Changes

I really want our articles on McCarthy to be cleaned up and made a shining example of conservative thought which is also accurate, balanced, fair, and of high encyclopedic quality. Let's tell the truth, and also make the reader aware of any lingering POVs that we think aren't true. We can do better than Wikipedia! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] ^{[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]} 11:57, 15 September 2010 (EDT)

I really want our articles on McCarthy to be cleaned up and made a shining example of conservative thought which is also accurate, balanced, fair, and of high encyclopedic quality. Let's tell the truth, and also make the reader aware of any lingering POVs that we think aren't true. We can do better than Wikipedia! --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] ^{[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]} 11:57, 15 September 2010 (EDT)

:McCarthy is more of a tragic figure then a demonic or heroic figure; he wasn't perfect, had many flaws, and suffered from being fed bad information by Hoover's FBI. He was barking up the wrong tree. But McCarthy's basic premise was correct, and much closer to the mark than his critics (the guilty parties who falsely claim to be 'victims' of McCarthyism are much deserving of condemnation). And know we more closely understand what the reality of the situation was, and ''why'' Hoover fed McCarthy bad information.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:17, 21 September 2010 (EDT)

:McCarthy is more of a tragic figure then a demonic or heroic figure; he wasn't perfect, had many flaws, and suffered from being fed bad information by Hoover's FBI. He was barking up the wrong tree. But McCarthy's basic premise was correct, and much closer to the mark than his critics (the guilty parties who falsely claim to be 'victims' of McCarthyism are much deserving of condemnation). And now we more closely understand what the reality of the situation was, and ''why'' Hoover fed McCarthy bad information.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:17, 21 September 2010 (EDT)