1 comments about Yesterdays Are Forever: A Rite of Passage Through the Marine Corps and Vietnam War.

1. First of all, let me confess that my remarks are not entirely objective since I was a member of Captain Jackson's Mike Company during his command. His recollections are far clearer than mine, perhaps due to our very different stations. You see, Captain Jackson was a 30 year-old Marine officer with six years experience, while I was a 19 year-old PFC and LCpl, operating as a grunt rifleman and radioman in "Mike-2-Charlie."

   I was fascinated by Jackson's account the circumstances leading up to his entry in the Marines, and his very remarkable career as an officer prior to his tour in Viet Nam. Captain Jackson provides the reader with a clear picture of life in Mike Company in those days, although from a quite different perspective than I had.

   One difference of opinion I have with the author is his assessment of my Platoon Commander. Captain Jackson describes an incident in which the Lieutenant beats a Marine on the back with a steel bar, but dismisses the event as the officer merely trying to admonish the young man without really inflicting any pain. Well, I witnessed more than one incident where this officer either kicked or beat men in the head with a steel helmet in his hand. The opinion of the men under his command was that this "warrior" was a vicious and arrogant prima donna.

   While the book will be quite interesting to students of the war in Viet Nam or those who were participants, the very poor (or nonexistent) editing done by the book's publisher is quite distracting. Virtually every page contains errors in punctuation, spelling, word usage, etc. My background as a Mike Company Marine serving under Captain Jackson allowed me to easily ignore these small issues. All in all, a very interesting and readable book.

5 comments about Next of Kin: A Brother's Journey to Wartime Vietnam.

1. I am a woman in my early 40's and don't usually read books on war or enjoy hearing about war, but I couldn't put this book down. It was written so well that I couldn't wait to find out what happened next. It begins with young Tom Reilly, losing both of his parents and how his brother, Ron, was a constant in his life. Tom, at the age of 19, goes to Vietnam to find out the truth about his brother's death and his "adventure" over there. Tom has written a wonderful, loving dedication to his brother that will touch each and every person that reads this story. It doesn't matter if you are a man or woman, young or old, this is a book you'll want to read. You'll have such a good feeling when you finish.



2. Just a great story about the caring relationship between two brothers, about love and commitment, set in the era of Vietnam.

   An adventure that covers half the world by an 18 year old from the midwest who lost his brother. He had to know what happen and it was clear, it was not war reltated.

   This was a great read, a story that was hard to put down at night and when the book was finished, I felt like I lost a
   friend.




3. What a great story. What a dedication to a brother. we all could learn from this man. This is what family is all about. I highly recomend this read to everyone.



4. The book is outstanding. I had my daughter pick me up a signed copy because the author lived in my town and I have always been interested in Vietnam as it was from my era.
   I had no idea that I would be so enthralled from the very first page. I feel like I know the whole family and recognized all the places that the author speaks of. The pain and courage of both of the brothers reached out from the pages into my heart.
   This book was so great I hated to have it end.



5. "Next of Kin" is a remarkable first-person memoir that reads like a novel. Tom Reilly's story will take your breath away, whether or not you accept all the details. This is not another war story that revisits battles and the soldiers who fought them. Instead, this is a coming-of-age story that is catalyzed (but not defined) by the Vietnam War. Thanks to clean, straighforward writing, Reilly's story is a breeze to read. Critical readers may wish to see additional corroboration or evidence of this harrowing journey. The more casual reader will take it at face value and may appreciate the brotherly bond that made this story possible. May we all be so fortunate to experience such devotion.

2 comments about Riding with Custer: Recollections of a Cavalryman in the Civil War.

