| |
"Good Night, and Good Luck" — Joe McCarthy Rides Again
Bernard Weiner—10/2005 |
| |
Bernard Weiner draws parallels with the
Bush administrations abuse of the nation and the
nightmare of the McCarthy era — highlighted
by Clooney's powerful new docudrama. |
| |
HENEVER
I HAVE A DREAM, I ask myself: "Why this dream now?
What is happening in my life at this moment that would
engender these particular images?" |
| |
| The same question has to be asked about "Good
Night, and Good Luck," George Clooney's powerful
docudrama about the McCarthy era of the 1950s: "Why
make this film now? Is there something happening
in our society, our media, our politics that would
make audiences resonate with a low-budget film, shot
in black-and-white, about the 1950s in America?" |
| |
| It seems clear that director Clooney and co-writer
Grant Heslov see a direct contemporary parallel with
the anti-communist political witch-hunting of the
1950s, the unwillingness of most of the media to
take on the bullyboy of that era. In our own time,
an arrogant, bullying Administration is ruining the
country, running roughshod over the Constitution,
and questioning the patriotism of any who oppose
them, much as Senator Joe McCarthy did with anyone
who raised questions about his methods of hunting
down suspected communists. |
| |
| These days, of course, one substitutes "terrorists" for "communists." |
| |
| Think I'm exaggerating? How about the White House
orchestrating a smear of Ambassador Joseph Wilson
because he publicly questioned Bush's twisted evidence
for going to war in Iraq — and then, as a special
revenge-bonus, key Administration officials outed
Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, as a covert CIA officer?
(Indictments in this case, and the coverup that followed,
are expected within the next week or two.) |
| |
| How about then-Attorney General John Ashcroft
telling Congress that those who ask pointed questions
about the legalities of the Administration's "war
on terrorism" give aid and comfort to "the enemy"?
(Here's Ashcroft's exact quote: "To those who scare
peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty;
my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists — for
they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve.
They give ammunition to America's enemies…") |
 |
| How about then-Press Secretary Ari Fleischer warning "all
Americans that they need to watch what they say" about
the Administration's anti-terrorism policies, and
the comments of Administration hatchetmen in the
press, such as Ann Coulter, calling anti-Bush liberals "traitors" who
deserve to be shot? |
| |
| How about White House Press Secretary Scott McLellan
questioning the patriotism of veteran correspondent
Helen Thomas just a few days ago because she "expressed
her concerns" about the Bush Administration's handling
of the Iraq War? Here's the official transcript of
the key exchange, including ABC's Terry Moran nailing
McClellan. Thomas has asked several questions about
Bush's policies in Iraq: |
| |
McCLELLAN: Well, Helen, the President
recognizes that we are engaged in a global war
on terrorism. And when you're engaged in a war,
it's not always pleasant, and it's certainly
a last resort. But when you engage in a war,
you take the fight to the enemy, you go on the
offense. And that's exactly what we are doing.
We are fighting them there so that we don't have
to fight them here. September 11th taught us — |
|
THOMAS: It has nothing to do with — Iraq
had nothing to do with 9/11. |
|
McCLELLAN: Well, you have a very different
view of the war on terrorism, and I'm sure you're
opposed to the broader war on terrorism. The President
recognizes this requires a comprehensive strategy,
and that this is a broad war, that it is not a
law enforcement matter. Terry. |
|
TERRY MORAN: On what basis do you say
Helen is opposed to the broader war on terrorism? |
|
McCLELLAN: Well, she certainly expressed
her concerns about Afghanistan and Iraq and going
into those two countries. I think I can go back
and pull up her comments over the course of the
past couple of years. |
|
MORAN: And speak for her, which is odd. |
|
McCLELLAN: No, I said she may be, because
certainly if you look at her comments over the
course of the past couple of years, she's expressed
her concerns — |
|
THOMAS: I'm opposed to preemptive war,
unprovoked preemptive war. |
|
MR. McCLELLAN: — she's expressed her concerns. |
|
| |
| |
| THE ROTTEN ODOR FROM THE TOP |
| |
| Well, you get the idea. Criticize the Administration,
have your ideas distorted, your reputation smeared,
your patriotism questioned — with the consequences,
of course, that your job, and perhaps even your life,
could be placed in jeopardy. (Many of Plame's contacts,
for example, ones that she had built up over a decade
as a covert CIA agent working in the field of weapons
of mass destruction, were compromised and may well
have been eliminated in their home countries.) |
| |
| What emanates from the top works its stink down
to the grassroots. There are instances of folks being
refused passage on airplanes because a group with
which they're associated is critical of the Bush
Administration, or they're wearing anti-Bush buttons
or T-shirts. And there are all those citizens who
are bounced from Bush rallies, supposedly open to
the public, because they don't look right or are
known to be Democrats. Or, a student is kicked out
of school for wearing an anti-Bush logo on his T.
