Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Just how far has John McCain slid into the abyss? So far that Glenn Beck is now the voice of reason in opposition to his lunacy. With the arrest of Faisal Shahzad, an American citizen, for the crappy attempt to bomb Times Square, McCain immediately joined the right wing idiot's chorus for ignoring the constitution:
"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.
Rule of law? What rule of law? Real men don't care about such things, they decide arbitrarily who gets rights and who doesn't -- to hell with that pesky constitution thing those liberal eggheads seem to like so much. And would you believe, Glenn Beck of all people is the voice of reason?
Politics
Comments
The judge didn't do too shabby of a job either.
Posted by: Travis | May 5, 2010 9:40 AM
Even so, Napolitano is still the brighter of the two. He was the biggest voice of reason in this matter.
Posted by: Tristan Band | May 5, 2010 9:42 AM
"Don't give this guy his Miranda rights until we find out what it's all about,"
The stupidest thing about this is that the guy has the rights whether you read them to him or not. That's kind of how rights work. The reading is just to make sure he's aware of those rights. In fact, if you don't read him those rights, there's a good chance you've just let him get off scott free.
Given what McCain went through for this country, you'd think he'd have a little more respect for its Constitutional principles.
Posted by: Brian Smith | May 5, 2010 9:52 AM
Tristan,
I'm not sure what you're trying to say here?
Posted by: dogmeat | May 5, 2010 9:54 AM
Wow, Glenn Beck the voice of reason on this case.... even when the douchebag Brian Kilmeade kept bringing the same simplistic far-right wing--the Constitution isn't applicable in a time of war--talking points. I'm surprised.
Posted by: Goldbrick4 | May 5, 2010 9:56 AM
Maybe McCain has more inside information than we have to make such a judgment about weather this American citizen has constitutional protections or not. Maybe there is a compelling bit of evidence that says this American should not have freedoms specified by the highest law of our land.
Maybe John McCain has access to Faisal Shahzad's voting records and knows that he's a registered Democrat.
Posted by: Ken | May 5, 2010 10:15 AM
Glenn Beck is indeed praiseworthy for defending the Constitution, but he makes an arbitrary distinction between citizen and noncitizen. The Constitution makes no such distinction. The Fifth Amendment states that "no person" -- NOT "no citizen" -- "shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law..."
Posted by: Chris Crawford | May 5, 2010 10:16 AM
I'm sorry, but there is no constitutional right to be mirandized. All the Supreme Court has held is that an arrestee's statements to police are inadmissible in court unless he's had his Miranda rights explained to him. But the government is free to use this information in other ways.
Posted by: lukas | May 5, 2010 10:19 AM
Olbermann went on a near-screaming rant at McCain last night. It was an odd attack on an odd target. McCain's political career is waning; even if he beats Hayworth, it's not like he has a snowball's chance in hell at making it to the White House.
Ed's right: this video is a shocking display of a Glenn Beck in one of his infrequent outbursts of reason.
Posted by: barry | May 5, 2010 10:29 AM
@dogmeat
What I am trying to say is that Glenn Beck is not at worth a consistent damn, and that Andrew Napolitano had the stronger arguments in the defendent's favor.
Posted by: Tristan Band | May 5, 2010 10:34 AM
John McCain's total capitulation to his party's extreme right wing is as sad as it is totally pointless and contrary to his career interests.
Seriously, WHAT GOOD has it ever done him? His entire appeal to non-extremists has always been based on his willingness to stand on his own and be his own man. That plus his "war hero" status was the ONLY thing that ever made him a credible candidate for President. And yet every time the radical idiots trashed him, he simply let it happen, when he could have stood up to their obvious insanity, stupidity and lack of patriotism, and earned himself lasting respect among moderates.
Is McCain that easily deluded by the radicals, that easily cut off from direct contact with the real world? Or is he just tired and senile? Those are the only two explanations -- the radical right sure as Hell aren't tougher, or smarter, than the North Vietnamese who tried, and failed, to break him.
Posted by: Raging Bee | May 5, 2010 10:42 AM
C'mon, guys. Let's be fair. If anyone in America knows about "serious mistakes," it's John McCain. You may remember his last one, Sarah Palin.
Posted by: Duke York | May 5, 2010 10:50 AM
Unfortunately McCain is my senator. Also unfortunately he has a dog whistle permanently stuck in his throat. It didn't used to be that way. He's now joined the ranks of other republicans, being that it's all about winning and not about governing at all.
Posted by: David Thompson | May 5, 2010 10:55 AM
On the contrary, this is absolutely in character for John McCain. From the beginning, the only thing that mattered was ... John McCain. The rest of it -- bipartisanship, "maverick," all that -- was just marketing. That "brand" isn't working this year, and sticking with it is going to end up with McCain on the beach watching Senator Hayworth take one of the seats that rightfully belong to John McCain while Barack Obama continues to occupy the other.