1. This reprint of the classic "Recollections of a Cavalryman" is a valuable addition to the military history of the nation. It also offers a view of Custer by someone who actually served with him in combat -- extensive combat. The view of Custer that emerges is not that penned by a fawning subordinate; Colonel Kidd simply recounts the battles and activities of the Michigan Cavalry Brigade in a straightforward manner. His later controversy notwithstanding, Custer was an exemplary cavalry commander and arguably the most successful and brilliant cavalry officer on either side in the conflict. This book opens a window on the past and is an excellently written account of the brutal battles fought by our ancestors. The book also offers an unintentional balance to Custer's historical legacy. It's unintentional because at the time it was written, Custer was still considered a national hero. This book explains why he was. Read it.



2. This is a memoir with chapters written in and after the 1880's.

   An interesting positivist take on the war--also interesting how politically conscious Kidd appears to have been. My general observation is that the Northern accounts seem to be more politicized, more likely to talk about politicians and political beliefs, than Southern.

   Kidd started the war as captain of Troop E, 6th Michigan Cavalry, and ended up in command of the regiment. He spends a lot of time discussing recruiting and training, details fighting at Gettysburg and Williamsport, Trevilian Station, Third Winchester, et cetera. Kidd's admiration for Custer, his brigadier, is clear.

   A useful account, but not an especially anecdotal or vivid one.

2 comments about Surrounded by Dangers of All Kinds: The Mexican War Letters of Lieutenant Theodore Laidley (War and the Southwest Series, 6).

1. "'Surrounded by Dangers of All Kinds': The Mexican War Letters of Lieutenant Theodore Laidley" is edited, with extensive commentary, by James M. McCaffrey. The book is Number 6 in the War and the Southwest Series. Spanning the years 1845 to 1848, these letters tell of Laidley's journey through Mexico as an ordnance officer in the U.S. Army. These letters combine with McCaffrey's illuminating commentary to tell a fascinating story.
   
   Laidley and McCaffrey cover many topics: concern about disease, battlefield medicine, the impact of guerilla activity on the U.S. campaign, the importance of mail to the troops, the challenge in getting volunteer troops to reenlist, cultural sensitivity issues involving U.S. troop contact with Mexican civilians, and conflict among senior U.S. military officers. Laidley describes the reality of 19th century combat; he notes that "the horrors of war one can not understand until you have seen it." Particularly interesting are Laidley's observations on the Mexican land and people; he writes about climate, religion, architecture, agriculture, food, and language.
   
   One thing I found quite striking about the book was how relevant many of McCaffrey's and Laidley's topics are to the U.S. operations that are going on in Iraq and Afghanistan at the time I write this review. Laidley's observations are full of interesting details. His voice is at times quite feisty, and his style is consistently very readable. Overall, this book offers a remarkable look at the U.S.-Mexican War.



2. An interesting book of letters written by Lieutenant Theodore Laidley during the historic Mexican War.

No comments about A Dogface's War: A Paratrooper's Story of WWII in the Philippines.

1 comments about You'll Die in Singapore: The true account of one of the most amazing POW escapes in WWII.

1. Charles McCormac was a wireless operator/air gunner in the RAF assigned to Seletar Airfield, Singapore pre-war. At the time of the Japanese invasion of Singapore he joined forces with a group constructing a roadblock on Bukit Timah Road. These men lost contact with Allied Forces, and did not realise that the British had surrendered on February 15th. The next day they encountered Japanese soldiers, three of whom McCormac killed with his Thompson Submachinegun. McCormac was taken prisoner and placed in a special POW cage at Pasir Panjang. The military and civilian prisoners held there were isolated because the Japanese believed they had committed grave offences against Japan. McCormac was brutally interrogated by the Kempei Tai at their headquarters in the YMCA building on Orchard Road. The Japanese summarily executed groups of prisoners held at Pasir Panjang
   in front of the others. McCormac believed the only chance for him and his fellow prisoners was to escape. This is the fantastic story of that escape.

5 comments about Renaissance Man of Cannery Row: The Life and Letters of Edward F. Ricketts.