Or, one of my favorites, Bush telling a citizen on
a rope line who asked him a pointed question, "Why
should I care what you think?" |
 |
| We pay Bush's salary but the only people he wants
to hear from are large GOP donors and the criminally-liable
lackies and toadies down there in the Bush Bunker
with him — or, as we learned last week, from carefully-scripted
military officers in Iraq (not ordinary soldiers)
feeding back to him the war talking-points they'd
rehearsed with a Pentagon public-relations specialist.
Oh, by the way, one of those supposed "combat troops" praising
Bush's policy, the one sitting in the front row at
the far left, turns out to be a Pentagon public-relations
flack. |
| |
| Despite the Bush Administration buying off name
journalists to spout its propaganda message (the
hiring of talk-show host Armstrong Williams finally
is being investigated as a possible crime); despite
manufacturing its own propaganda "news reports" and
then sending them to TV stations around the country
as real journalism; despite the staged photo-ops
in New Orleans and Iraq, on sets immediately dismantled
after the shoot; despite the GOP's control of the
House and the Senate and most of the corporate media — despite all that, Bush's ratings continue to plummet,
to the lowest point of his tenure in office, down
in the 30s, even sliding fast among Republicans.
Finally, the veils have come off the public vision,
and they are beginning to see Bush & Co. for
what it is. |
| |
| |
| BEWARE OF CORNERED, WOUNDED BEASTS |
| |
| On the one hand, that's good news for those of us
dedicated to a restoration of Constitutional rule,
and to bringing the troops home alive from Iraq ASAp.
On the other hand, I must confess I'm really nervous.
The Bush Bunker crew right now are desperate, on the
ropes, and have painted themselves into a felonious
corner of their own devising. Beware wounded beasts;
when they feel trapped, they are liable to strike out
in a desperate attempt at survival. |
 |
| As the Plamegate indictments approach; as Bush's
popularity ratings continue to fall precipitously;
as the situation in Iraq continues to deteriorate,
referendum or no referendum; as the true nature of
Bush's unfeeling ideology toward ordinary people
became even more clear in the wake of the Katrina
disaster; as the corruption and corporate thievery
proceeds apace — as all these negatives continue
to build pressure in the White House, one can anticipate
a wide variety of major distractions and violent
initiatives, both foreign and domestic. |
| |
| What might some of those be? In one effort to get
the Plamegate indictments off the front page, we can
anticipate that Saddam Hussein's show-trial in Iraq
will dominate the front pages and TV-news broadcasts
to tell us yet again what a monster dictator this guy
was, thus leaving precious little space or airtime
available for the White House's ethical and criminal
problems. (Let's just stipulate: Saddam was one of
the worst dictators ever, nobody mourns his loss from
power — and now let's get back to the real news.) |
| |
| In addition, I would not be surprised if the U.S.
or Mideast ally Israel moved to take out Iran's nuclear
power plants and research facilities. A massive bombing,
with all the ramifications of such action in the Muslim
world, would do wonders to divert attention. Likewise,
ratcheting up the military pressure on Syria, after
the U.S. recently started up hostilities along, and
perhaps even beyond, the border with Iraq. Or, the
Bush Administration may choose once again to look the
other way when a major terrorist incident is about
to happen inside the U.S. |
 |
| |
| THE IMPEACHMENT SCENARIO |
| |
| Karl Rove's M.O. always has always been, "when
in trouble, attack." Don't let the opposition even
get close to defining the agenda and parameters
of discussion. As Rove himself is about to be attacked,
I would think he might have even more motivation
to pull out all the survival stops and arrange for
something drastic to become Topic #1, rather than
permitting the American public to focus on the high
crimes and misdemeanors of the Bush Administration
before the judicial dock. |
| |
| And rest assured, the Plamegate indictments will
have ramifications way beyond those charged. Once
the perp-walks take place, once those trials begin — and probably long before as key elements of the
case are leaked — the dirty secrets inside the White
House will be revealed; Republican Senators and House
members, anxious to be re-elected, might well back-pedal
away so fast from BushCheneyRoveLibby that in the
rush you'll barely be able to read the impeachment
bill they'll agree to support. |
| |
| In addition, GOP power-brokers and economic leaders,
anxious to keep the markets stable and their profits
predictable, might bow to the inevitable and their
own self-interests and jettison their support for
the Bush Administration, putting their money behind
other, less-tainted politicos. |
| |
| What would follow impeachment trials — assuming
Bush and Cheney don't do a Nixon and resign first?
