Why do liberals hate J. Edgar Hoover?

D

Doug.38PR

Moderator
Why do liberals hate J. Edgar Hoover. I grew up (and I'm 28 not 58) in a home who generally regarded J. Edgar Hoover as a patriotic guy who shaped up the FBI into a good LEO agency (not perfect), a guy who stood firm against communists and used the FBI to help hunt down gangsters in the 20s and 30s.

But liberals today (and even some conservative minded people my age) act like Hoover is the the devil himself.

I mean he did serve the FBI for 50 some odd years turning into a fairly good national LEO investigation agency. He did stand firm against communists.
I remember a movie we have on tape at home called The FBI Story with James Stewart. There is no doubt a lot of embellishing as it is Hollywood, but my I remember my dad telling me that many points of that movie were essentially true, such as Hoover himself approaching some gangster (who bragged that he was going to kill Hoover himself) in person and arresting him on the street.
 
...have you noticed a systematic toppling of all of our icons of integrity(from george washington to jefferson to walt disney to hoover and everybody in between)..i am getting suspicious of all this 'new' information....
 
Read up on the guy a bit. As a LEO, he did some important things, but he was a controversial figure and no friend of civil liberties.

...have you noticed a systematic toppling of all of our icons of integrity(from george washington to jefferson to walt disney to hoover and everybody in between)..i am getting suspicious of all this 'new' information....
Click to expand...
I await some examples with baited breath.
 
J. Edgar Hoover was an egomaniacal fascist whose skills as a law enforecement officer were minimal in comparison to his skills as a clearly psychologically disturbed beauracratic dictator and blackmailer.

His regime represented an abysmal failure in federal law enforcement as well as a degradation of all constitutional rights and freedoms we hold dear.

I challange you to demonstrate different.

WildimnotaliberalandirememberhimAlaska

PS:

I remember my dad telling me that many points of that movie were essentially true, such as Hoover himself approaching some gangster (who bragged that he was going to kill Hoover himself) in person and arresting him on the street.
Click to expand...

WODR, yer daddy was worng
 
I go along with the "Hoover was not a hero" sentiment.

He systematically destroyed most of the BOR's as well as blackmailed, cheated, and lied to get his way.

And for all of that he had a building named after him.?.

Why do the good guys get nothing and the bad guys get icons named for them?
 
yes I have read that page and several others on hoover. I didn't see anything in that one that particularly stood out as making him the worst human being to ever enter American public service. In fact it states more accomplishment than ills in his life
Also, the info from that link is from contermporary sources. Many contemporary historians (left wing leanings) tend to downplay the threat of communism as though it was just some harmless ideal philosophy that paranoid weirdo's made out to be bad (most often citing Joe McCarthy). Make no mistake, communism was real, communism did vow to destroy the American way of life (and by that I don't mean some abstract statement like "america is the greatest country on earth" but to say that the American way of life is a free republican society that is founded on Western Christian virtues) and it was a revolutionary philosophy that set itself in motion through violent and subversive means (Castro, Viet Cong, Communist revolutions of Russia, China, et al). They often did this through the educational institutions, political circles and, yes, even racial circles. MLK for instance was influenced, at least to some degree, by the communist party (even many good black leaders back then didn't trust him...he talked a lot about "non violence" but look how many of his influenced "marches" ended up.) and the Black Panthers were a militant radical group.
The point is, many of these threats that Hoover and others of his era opposed were not as harmless as modern liberal "educators" would have us believe. This is not to say that Hoover and many of his contemporaries were perfect or always right in their views or the way they handled things, but they are a far cry from the evil tyrannical monster liberal portray them as.

Even that link says there is no concrete evidence that he was in with the mafia or a homosexual or what all. Much of it is rumor. (possibly by people who didn't like him back then...liberals)
The fact that liberals don't like him (Truman, Kennedy, Johnson...three liberal presidents) gives me pause to think (this may not be such a bad guy)
Anytime the left despises someone means I will most likely like them.

WODR, yer daddy was worng
Click to expand...

You, Sir, are condescending and rude. My father is a good man whom I respect.
 
Sorry ya took it as condescending and rude, but yr daddy was still wrong.

The point is, many of these threats that Hoover and others of his era opposed were not as harmless as modern liberal "educators" would have us believe. This is not to say that Hoover and many of his contemporaries were perfect or always right in their views or the way they handled things, but they are a far cry from the evil tyrannical monster liberal portray them as.
Click to expand...

Illegal wiretaps? Illegqal burglaries? Ignoring horrific crime to pursue inefectual lefties or condoning murder for political ends? Lying and cheating? Abuse of the bill of rights?

Hoover was a psycho and a monster.

Wikpedia is worthless. After ya stop being indignant, Go get yourself some books.

WildiwasfightingleftistsbeforeyouwerebornAlaska
 
Why do liberals hate J. Edgar Hoover?
Click to expand...
Simple - because he was a queer.
Liberals hate fags, spics, niggers and (crude term which refers to women).

(*language used for emphasis only)
The modern *Liberal* in current US politics strongly adheres to a few ideas:
"Keep your friends close, and your enemy closer"
"Those that stand on the shoulders of others to reach the top,,,have good balance"

The "machine" behind the *liberal* today is simply herding all of what they deem, the "unfit" into one small place. Ironicly, it's an excellent idea (if extermination is the goal). *They* know that putting all of these groups together will eventually result in the different groups going after each other.

