Part: 123456789         Session: 1         Page na123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191 of 191

No. No. That's still the rule. They don't quote it just that way. A former Communist could still be employed, provided it was shown that he had given up Communism and had, in fact, abjured it. Now you have to show that pretty clearly. A man who just soft-pedals it to conceal the fact that his wife hadn't given it up...it's the same old story: a man has a constitutional right to be a Communist, but he has no constitutional right to work for the Government of the United States. No, none whataver.

No, those are not two different questions. I mean, the Government of the United States--

There are lots of people who don't have the constitutional right to work for the Government of the United States.

--and who don't work for the Government of the United States. That's right. It can be for all kinds of reasons.

The presumption, it seems to me, came to be based on the idea that Communism was a great international conspiracy and anybody who was a Communist was probably therefore treasonous.

Oh well, I think you've over-stated that. Oh, yes. It didn't come to be that. Communism is a strange doctrine,