1. Renaissance Man of Cannery Row finally puts flesh on a real person who has been perceived as a caricature for too many years. In this book Edward Ricketts, a father, a marine biologist, a hard-working figure found for two decades along Cannery Row in Monterey in California (shades of Steinbeck?), and the persona found in at least six of Steinbeck's novels and short stories comes to life. Katharine A. Rodger has done a masterful job of editing that allows a wonderful insight into Ricketts personality and philosophies. The letters include Ed's correspondence with such figures as John Steinbeck, Henry Miller, Joseph Campbell and Paul De Kruif.

   The book is a must read for any student of Steinbeck, Cannery Row or the Monterey area and is beautifully done. As professor Richard Astro stated "to know Steinbeck one must know Ricketts." How true.




2. Renaissance Man of Cannery Row finally puts flesh on a real person who has been perceived as a caricature for too many years. In this book Edward Ricketts, a father, a marine biologist, a hard-working figure found for two decades along Cannery Row in Monterey in California (shades of Steinbeck?), and the persona found in at least six of Steinbeck's novels and short stories comes to life. Katharine A. Rodger has done a masterful job of editing that allows a wonderful insight into Ricketts personality and philosophies. The letters include Ed's correspondence with such figures as John Steinbeck, Henry Miller, Joseph Campbell and Paul De Kruif.

   The book is a must read for any student of Steinbeck, Cannery Row or the Monterey area and is beautifully done. As professor Richard Astro stated "to know Steinbeck one must know Ricketts." How true.




3. Ed Ricketts had an important influence on the developing science of marine ecology during the 1930s and 40s. Even if John Steinbeck had never met or written about Ricketts, his work Between Pacific Tides (co-written with the forgotten Jack Calvin) would stand as a significant contribution to biology. But Ricketts also was a close friend of Steinbeck's, and so Ricketts himself (as he appears in the Log from the Sea of Cortez) and the caraciture "Doc" (Cannery Row) overshadow his written accomplishments. For better or worse, Ricketts now is remembered mainly as Steinbeck's friend. Besides reading and thinking about his scientific work, we want to know what it was like to hang around Pacific Biological Labs and drink with Ricketts, listen to music, and talk about big or small things.

   Ricketts was a hard-working and prductive biologist (without a college degree), a struggling small businessman, a father separated from his two daughters and wife, but close to his son, a serial monogomist, a drinker, a reader, a music fan, and by all reports a very appealing guy. Someone who almost anyone would enjoy spending a few hours talking to.

   Ricketts important previously unpublished writings were collected in The Outer Shores (2 vols.), edited and with biographical notes by Joel Hedgepeth. Hedgepeth knew Ricketts and wrote in an entertaining iconoclastic style. It's long out of print and hard to find, but provides greater insight into Ricketts than this collection of letters can. Readers willing to wait should be encouraged from an NPR news report a few months ago that Ricketts son, Ed Jr., is editing a collection of writings which presumably will include much of the same material.

   Ricketts wasn't a great philosopher, but he wrote 3 essays of philosophy that he was proud of. He was interested in music and poetry and felt he knew what characterized really good work. His ideas wouldn't fit into today's postmodern world, where a basketball in an aquarium can pass for art. Fans of Robert Pirsig's Zen & the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance might find Ricketts philosophy appealing.

   Katharine Rodger has collected about 100 letters, written to various friends, family members, professional contacts, and John Steinbeck. She also has written a bare bones outline of Ricketts life, with little insight into his thoughts. We can fill these in ourselves from the letters, assembled mainly from Ricketts own papers (he kept carbons of his correspondence). Sadly, they cover only his later career, because his lab and its contents burned down in 1936. There are no letters addressing Ricketts marriage and how he came to spend both his nights and days at the lab instead of home with his family. Further, after Ricketts was killed, Steinbeck went through Ricketts files and destroyed most of their correspondence.