Since that's a totally unacceptable outcome, it's time for some rebranding. Which is what we're seeing.
Posted by: D. C. Sessions | May 5, 2010 11:36 AM
Raging Bee @ 11 stated:
The Viet Cong broke Mr. McCain in some ways, like talking; enough he earned the ire of a co-prisoner who was never broke. In all fairness to Mr. McCain however if IIRC that was the only dude they didn't break. In addition Mr. McCain refused to be released prior to comrades who'd been held longer, which in one way is an example of not breaking. Mr. McCain admits he was broke in one of his books so it's not something he hides but instead uses to help educate the public.
Citation: http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/23316912/makebelieve_maverick/print (Now requires subscription to access, which I don't have though I've linked to this story in this forum prior to RS's new subscription requirement).
Posted by: Michael Heath | May 5, 2010 11:45 AM
From the beginning, the only thing that mattered was ... John McCain. The rest of it -- bipartisanship, "maverick," all that -- was just marketing.
But it still doesn't make sense: caving to the far right has never been good for him. Every time he did it, he looked lamer and lost credibility. He lost respect from moderates, and on top of that, the people he caved to didn't respect him any more for it. Caving to the far right was a lose-lose every time he did it, and it was a losing proposition for everyone else who tried it, including Bush Sr., Forbes, and even Huckabee, who saw his hard-earned "religious right leader" position swiped by Sarah Palin despite his tenure as both a governor and a minister. Why couldn't McCain see, and learn from, such obvious and consistent experience? We're still left with only two answers: delusion or senility.
Posted by: Raging Bee | May 5, 2010 11:59 AM
On a tangential note, if only Obama had realized this earlier in his term.
Posted by: Sadie Morrison | May 5, 2010 12:10 PM
Raging Bee, excellent comment at #16. Pandering to the Far Right is a lose-lose situation. Society loses. The panderer loses. The panderees don't even fucking notice...
Great observation. I never quite realized it before.
Posted by: James Sweet | May 5, 2010 12:22 PM
I have no interest in the candidacy of JD Hayworth, but Christ almighty, McCain has to go.
He's become a living cartoon.
Posted by: CHV | May 5, 2010 12:26 PM
Who's the asshat on the right, who thinks the Constitution doesn't apply when a person is "a threat to the country"?
Posted by: James Hanley | May 5, 2010 12:29 PM
In fact, I liked your comment so much I based a blog post on it. I hope you don't mind too much... (Credit is explicit and original comment is linked)
Posted by: James Sweet | May 5, 2010 12:30 PM
Once again, I'm struck by how New Yorkers - the Real Americans, as far as the terrorists are concerned - can take these threats in stride. Meanwhile, the self-styled Real Americans, those rural folks who are in no danger of being noticed by a terrorist, are the most thoroughly terrorized people in the country. It's just embarrassing.
Posted by: Scott Hanley | May 5, 2010 12:51 PM
Huffington Post & Mayor Bloomberg are of the mind that US citizens should be denied the right to own or purchase a firearm just because they are on a terror watch list or no-fly list.
So glad to see people wanting others to be denied rights before being convicted of a crime. Hypocrites.
Posted by: Madrocketscientist | May 5, 2010 1:19 PM
The Huffington Post is an abstract entity that has no capacity for thoughts or opinions. Dan Froomkin is of the opinion that suspected terrorists should not be allowed to purchase firearms.
Posted by: Brandon | May 5, 2010 2:23 PM
Brandon "Dan Froomkin..."
"Froomkin"? Is he a hobbit?
Posted by: Modusoperandi | May 5, 2010 2:43 PM
Cris Crawford at # 7
Thanks for mentioning that the relevant sections of the constitution makes no distinction between citizen and non-citizen. After the Christmas day bombing Right-wingers were defending Bush's actions to not deny Padilla due process it was OK because he was an American citizen. That drove me nuts because the relevant portions of the Constitution never mention citizenship.
The fifth amendment says "NO PERSON shall be held to answer". The sixth amendment also states in ALL criminal prosecutions, the accused." The 14th amendment states that "nor shall any State deprive ANY PERSON of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law: nor deny to ANY PERSON" within it's jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Being a citizen has nothing to do with those in the due process sense.
