| | Advanced Search


Misquamicut Beach to Present FallFest—The Misquamicut Business Association will host FallFest at…

Gronkowski “Good to Go” Week 1—Rob Gronkowski told reporters at Gillette Stadium that…

Russell Moore: Experience Makes Caprio a No-Brainer for Treasurer—Let's face it: politics is strange business.

Smart Benefits: Two Regs Issued on Contraceptive Coverage—Two regulations on contraceptive coverage were recently issued…

Peace Flag Project to Host Rhode Island Month of Peace in September—The Peace Flag Project will host over 30…

Don’t Miss: Fall Newport Secret Garden Tours—The Benefactors of the Arts will present a…

Fall Activities for the Whole Family—Mark your calendars for the best activities of…

Skywatching: Seagrave Memorial Observatory Centennial (1914-2014)—Skyscrapers, Inc., the Amateur Astronomical Society of Rhode…

The Urban Gardener: Harvesting Green Beans + Sunflowers—Gardening made simple...

Friday Financial Five - August 29, 2014—The Tax Foundation has put together a helpful…


Travis Rowley: Hitting the Wall

Saturday, January 07, 2012


Recently GoLocalProv guest mindsetter Daniel Wall, a member of the Providence teachers union, called my overall assessment of organized labor “shameful,” particularly my claim that Marxist philosophy largely influences the modern labor movement. Wall writes that he “would have more respect” for me if I abandoned “sensationalized claims” and that I actually provided some “evidence.”

Consider this Part One in a series of responses to Wall’s critique.

In addition to organized labor, the overall political culture of the Left – ethics, strategy, etc. – is another regular focus of mine. And I often reveal how, and why, leftists choose to smear and ridicule their conservative rivals, rather than confront their ideas. By crafting an op-ed, Mr. Wall obviously managed to sidestep that impression.

Except to those who actually read it.

A careful examination of his column reveals that Mr. Wall, in fact, perfectly toed the leftist line by falsely describing an absence of argument within my writings. While the complete opposite is true, at the end of Wall’s column it is clear that readers are meant to believe that I am the one who avoids “debate, deliberation and discussion,” deciding instead to “besmirch” and cast “unfounded accusations.”

Entirely ignoring my arguments, Wall implies that I provided none, and then simply went on to sound as dignified as possible by primarily pontificating about lofty and untouchable ideals such as “unity,” “loyalty,” “due process,” “honesty,” and “keeping promises.” Oh, and the wisdom of George Washington.

By denying the existence of my arguments and accusing me of his own misdeeds, Wall employed a typical left-wing tactic; that is, he dodged the debate over union-Marxism, and turned me into a conservative caricature that weak liberal arguments could overcome. In this sense, the entire article was just another leftist smear.


Wall ends his column by comparing me to the 1950s Republican Senator Joe McCarthy, the Left’s favorite fallback whenever faced with criticism. After decades of establishing a tarnished legacy for Senator McCarthy – namely for his attempts at exposing covert communist schemes within the United States – the Left had armed itself with a political device that would serve to discredit, shame, and silence any future detractors.

The irony is that the charge of McCarthyism became a reckless and erroneous charge itself – designed by the Left for the express purpose of reflexively painting their critics as something they are not.

“Actually, Mr. Liberal Democrat, the progressive income tax is a Marxist concept. Marx advocated for it in the Communist Manifesto.” Hey! That’s McCarthyism!

While Senator McCarthy’s tactics may have been destructive to the democratic process, left-wing revisionists have never acknowledged these truths from the McCarthy era: Senator McCarthy was confronting full-blown deception; those called before his congressional committees were, in fact, found to be members of an international conspiracy that served Soviet interests; there never would have been a need for McCarthyism if American communists weren’t disguising themselves as “progressives” within “popular front groups;” if the communists invoking the Fifth Amendment were simply honest about their intentions, then Senator McCarthy wouldn’t have had to resort to questionable inquiries.

Bottom Line – McCarthy was a patriot. American communists were liars.

As former Trotskyite Max Eastman wrote in 1953, “We are dealing with conspirators who try to sneak in the Moscow-inspired propaganda by stealth and double talk, who run for shelter to the Fifth Amendment when they are not only permitted but invited and urged by Congressional committee to state what they believe. I myself, after struggling for years to get this fact recognized, give McCarthy the major credit for implanting it in the mind of the whole nation.”

As I’ve warned of before, today we face a similar dilemma with our own “progressives.” They are more than they portend to be.

