Such was the question posed by Robert N. Welch, chief counsel for the United States at the McCarthy hearings in June 1954. It was rhetorical but designed to bring the obvious truth to the smear campaign that Senator McCarthy was waging against people whom he named as communist sympathizers.
We all know the outcome of that hearing. Hundreds of people, particularly in the entertainment industry, were irreparably damaged by the insinuation, and Joseph McCarthy soon disappeared from the American scene to be remembered as the epitome of empty accusations.
When The Roanoke Star Sentinel, as it was originally known, first appeared years ago, it announced that, among other things, it would not endorse candidates or be politically partisan. That, of course, was (and still is) its official position but it made no promises when it came to the views expressed by the columnists. After all, such writers are heavily guided by their personal beliefs which, one would hope, are buttressed by facts. All of us who contribute to the paper, yours truly included, have ridden our favorite pony around the track many times but with respect for contrary opinions.
Now we find ourselves on the cusp of having to name names and attach them to shame. It is always potentially hazardous to be judgmental but equally dangerous to remain silent when egregious transgressions against our civilization are being made.
Only a fool would look back at life and claim that no mistakes have been made. Who among us has not blushed with embarrassment when recalling a position taken, a statement made, an action launched, that in retrospect was . . . well, ill-advised, stupid, wrong, or all three?
The antithesis of that generates the phrase “never in doubt, but often wrong”. The ability to admit retrospective error is the mark of honesty and humility, which appear to be in short supply on both sides of the campaign trail.
Now we are being subjected to a barrage of insults the like of which has not been seen since tail gunner Joe was holding his hearings. Which brings us back to Robert Welch’s question. Much of what many find offensive have been off-the cuff-remarks with consequences; they reveal the true nature of the speaker.
No less august journal than The New Yorker has been quick to report them. Unless one has been residing on another planet, one is familiar with the personal attacks, the mocking of the handicapped, the belittling of women, the sexual innuendo, the disrespect of virtually all ethnicities, the hatred and fear-mongering. The outrage goes on.
We have seen enough and heard enough to understand the personality and character of the man behind them. While the powers that be may try to rein him in, the horse is truly out of the barn. The grandees of the GOP disapprove but say they will continue to support the nominee. As one columnist commented last week, even invertebrates have more spine than he! At least Mitt Romney has spoken truth to power, but he’s not running for office. How many wish he were!
Who knows how this will work out? The opposition has their own problems, but they pale in comparison to a self-confessed libertine, misogynist, xenophobic, racist, and totally self-possessed egotist with a track record that boasts self-aggrandizement and multiple bankruptcies, both financial and personal.
The best we can hope for is that national leaders will understand the hypocrisy of their position and work to elect to Congress those who will follow the ancient teachings of the Iroquois nation when they tried to think of what would best serve the next seven generations, not just what was in the interest of their single existing tribe.
Are you listening, Bob? Are you listening, Morgan? And please factor decency into your equation or explain to all of us how personal interest trumps a garbage dump.
Hayden Hollingsworth