*Does Griffith convincingly undermine or change the 2 
dominant themes in the historiography of McCarthyism: 
the portrayal of anti-communism as a mass movement of 
the new "radical right" and the depiction of McCarthy 
as its charismatic leader. (x)

*The entire first chapter and much of the book focuses
 on McCarthy  and his personality.  Does this
undermine  Griffith's claim that the importance of
McCarthy's  influential personality was not as
important as it  appears in early historiography?

*Griffith uses a Przbysewski like method in describing
 the personal background of McCarthy to help explain 
his actions.  Is his method effective?   Is the idea 
of a private "Joe" versus a public "McCarthy" 
substantiated?

*McCarthyism peaked at a time when anti-communist 
sentiment in America is running high.  Do you think 
the limited scope of the book--his focus on the 
Senate--effects his argument?  Would it be effected by
 looking at anti-communist and McCarthyism sentiments 
outside of the Senate?  How would the consideration of
 public opinion have changed the argument of the book 
if at all?

*What exactly is the "politics of fear" in this book? 
 How is it portrayed by Griffith?

*McCarthy's rise, according to Griffith, came about  
within a preexisting anti-communist movement.  How  
would the movement have evolved without McCarthy?   
What was his effect on the movement?

*Does Griffith give a convincing explanation of why
the  political paralysis in the Senate allowing the
censure  of McCarthy breaks when it does?

*How does Griffith's portrayal of Presidents
Eisenhower  and Truman compare with Hogan's.

*Party politics are central to both Hogan's and 
Griffith's analysis of government policy during this 
period.  Compare the portrayal of these politics and 
political ideology by  each author.