Dishonesty Via Ignoring “Evidence”

Mr. Wall accuses me of having a “political agenda” – an agenda other than the truth, which he professes to value. Meanwhile, however, Wall conveniently snubs the evidence that supports my claim of a Marxist-labor connection, including the writings of two prominent socialist professors applauding organized labor for its longstanding commitment to collectivism, that “promot[ing] their fortunes in the aggregate…has sustained the labor movement in the face of a counter pull from the ideal of individual achievement.”

Within the column that Wall focused on, I went on to support my argument by quoting Brenda Stokeley, a former AFSCME official in New York City, who said in 2003, “The first thing we have to do is remind ourselves that we are fighting for socialism.” I also quoted SEIU president Andy Stern: “There are opportunities in America to share better in the wealth, to rebalance the power. And unions and government are part of the solution.” Peter Asen was highlighted in the column as the quintessential “progressive,” a community organizer known for making submissions to a “revolutionary socialist” website, who was once an officer of the RI Democratic Party, and who now works as a “policy analyst” for the state’s Democratic General Assembly, “focusing on health care and labor policies.” I mentioned that NEA-RI executive director Bob Walsh once sat on the Board of Ocean State Action, a “progressive” organization once run by Asen. I referenced Netroots Nation, a “progressive” organization that proudly features the self-declared communist Van Jones on its website’s homepage; an organization that flatly admits that co-opting the labor movement is crucial to their plans to redistribute the nation’s wealth; and that lists the AFL-CIO, the NEA, the AFT, SEIU, AFSCME and other labor organizations as their “premier sponsors.” Finally, I explained how public union leaders’ utopian scheme for their members included the establishment of a series of “promises” and “contracts” that would force the government to raise taxes in the event that public pension funds were discovered to be poorly funded – in effect, socializing the losses.

And in previous writings, such as here I further elaborate on the deep and disturbing connections between unions, Democrats, and socialists.

Without mention of any of this, Mr. Wall – a man who claims to “have read and heard many of Rowley’s comments on the ‘evils’ of American labor unions” – somehow concludes that this all represents a void of “evidence” and “unfounded accusations.”

Whether one agrees or disagrees with my assessments, what could explain this failure to observe my overt attempts to provide proof of all my claims? Perhaps Mr. Wall has adopted another tactic of the radical Left that I am fond of writing about – lying, lying, lying, and more lying.

Travis Rowley (TravisRowley.com) is the chairman of the RI Young Republicans and a consultant for the Barry Hinckley Campaign for US Senate.


Enjoy this post? Share it with others.


McCarthy was right; the State Department was full of Communists, Commie Sympathizers, and "fellow traveleers." Documents revealed after the fall of the Soviet Union, in an effort called the "Venona Project" document this. As far as I can tell, liberals ignore all of the findings, which include, among other things, that the Rosenbergs were guilty.

Comment #1 by Michael Trenn on 2012 01 07

So I guess the lesson here today is: Don't mess with Mr. Rowley.

Comment #2 by Gip H. on 2012 01 07

Great article. The McCarthy stuff is awesome.

Comment #3 by Chris O. on 2012 01 07


"Senator McCarthy’s tactics may have been destructive to the democratic process ... ottom Line – McCarthy was a patriot."

So patriotism is destructive to the democratic process.

Finally, we agree.

Even a fool of Palin-esque proportions can stumble upon the truth.

Comment #4 by Charles Drago on 2012 01 07


Let's try that again, but without the schizoid boldface:

"Senator McCarthy's tactics may have been destructive to the democratic process ... bottom line -- McCarthy was a patriot."

So patriotism is destructive to the democratic process.

Finally, we agree.

Even a fool of Palin-esque proportions can stumble upon the truth.

Comment #5 by Charles Drago on 2012 01 07

Wrong, Drago ---- LYING is destructive to the democratic process. Only someone like you could interpret that line incorrectly.

Comment #6 by Chris O. on 2012 01 09


As in lying your "democracy" into war?

As in lying your "democracy" into installing an unelected candidate as its president?

Comment #7 by Charles Drago on 2012 01 09

oh my God, get over it already. Bush won the 2000 election.

And what's with your total small-minded inability to stay on topic? The people see your full-fledged sarcasm for what it truly is....complete intellectual insecurity.

Comment #8 by Chris O. on 2012 01 09


Ahh, the voice of the people.

Pimping for the ownership class.

"Chris O," you're just another coward hiding behind a pseudonym. Thanks so very much for your kind words. They shall be appreciated in their appropriate context.

Grow a spine a get back to us under your own name.