   I found most of the letters here unsurprising. Most of the really revealing letters are the ones to Steinbeck, but there aren't many of them. I wasn't rivited to the book until the last few pages, when Ricketts (near) step-daughter dies, his long-time partner Toni Jackson leaves, and he suddenly takes up with 25 year old Alice. The emotional impact of these changes all within a short time must have been immense, but we get only a hint of it in the last letters to Steinbeck and Jackson.

   A worthwhile read, but it doesn't leave you feeling like you know him any better than you did before. I hope for a more comprehensive biography some day.




4. ...and that's it.
   There is little penetrating biographical detail in the short essay that begins the book, and the failures of action and inconsistencies of thought are shrugged off. Everyone has failings and Ricketts's were substantial; but they are also what make us interesting, and are what often create the context in which greater aspects of character can be realized. There is little critical analysis of Ricketts's thought and work (which is probably not a bad thing), but we are left thinking, "Wow, what a nice clever guy; wish we could have shared a beer." Which is about right.
   The letters are about as engaging as such collections go, and do sort-of flesh out the evolution of the man and his thoughts. But Ricketts was careful, as we all are, about the manner in which he projects and portrays his character. He is at a distance, more often than not, and somewhat armored.
   Not a bad read at all, mind you, and I am grateful the editor has pursued the project. Pull up to a tidepool, have a beer, and do some non-tele(ological) thinkin'.



5. This collection of Ed " Doc " Ricketts letters rates 5 stars if for nothing else the glimpse it gives into a man that is all too rare. For the non-biologist reader considering reading Ricketts book, Between Pacific Tides, The Life and Letters of Edward Ricketts is a good place to start. If any reader is interested in exploring what John Steinbeck called " a mind without horizons", this is a very valuable resource as well. What we find in this collection of letters is really what his friend Steinbeck saw, a man with unlimited understanding of the human condition and a man who still, almost 60 years after his death, has much to teach.

5 comments about The Winking Fox.

1. Rene Defournaux is an excellent writer who, unfortunately, has not been allowed to tell more than about 25% of the story, but that 25% is absolutely riveting. His life puts the fiction of Ian Fleming and W. E. B. Griffith in the shade. This book not only adds to the historical knowledge of the era but is a good read. I couldn't put it down and read it straight through one recent weekend. I recommend it for students of history and for those readers of novels who think that fiction is more exciting than real life, they will find that adventure tales take second place to this man's life.



2. Rene Defournaux is an excellent writer who, unfortunately, has not been allowed to tell more than about 25% of the story, but that 25% is absolutely riveting. His life puts the fiction of Ian Fleming and W. E. B. Griffith in the shade. This book not only adds to the historical knowledge of the era but is a good read. I couldn't put it down and read it straight through one recent weekend. I recommend it for students of history and for those readers of novels who think that fiction is more exciting than real life, they will find that adventure tales take second place to this man's life.



3. Rene Defourneaux was a young Frenchman who came to the United States shortly before the outbreak of World War II. In 1943 he joined the American army, trained as an intelligence specialist, and was sent to England to join a unit as an interrogator. There he was recruited by the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and strained as an agent. He parachuted alone into occupied France to organize and train French resistance groups. After the liberation of Paris he was transferred to Asia where he served as second in command of a team parachuted into Japanese held French Indochina in support of a group assembled by Ho Chi Minh and Vo Nguyen Giap. Shortly after World War II he was recalled to active duty and served twenty years as an Army intelligence office with duty in Europe, Asia, and the United States, finally ending his career at Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indianapolis, Indiana. The Winking Fox is a vivid account of some of his activities and explains why his efforts were often misunderstood or ignored by his superiors who lacked the required background and experience to adequately utilize his talents. Because of his ability to overcome adversity, hist phenomenal good luck, his associates dubbed him "The Fox". The Winking Fox is Defourneaux's true life story, told by himself, and a welcome, eye-witness, invaluable addition to the literature of both World War II and Cold War history.



