ShareThis Page

Mischaracterizing history

| Wednesday, July 24, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Regarding the letter about mischaracterization from Jim Ferlo (July 7), who is mischaracterizing whom?

Liberals don't know what freedom is. Freedom is a lack of constraints, restraints and control over people. Government is power and control. More freedom means less government.

The people who founded this nation knew that very well. The liberals' (or progressives') answer to any real or imagined problem is more government regulations and laws.

Talk about mischaracterizing!

Mr. Ferlo presents liberals as staunch defenders of freedom. He says they fought to preserve democracy against fascism in World War II.

He is in need of a history lesson. There was only one statesman on the entire planet trying to warn people about the evil of Naziism and fascism amassing and accumulating power. He was no liberal. He tried to warn his countrymen not to neglect their defenses. He was called a warmonger and scaremonger. He was alone and mocked. That was Winston Churchill.

FDR and his liberal allies turned a blind eye to Hitler and Mussolini. FDR almost totally neglected America's defenses. Thousands of Americans paid the ultimate price for that neglect. What FDR and liberals did in the 1930s are hardly criteria for being staunch defenders of liberty.

Also, regarding his reference to the McCarthy investigations of the ‘50s, I highly recommend that Ferlo read M. Stanton Evans' book about Joseph McCarthy, “Blacklisted by History.” The FBI told the Roosevelt and Truman administrations about the penetration and infiltration of Communists into the U.S. government.

So, the mischaracterizing is all by Ferlo. Liberals are the ones destroying freedom in this country. To admit that about liberal ideology would be to destroy their “morally superior” narrative.

John Brunner

Lower Burrell

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.