Although the procedure might require stem cell therapy ... and we all know how your masters tell you to feel about that.

Comment #9 by Charles Drago on 2012 01 09

More sarcasm. No argument. Telling. Watch Drago try to score points because readers don't know my last name, as if that's relevant to any argument. All distraction, Drago. Here, my last name is Oreko. NOW can we get back on topic? What a fool.

Normal Person: "2+2 = 4"
Drago: "You're just for the ownership class."
Normal Person: "No really, 2+2 = 4. I can prove it."
Drago: "You're just a coward who won't tell us your last name."

What. A. Fool.

And you're a liar. Shall I repost the lie you attempted to tell several months back? Haven't we gone through this already? Dope.

Comment #10 by Chris O. on 2012 01 10


If you insist upon calling me a liar, do so over your full name and address.

Then be prepared to prove your claim in a court of law, because I will sue you for defamation of character and libel.

If you doubt my resolve, then do as I ask.

If you call me a liar again under any other circumstances, you once again will underscore your intellectual and physical cowardice.

Scum does indeed rise to the top.

Comment #11 by Charles Drago on 2012 01 10

Here it is, again, for Everyone to see. Drago, Drew, and myself have already had this fight ( http://www.golocalprov.com/news/nee/ ). Drago is a liar (and also ignorant on the legalities of "defamation of character and libel")... Here's a GoLocal dialogue from several months ago:


Yea, okay, DRAGO. Figure out my last name by yourself. As far as the proof that you are a left-wing lying hack, here you go everyone:


Charles DRAGO writes:

Thanks to the Daily Kos and "Anonymous," we have on record the following memorandum from Karl Rove to members of his shadowy, billionaire-funded American Crossroads GPS outfit.

MAKE SPECIAL NOTE of how Rove quotes his -- and Rowley's -- role model, Adolf Hitler. Although not, of course, by name: For the coward Rove, der Fuhrer becomes "someone else."

Aug. 24, 2011
From: KR
To: All Internet Operatives and Interns
Re: Internet Operations -- For Immediate and Aggressive Implementation

Hello Gang,

... I simply cannot emphasize this point enough: No meme is too extreme or radical. "Obama is worse than Bush!" "Obama is a war criminal!" Remember: the reader thinks he is reading the opinion of a fellow liberal. It's all about peer suggestibility, people. Keep expanding the Overton Window. The more you push a radical notion, the more likely a slightly less radical notion becomes acceptable. Someone else said it this way: "The bigger the lie, the more likely people will believe it."

So take it over the top. Absolutely nothing is outside the realm of plausibility. "Obama is an alien from the planet Negron." I like it!

Comment #30 by Charles Drago on 2011 08 28

Comment #11 by Drew M on 2011 10 08

I remember this. Drago tried to convince everyone that conservatives lie by posting a blatantly phony email written by a liberal operative posing as "Karl Rove," who was instructing imagined conservative minions to spread lies about Obama. Go home, Drago. It's getting embarrassing.

Comment #12 by Chris O. on 2011 10 08

That's right, Chris. Glad you remember. If I hadn't investigated DRAGO's lie, nobody would have ever known. I'll leave by copying my former reply to DRAGO's deception:

ALERT: Charles Drago is a Liar and a Daily Kos hack/buffoon/lemming. Go read what he just used to support his arguments. A glaringly phony email that people are supposed to believe Karl Rove wrote.

More left-wing thuggery below. Written by "Anonymous" with a left-wing activist declaring "This shows how blatantly dishonest the right is and the lengths that they will go to win elections without talking actual issues."

Just more propaganda - Accusing your rivals of your own dishonest tactics! I just keep thinking that Rowley has a point: These aren't people. These are Democrats....They make up lies and then pass them off as truth all over the internet. Screw you, people. Seriously.

Thanks, Drago for proving Rowley's point even further. I can't believe you fell for this....Or maybe you wrote it? What's your real name again?


Comment #32 by Drew M on 2011 08 28

Comment #13 by Drew M on 2011 10 08

Comment #12 by Chris O. on 2012 01 10

Thanks so much, and God bless.

Comment #13 by Charles Drago on 2012 01 10

Frankly, it's no wonder that someone might be unwilling to use his real name in this context - the (poorly reasoned) blog post by Rowley is a full-on defense of McCarthyism! It was very wise for the Founding Fathers to create in the Constitution a living document that protects anonymous speech.

Comment #14 by Matthew Cento on 2012 01 10

Write your comment...

You must be logged in to post comments.