4. The Winking Fox: Twenty-Two Years In Military Intelligence is Rene Defourneaux's first hand account of his years as an officer with the U.S. Army's intelligence service. A young Frenchman who came to the United States with his mother and sister to join his father shortly before the outbreak of World War II, Defourneaux joined the service in 1943. Trained as an intelligence specialist he was sent to England to join a unit as an interrogator. There he was recruited by OSS and trained as an agent. He was parachuted alone into occupied France to organize and train French resistance groups. With the liberation of Paris he was transferred to Asia where he served as the second in command of a team parachuted into Japanese held French Indochina in support of a group assembled by Ho Chi Minh and Vo Nguyen Giap. After WWII he served for the next twenty years as an Army intelligence officer with duty in Europe and Asia. The Winking Fox is a stirring, eye-witness account of military intelligence activities and his own decisions and efforts that were often misunderstood or simply ignored by his superiors who lacked the background and experience to adequately utilize his talents, experience and expertise. Enhanced for the reader with 75 photographs, illustrations and documents, The Winking Fox is a superb contribution to the growing body of World War II literature and offers a unique insight into the world of Army intelligence.



5. From Whitney Gafford, A HS Student:
   Rene,
   I am very pleased to announce that I won 1st place at National History Day!!!!!! Thank you so very much for all your help. Yes, I did read both books. That's why I was wondering if you had finally been successfull in the location. The judges were like... "OSS?" How come we don't know much about this?" I was very proud to bring your history forward to the world.... maybe some more books will be sold!! You have been just the sweetest person to show interest in me. I know I would never have gotten this far without your help. Thank you! Thank you!
   
   Yours in freedom and justice....
   Whitney

1 comments about One of the Few: A Triumphant Story of Combat in the Battle of Britain.

1. The title is a referance to Churchills famous comments of the Battle of Britain. Kent is the man who made the free polish squadrons one of the best of the war. The book covers his life from his first flight in Canada to the post war years. His wit and humor make for some fun reading. Some of the things he did had quite an effect on the outcome of the Battle of Britain.

5 comments about A Conspiracy So Immense.

1. Oshinsky lays out the McCarthy record in straight-forward, unbiased terms.
   
   Joe McCarthy was a deeply disturbed individual, who, having stumbled into a Senate Seat, went asking his friends for a good campaign "hook" to get reelected. They suggested communism.
   
   Over the next five years, McCarthy accused, literally, thousands of Americans of being Soviet agents. Not once did he produce evidence that any of those accused were, in fact, working on behalf of communism. He accused the leadership of the U.S. Army of communism because it insisted on drafting G. David Schine, "friend" of McCarthy's associate Roy Cohn. Anyone who publicly criticized what McCarthy was doing was accused as well. Anyone who so much as supported progressive causes was labled as unpatriotic. In 2005, does that sound familiar?
   
   It was inevitable that the Republican noise machine would eventually try to rehabilitate the record of one of the most disgraceful persons in American history. For the real facts on this living nightmare of a man, read this book.



2. A book of politics, and the craving for power that drives some people to do almost anything to get that power. The broad outlines of the story are well known. Joe McCarthy grandstanding in front of the microphones accusing all kinds of people of being communists. Never presenting any evidence he was able to ruin the lives of many Americans just to gain his own satisfaction.
   
   Now reviled, these times really need to be viewed in the light of the times, and again now that we have learned more about those times. His accusations appear to have been unfounded. But this was the time of the Rosenberg executions. This was the time of the House UnAmerican Activities Commission (HUAC).
   
   As we have learned since with the release of the Venona documents, the Rosenbergs were guilty (well there's some question about Ethel). The activities of HUAC harmed a lot of people, especially in Hollywood, but did it really make us safer? It also appears that there were a lot of communists in our Government. But there is no indication that McCarthy really knew that.
   
   This is an accurate story of McCarthy's rapid rise, and his rapid fall.



3. Oshinsky gives the most complete review of McCarthy's life of any historian. He tries to appraise McCarthy's controveries and does not take part in the vicious name calling of a Ricahrd Rovere. However he comes from a liberal perspective and to get a fair appraisal from a conservative historian - read Hermann's McCarthy.
   
