In a time that finds the MSM losing its monopolistic grip, it would appear that another effort is being undertaken with hopes to regain its status among the 'silent majority'. Their bag of tricks of late has generally only included equating the Bush administration with Nixon, and comparing Iraq with Viet Nam. These tactics have not produced the desired stampede of return to dependence on their wisdom and professionalism. It seems that they will now try a 'new' trite trick.

Recently there have been TV ads for a movie (or TV movie) depicting Edward R. Murrow and a few other brave journalists standing up to and resisting the evil Senator Joseph McCarthy. My enquiring mind finds the timing a bit propagandistic. Bush=Nixon, Iraq=Viet Nam as comparisons, coupled now with Murrow vs. McCarthy with intent to shed enlightenment on the present day's Democrats and MSM vs. Republicans and unwashed masses scenario.

Of course, I am prejudging. I learned in Texas to prejudge the probabilities of encounters with rattlesnakes, scorpions, fire ants, and killer bees without giving each and every one a fair chance to prove their goodwill. However, I will bet the aforementioned 'historical' production will not include the following:

"Kennedy also confronted communist subversion at home. As a House labor committee member, he helped convict a communist union official. While in the Senate, he backed Senator Joseph McCarthy's investigations. In January 1955, after McCarthy had fallen from power, JFK walked out on a banquet speech by McCarthy-hating journalist Edward R. Murrow. Three years later, at a Harvard dinner, when a speaker compared McCarthy with convicted Soviet spy Alger Hiss, JFK exclaimed, "How dare you couple the name of a great American patriot with that of a traitor!," and stormed out of the building."

"Eventually, Kennedy came properly to lament McCarthy's methods. Yet unlike most of his liberal Democratic contemporaries, JFK refused to deny the obvious: the high-level Communist penetration of FDR's State Department in the 1930s and 1940s. For this courage he almost paid dearly. In 1960, Eleanor Roosevelt tried mightily to deny him the Democratic presidential nomination, and New York's Liberal Party almost withheld its endorsement of him as well."

Or these excerpts of an article, written in 1949, whose author surprised the crap out of me:

"The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil."

"Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society."

"I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals. In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child. The education of the individual, in addition to promoting his own innate abilities, would attempt to develop in him a sense of responsibility for his fellow men in place of the glorification of power and success in our present society."

Hint: e=mc(squared), (humane) economics equals multiplicity of (exponential) communism.