Tuesday, May 4, 2010

Serious Pandering

Senator John McCain, of all people, should know better than to say something like this. From an article on the The Hill.

It would have been a serious mistake to have read the suspect in the attempted Times Square car bombing his Miranda rights, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said Tuesday.

McCain, the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a longtime leading Republican on national security issues, said he expected the suspect in the case could face charges that might warrant a death sentence if convicted.

"Obviously that would be a serious mistake...at least until we find out as much information we have," McCain said during an appearance on "Imus in the Morning" when asked whether the suspect, 30-year-old Faisal Shahzad, a naturalized American citizen from Pakistan.

"Don't give this guy his Miranda rights until we find out what it's all about," McCain added during an appearance on the Imus show, which is broadcast by the Fox Business Network.


Having personally suffered at the hands of a country that set the rule book aside, you'd think his belief in protecting rights would supercede his desire to get re-elected. You'd think.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Interesting Hank. I am no fan of the republican senator (although he is a true American hero!).

To be "fair and balanced", here is one from the democrat/independent side, Joe Lieberman:

"Lieberman plans to introduce a bill that would amend a decades-old law aimed at yanking citizenship from U.S. citizens who fight for a foreign military.

“I’m now putting together legislation to amend that to [specify that] any individual American citizen who is found to be involved in a foreign terrorist organization, as defined by the Department of State, would be deprived of their citizenship rights,” Lieberman said Tuesday."

The man taken into custody is an American citizen. I thought in this country we were innocent until proven guilty. It is appalling that Lieberman (who is not up for election) would take such a stance.

As a matter of fact, you agree with Glenn Beck (listen and/or watch him every day to understand) on this:

"He is a citizen of the United States, so I say we uphold the laws and the Constitution on citizens," the bombastic Fox News host said to the stunned co-hosts of "Fox and Friends". "If you are a citizen, you obey the law and follow the Constitution. [Shahzad] has all the rights under the Constitution."

We don't shred the Constitution when it is popular," Beck added. "We do the right thing."

Although, I know you don't agree, he is the most consistent and honest commentator in America who does solid research.

You would be surprised at how often you agree with him when it comes to protecting the constitution from destruction. Which is exactly what the current leadership is trying to do.

Hank said...

Lieberman's actions are also politically guided. See this article for more on the legal aspect of it.

By his own admission Glenn Back is in the entertainment business. Whether he and I agree or disagree on the same issue is inconsequential.

Anonymous said...

Yes, I understand Lieberman's stand on the issue. I will look at your link.

However, concerning Beck. He is a commentator you have been critical of in the past, so it is consequential. My point was that you agree with him more than you would like to admit.

It is also consequential that we have people of influence who stand up for and defend the constitution of the United States when there are others who would like to shred it to pieces.

It really doesn't matter who defends it, just that we have people who consistently and honestly do defend it.