   Since Venona has been released Oshinshy should have rewritten this book and not reissued the book he wrote in 1982.The events of 9/11 can give us an analogy.
   
   Imagine if a professor advised the state department that the Taliban was the best hope for Afghanistan and that bin Ladin was just an agrarian reformer. Imagine if military secrets as the H bomb was given to Iran and that key government officials belonged to Islamist groups. Imagine if a senator would look at the aspects of that ? Would he be called intolerate of other religions ?
   
   Owen lattimore urged that Mao was an Agrarian reformer. Mao killed millions. Larrimore made millions of bucks on his 'brilliant" observations. Oshinsky shouldn't defend this man. Klaus Fuchs, Rosenbergs, Hall etc gave the bomb to Russia. Hiss helped shape our foreign policy and even gave Russia three votes in the General Assembly.
   
   So balance is really needed. McCarthy was a patriotic man who used bad means to an end. But his enemies sometimes used worse methods as Oshinsky demonstrates in the Joseph Rauh case and Eisenhower's minions forging letters.
   
   McCarthy was brought down by Roy Cohn wanting favorable treatment for a possible lover- David Schine but curiously Oshinsky does not update the book with Cohn's sexuality and this would be an important insight.
   
   In short this was a brilliant book for 1982 but the newer revelations as Venona , Cohn etc demands an update for this book



4. I think the evidence is pretty clear at this point that McCarthy was right on target with his accusations. Its amazing to me that liberals still cling to this "McCarthyism" myth. It just didn't exist. There was no repression of ordinary Americans in the 50s. Didn't happen. Sure, some people in government lost their jobs. But they were communists who then got other jobs selling insureance or whatever. Its not like they were sent to the gulag or anything.



5. One thing needs to be cleared up right away: Joe McCarthy "never uncovered a Communist."
   
   Because McCarthyism was so devastating to rightwing anticommunism, giving a sour taste among decent people for half a century, there has been a deliberate (and often successful) attempt to rewrite history. In this version, McCarthy may have been crude and abrasive but he accomplished good work for the cause of freedom.
   
   As David Oshinsky lays out in endless detail in "A Conspiracy So Immense," there was nothing good about McCarthyism and little good about McCarthy except perhaps his charm. This was lost on many but reported powerfully by some who were strong political enemies.
   
   Oshinsky asserts, I think correctly, that his is not an ax-grinding history, and he certainly finds fault often enough with McCarthy's enemies, both political, journalistic and academic. He gives McCarthy credit where he can, which is not often.
   
   He portrays McCarthy as a man outside society, a natural: "He was so primitive, so cynical, so devoid of commitment to any goal but personal success, that few opponents had the will or stomach to fight him on his own terms." Or perhaps few Americans were as indecent as Joe McCarthy.
   
   That quotation comes from the introduction. Later, much later Oshinsky decides that McCarthy's anticommunism was genuine and not just, as so many charged, a cynical manipulation of an issue to get power, attention and money.
   
   This judgment must be heavily qualified. It's doubtful McCarthy knew anything about communism, and he definitely knew nothing about Americanism. That he was convinced that communism was evil means little; plenty, maybe almost all, of his opponents got that, too.
   
   Catholicism is key to McCarthy. Oshinsky says he was a ritual, not a moralistic Catholic. As long as he attended Mass and made his Easter duty, he had fulfilled the requirements of faith. Even priests who supported him are quoted as saying that McCarthy paid no attention to doctrine.
   
   This is an extremely important point and one where Oshinsky, in my opinion, errs. It has long been asserted that McCarthy was led to anticommunism by the Catholic clergy, and a dinner meeting is even said to have been the occasion that he was informed how he could use the issue to shore up his sagging political base after almost four years of undistinguished residence in the Senate.
   