Posted by: Zaxro | May 5, 2010 5:15 PM
The SCOTUS has already made an exception to Miranda in some case (forgive my poor memory, but I forgot the name) where a suspect with an empty holster was asked where his gun was before he was read his rights. The reasoning had something to do with imminent public safety concerns trumping his rights to be immediately told his rights. At any rate, despite McCain and the rest of these blathering idiots clamoring for suspension of Miranda rights because they *just know he's guilty*, there are times where the need for information (that could protect the public from an imminent threat) may necessitate temporarily delaying the delivery of the Miranda information to a suspect. I know that what comes of anything said pre-Miranda-reading *might* be considered fruit of a poisonous tree, but there are probably actual times we should be able to question people without having to remind them of their 5th amendment rights straight away, no?
Posted by: Troy | May 5, 2010 5:15 PM
The Huffington Post is an abstract entity that has no capacity for thoughts or opinions.
Ah, yes, very true. Dan is a hypocrite, the HP just gives him space to rant.
Posted by: Madrocketscientist | May 5, 2010 5:39 PM
Ed stated:
" to hell with that pesky constitution thing those liberal eggheads seem to like so much"
Hold on now. I think the Tea Party people like the Constitution too. I know some are idiot supporters of torture that tag along for the ride because they hear lower taxes. BUT, others who support Ron Paul (Rasmussen poll had him trailing Obama by one point so I think it is more of these people then many think) are just as pissed about wire taps, torture, and foreign occupation as any liberal. I am suspicious how much Beck really believes in the Liberatarian causes his says he promotes but he is sounding more like Ron Paul everyday and I am just not sure why you oppose the Paleo Conservative message so much?
Posted by: King of Ireland | May 5, 2010 9:04 PM
I can't believe I'm typing this, but I agree with Glenn Beck. What is wrong with the world?
Posted by: nickcan | May 6, 2010 2:47 AM
mccain was never broken by the viet cong, he was broken by the north vietnamese. there was a difference, you should know it if you post it.
Posted by: jim | May 6, 2010 5:38 AM
Wait, liberals like the Constitution? This must be some new Constitution that I was previously unaware of. Because liberals seem to be doing a pretty good job of stepping all over it.
Sure, liberals love the Constitution; except for the Full Faith and Credit Clause, the Commerce Clause, the Separation of Powers, Article One, Article Two, Article Four, and Amendments one, two, four, five, six, nine and ten.
Posted by: Evan | May 6, 2010 7:09 AM
Evan @ 32 stated:
If you read Ed's blog post daily, or Glen Greenwald's you'd find their readers who are liberal absolutely do.
Evan @ 32 stated:
Perhaps you've cocooned yourself off to reality, or have a reading comprehension problem, or are so zealously ideological you've became incapable of evaluating bad behavior in a representative manner that includes all U.S. political ideologies.
Evan @ 32 stated:
This is a confusing statement. Liberalism is a political ideology, not a political party. Are you claiming that liberal people are violating the Constitution or are you claiming a certain political party in power is 'stepping all over it'? If you are are referring to a political party, you'll need to validate those in power "stepping all over it" are actually liberal, that liberal constituencies don't call them out on it, that liberal constituencies don't work to end that behavior - all within an environment of the competing choice if they rejected liberal politicians - the new GOP. In order to not merely present a strawman, your presentation should be context of liberal performance on this matter relative to what we encounter and expect from non-liberals if they were in power.
Evan @ 32 stated:
Citations please. In addition, please provide some context that liberals are violating the context far worse than non-liberals. If your citations are regarding politicians in power, please also provide cited evidence they are both acting as a liberal on this violation, that liberals are not protesting their actions, and that we'd see far better fealty to the Constitution if non-liberals were in power.
Posted by: Michael Heath | May 6, 2010 9:08 AM
Wow, I'm very impressed with Glenn Beck. I think what he wanted to say but didn't get to say it was something to the effect of "Without the Constitution, all the things this country is about are pointless...it's what makes us great". Though it seems that people now seem to be thinking in a frame of mind that people who aren't citizens are not protected by the Bill of Rights, which they are. Apparently, the Patriot Act wiped out the Bill of Rights...
Posted by: afranze | May 6, 2010 1:33 PM
Having to say the miranda warning to every criminal or alleged criminal when they are trying to fight you and bite you after they have pulled a gun on you or tried to blow something up is nice and all, but does anyone think it's kind of a slap in the face to police? just a loophole that can be used in court... The squad car should just have a sign on the side like film sets, "If you walk into this area you are agreeing to be filmed.", etc only it's the miranda rights... That's what we hear all the time, "I didn't do anything" or "I wasn't read my miranda rights"...if you did the crime, you should just admit what you did, but what criminal does that? Americans should be aware of their rights and it should not be possible to use ignorance as an excuse. When was the last time you got out of a speeding ticket by saying, I didn't know what the speed limit was?
Posted by: Amoore | October 6, 2010 1:09 AM