As firearm owners, it realy should be crystal clear. It's the same tactic that they use against us. Pit the hunters and skeet shooters against the RKBA'ers.
 
Why would ANYONE, liberal or conservative, laud this guy? The FBI is a pretty conservative bunch, and they tend to avoid saying anything complimentary about Hoover, even internally.

Hoover publically denied the existence of the Mafia and organized crime. Why?


I don't really understand this talk about shooting down icons. Certainly, the founding fathers were amongst the most liberal people of their time. And Lincoln was a Republican. Surely you can find someone to be proud of besides someone who violated civil rights as a matter of policy and denied entire areas of US crime that fell squarely in his jurisdiction?

If conservative icons are fools and crooks like Hoover, Nixon and McCarthy, conservatives have an image problem that doesn't need to be damaged by the left - it started broke.

Why not just get warm fuzzies from the Reagan years? Even the Liberals have forgotten about S&L scandals and Reaganomics. That guy was at least mostly honest.


So what is it? Does the Patriot Act just make you miss the days when law enforcement really knew how to quash civil rights? Or is part of "conservative thought" to look back on ANY conservative with desperately rose colored glasses. Really - this is pathetic.
 
Last edited:
Nice post Wildalaska. Doug, you posted about a controversial figure asking why he's not generally revered by everyone, don't get all in a snit when you get the answers you were looking for.

is that liberals don't have any genuine heroes of their own (other than MLK), so they run down ours.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we sure hate that FDR guy. And that Truman guy who desegregated the military? What a jerk! And screw that JFK guy, he slept with Marilyn Monroe and didn't let us have any. But you know who we liberals really can't stand? That Gandhi guy! And Medgar Evers, and Vernon Dahmer, and Rosa Parks, no love for those people. Certainly no love for Thomas Jefferson's ideas, or that nincompoop Albert Einstein. :rolleyes:

Signature about moving into "Republican" school districts...
Click to expand...
Interesting how the net flow of tax dollars is FROM blue states TO red states. Might explain why we like your school districts, we're building them for you. If you don't like it and want to turn off the spicket, I can send you an address where you can mail me a rebate check. :D
 
As wildalaska said read up on it from various sources.
This is an example what I saw on a documentary from a local library about the FBI when my daughter was trying to decide if she wanted to be an FBI agent. (she became a drug rep instead). I've since read it in other sources. The mafia drug problem escallated under Hoover as the result of his inaction. Maybe he thought it was no big deal pumping into the inner cities but now it affects every american home.
http://www.geocities.com/northstarzone/HOOVER.html
 
Last edited:
Wikpedia is worthless. After ya stop being indignant, Go get yourself some books
Click to expand...

Listen jerk, you want to disagree with me, that's okay. This board is for discourse and civil discussion, but I have 0 tolerance for smart alec creeps. "WODR Yer daddy was wrong"
Honest discourse and disagreement is one thing, rudness is another.
 
Doug, there is very little to get upset with that quote. Wikipedia is written by anyone who submits to it. "Indignant" is an accurate description of your tone. And the recommendation to seek published sources which are likely to be more accurate than the internet a very good one.

You, on the other hand, are name calling.
 
hoover and libs

Sorry, i,ve heard it on here before, i mean yesterday i heard g** d*** AND I DONT SAY THAT AND I GOT A FILTHY MOUTH anyhow, thanks for the warning, it wont happen again, i promise, please dont kick me off cause i love talking about guns see ya
 
Last edited:
Whoa. Calm down. Back up.

Ease up.

Look. Most of us here respect our fathers. Gawd knows I do-- I consider him one of my best friends.

That said, it's a fact that sometimes my dad is wrong. It's bound to happen. Fact is, the man hasn't yet figured out that "Walk On Water" trick, else picking up decoys would be a LOT easier. :)

It's a fact, Doug.38PR, that a lot of us (many of us in law enforcement, BTW) believe that Hoover systematically undermined the rights of citizens nationwide, for decades. I'm one of 'em, and most of the history books that I've read that addressed the issue seemed to agree.

Hoover did some good things-- he professionalized the national crime investigation force. He brought respect to law enforcement. His agency grew and caught some really Bad Men. But he did some bad things, too. He illegally conducted criminal investigations for political purposes. He tapped phones without warrants.

Many of us would disagree with your dad's assessment of Hoover as a good man. As we believe this, we would say that we believe your father was incorrect in his assessment. A direct way of saying that would be to say that your father was wrong. That's not saying that your dad was a bad man, or stupid, or anything of the sort. It's saying that we believe that your father didn't have all the facts, and believed a supposition to be true, which was not.

Problem is, then we have to define the difference between "good man" and "bad man," and that gets into semantics and indidual interpretation.

Put it this way: a LOT of people would now disagree with your father, but he could make a good case for being right. I just don't happen to agree with him.
 
Thank you Long Path,
That's a well and honest statement. As I said, I don't mind anyone disagreeing with me (that's what this board is all about), I don't mind anyone disagreeing with my dad's views (sometimes I do). It wasn't disagreeing that made me mad but rather the tone that was given "yer daddy was wrong" sounds very sassy and disrespectful. It's one thing to say "I think your wrong." it's another to say "you don't know what your talking about." Like you said, most of us here respect our fathers.

Wildalaska, I'm sorry for blowing up at you that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top