One would hope that the political lessons would have
been learned by those next in line — be it Hastert
or Stevens or Rice or Rumsfeld. Whoever would take
over from Bush would be reading the 2006 pre-election
polls and, realizing that the Republicans are going
to be swept out of power bigtime — to even try to
manipulate the election returns in that kind of landslide
would be counterproductive — might well abandon the
imperial adventuring and corporate looting and advocacy
of torture as state policy and shredding of Constitutional
protections, etc. etc. In other words, there would
be some movement toward the middle. |
 |
| |
| McCARTHYISM IN THE BUSH ERA |
| |
| Which brings us back to "Good Night, and Good
Luck." Something similar happened to Sen. Joseph
McCarthy in the '50s: he was riding as high as any
political demagogue could, for years virtually controlling
the government and America's socio-political agenda
in his anti-communist frenzy — ruining the reputations
of honorable men and women with impunity — and then,
suddenly, he went too far, was shamed and humiliated
and was isolated by his fellow senators and his powers
removed. He died of alcoholism-related diseases a
few years later. |
| |
| For those unfamiliar with McCarthy and the political/social
mayhem he caused 50 years ago — along with the vigilante
movement he spawned ("McCarthyism") — here's a brief
primer. Waving what he claimed were lists of names
of alleged communists inside the State Department
and elsewhere in the government, and denouncing citizens
left and right for alleged "communist sympathies," and
with few in academia, the media and government willing
to take him on and risk being called a "pinko" or
worse, McCarthy became the locus of malevolent power
in America, dispensing a kind of toxic poison all
around the country that created fear and kept people
from fully exercising their rights as citizens. Keep
your mouth shut and your head down — that was the
operating principle in the McCarthy period. |
| |
| McCarthy's downfall was that he didn't know where
to stop, or when; indeed, he believed he was unstoppable.
But after hounding show-biz personalities and academics
and media reporters and lower-level government employees,
McCarthy began attacking the U.S. Army leadership,
including war-hero General George Marshall, at which
point former four-star general Dwight David Eisenhower,
now President Eisenhower, had had enough. The battle
was joined, and CBS star newsman Edward R. Murrow
attacked McCarthy frontally and wounded him enough
so that others, including Boston attorney Joseph
Welch and McCarthy's fellow Senators could finish
him off. |
| |
| But you don't get a lot of this important layering-history
in "Good Night, and Good Luck," which prefers to
focus almost exclusively and insularly on the battle
between Murrow/CBS and McCarthy. But McCarthy's arrogant
recklessness went far beyond the mass media. One
of my former university teaching colleagues, for
example, had been denounced by a touring McCarthy
as a "communist sympathizer" from the stage of the
university where he taught; my colleague (who, of
course, was no pinko sympathizer, just one of the
few academics in the loyalty-oath McCarthy era still
courageous enough to ask questions) lost that job
and, even though he located another teaching position
years later, he was emotionally scarred, easily frightened
and very afraid to speak his mind in public. Others
suffered similar harassments even though their only
crime was having names similar to the real suspects.
It was a true witch-hunt, with people naming names
willy-nilly — or being forced to publicly denounce
their parents — just to clear themselves. |
 |
| |
| THE POLITICS BEHIND WITCH-HUNTING |
| |
| The unspoken assumption in "Good Night, and Good
Luck" is that there may have been a few communists
inside and outside the government that were worth
paying serious attention to, but if there were, laws
and procedures were in place for uncovering and dealing
with them; the glory of our country's system is that
one can pay attention to the civil liberties afforded
suspects even when going after them legally. The
unspoken assumption in our own time is that there
may be al-Qaida sleeper cells inside the U.S., but,
even if that were true, you don't need to use a sledgehammer
to kill some gnats, wrecking the entire Constitutional
house in the process. |
| |
| McCarthy was encouraged by Republicans in the
1950s to rampage around looking for supposed Communists — and bullying everyone in his path — because it
would reap the party political advantage in the post-World
War II Cold War hysteria. Republicans today encourage,
or at least acquiesce to, the Bush Administration's
incompetent rampaging in search of "terrorist" suspects,
shredding badly the protections of the Constitution,
because it serves their electoral advantage in a
society frightened by the prospect of future terrorist
attacks. |
| |
"Good Night, and Good Luck" — which, in a brilliant
stroke, stars Joseph McCarthy as himself (from newscasts
of the time) — is not a consistently great movie.
It barely captures the social sweep and damage done
by McCarthyism outside the CBS newsroom, and in its
desire to glorify the courageous work of CBS newsman
Edward R. Murrow (played brilliantly by David Straithairn)
and his colleague Fred Friendly (Clooney), it overlooks
that fact that others took on McCarthy long before
they did. But, despite its flaws, it's a riveting
and socially important film, one we need to ruminate
upon for its messages for our own time and situation — lest we continue to repeat bad history. |
| |
| |
| Copyright © 2005
Bernard Weiner |
| |
|
|
| Bernard Weiner,
Ph.D. in government & international
relations, has taught at various universities,
worked as a writer/editor with the San Francisco
Chronicle, and currently co-edits The Crisis Papers. For comments, write crisispapers@comcast.net. |
|