponents found Joseph McCarthy quite likeable. I've heard the same about Bill Clinton, Fidel Castro, and Patrick Buchanan. Whether these human beings are gracious hosts or can tell a good joke and what their children or siblings or spouses have to say about them is, for the most part, beside the point when describing their public careers, and belongs in a section devoted to their personal life.
Yes there is more than one view on a subject. There is not, however, more than one set of facts, and the inclusion of those facts, whether or not they make the subject of an article look good, is not "moot." Setting aside a separate section of "Criticism" comes across here as an attempt to weed out those facts that are unflattering to Joseph McCarthy and separate them from the whole, as if they were a sort of footnote. I don't notice similar "Criticism" sections in Conservapedia articles on Salvador Allende, John Kerry or Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, and while Hillary Clinton's article has one, Whitewater and other criticisms of her policies mentioned in the article as a whole are not restricted to the Criticism section. For that reason, I am not inclined to put the issue surrounding McCarthy's conflicting statements about numbers or the discripancies in his reading of the Lee List under "Criticism." It belongs in a discussion of how he became a household name, and therefore early in the main body of the piece. It's up to the reader to decide how these facts reflect on Senator McCarthy. I appreciate your concern about a sort of "arms race" building up in the article, but the facts surrounding McCarthy's rise as a public figure are important.
I will comment on the telegram later tonight. --[[User:PF Fox|PF Fox]] 16:14, 20 March 2007 (EDT)