   Oshinsky is skeptical about this meeting, for which there is no reliable testimony. However, a host of circumstantial evidence supports the idea that the American Catholic church recruited McCarthy.
   
   First, as anybody who attended Mass in the early `50s (as I did) knows, the church was desperate to launch a counterattack in eastern Europe and for that it needed some standard bearer in the U.S. government. McCarthy was it.
   
   Second, McCarthy's preferred companions of an evening were floozies and grifters. He did not regularly, or even irregularly, socialize with priests. To imagine that a singular long meeting with two priests and a fanatical Catholic layman was devoted to chatting about Notre Dame football is beyond belief.
   
   Third, Catholics stuck to McCarthy long past the time that he was becoming a political liability in most other sectors of American life. (That his loudest and longest cheerleaders -- still cheering in 2008, in fact -- were the bigoted Catholic William F. Buckley Jr. and his brother-in-law Brent Bozell tells us much.)
   
   Oshinsky does a good job of recreating how crazy the McCarthy era was, even though he hardly mentions the concurrent Red scares that went along with it -- Robert Oppenheimer's security investigations get a single footnote, for example. I well remember how fearful people became when McCarthy's name came up.
   
   Oshinsky gives Dwight Eisenhower a lot of credit for bringing McCarthy down, second only to McCarthy's own flaws. But the fact that a president as popular as Ike had to do so sneakily, and that it took almost the first half of his first term to get it done, shows just how powerful the fear was.
   
   Oshinsky's admiration for Ike's skill in maneuvering McCarthy out of power is tempered by his disdain for Ike's refusal to confront him early and in the open.
   
   McCarthy lived at a burnout pace, and "A Conspiracy So Immense" overwhelms with detail. There were so many scandals. Nevertheless, the last 200 pages rush past as all the threads are spun together into a rope that finally hangs the evildoer.
   
   Only an opera librettist would have countenanced the coincidences that really happened around McCarthy. He had so many attacks going on simultaneously, and they all blew up on a single day, March 9, 1954. The Washington Post required no fewer than 12 stories, plus editorials and cartoons to keep up with Joe that day.
   
   He was elemental, a force of nature. But, Oshinsky says, he was never a threat to subvert the government. Unlike a Hitler (whom he resembled), he had no larger goal. He did not even have an antisubversive plan to throttle the commies with. He seemed to care only to expose them, presumably thus causing righteousness to prevail.
   
   This silly idea he probably came to instinctively, but it is also another hint that Catholic puppeteers were pulling his strings. It was firmly believed by the church that Russian communism was barely sustaining itself and even a slight push would knock it down. That is why the prospect of war in eastern Europe did not appall the Sheens and Spellmans (or, at a humbler level, my parish priest, Father Shea).
   
   Three incidents, out of hundreds, stand out in this life.
   
   One is McCarthy's bewilderment after the famous dressing down he got from Joe Welch on national television, when Welch stared him down and asked whether he had "at last no decency." After it was over, McCarthy is pictured asking in bewilderment, "What did I do? What did I do?"
   
   Even worse, but less famous because there is no film of it, was his treatment of a poor (and by the time McCarthy was through with her, jobless) black woman named Annie Lee Moss. Oshinsky reports that the steely Sen. John McClellan "seemed almost in tears" as he watched McCarthy's humiliation of this innocent woman. It made me cry.
   
   The last image is of McCarthy, out of power, weeping on the sidewalk after being thrown out of a Republican dinner. McCarthy, Oshinsky believes, wanted to be liked, but would rather have been hated than ignored. During the last three years of his short life, he was ignored and, with any other subject, the picture of him sobbing in loneliness might raise a sympathetic tremor.
   
   Not this man. His was no Greek tragedy. McCarthy's story was black and then blacker.
   
   In the end, Oshinsky says, McCarthy's strength and weakness was his "outrageous independence." If so many people had not been injured so badly, it would almost be funny: A man claiming to be fighting for all he was worth (nothing, as it turned out) to save society who was never part of that society himself.