Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
McCain Takes Gitmo Ruling Personally
Why Does GOP Candidate Scorn Supreme Court's Affirmation Of Right Of Habeas Corpus?
John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, told a crowd of supporters in New Jersey Friday that the Supreme Court's latest Guantanamo Bay ruling is "one of the worst decisions in the history of this country."
Why would the normally stoic senator become so hyperbolic about a ruling that, at its essence, strengthens the vitality of the "Great Writ" of habeas corpus - a bedrock constitutional right?
There are several reasons. As a political matter, McCain clearly understands that in his quest to enchant the hard-right wing of the Grand Old Party, he must rail upon the Supreme Court whenever it happens to disagree with the Bush Administration on legal aspects of the war on terrorism.
This is why, just a few weeks ago, McCain delivered a speech that hammered the federal judiciary, sweeping away any lingering notion that he intends to govern as a moderate on legal policy and priorities.
So, whether or not McCain really believes what he says, it is good politics (read: inaccurate and unfair) to declare that the Court just sided with the terrorists over the President when five Justices ruled that the terror suspects detained in Cuba may challenge their detentions in our civilian courts.
And it is good politics to warn of the detainees clogging those courts with frivolous lawsuits - like current domestic prisoners do - even though the suspects so far only have sought to have some sort of objective, neutral fact-finder evaluate the government's classification of them as "enemy combatants."
The main reason for McCain's strong language, however, is as personal as political.
Following the last Supreme Court ruling on this topic, which also struck down stubborn Administration detainee policies, the Senator (a Vietnam torture victim himself) invested no small amount of his own treasured (and well-earned) historical capital to try to broker a deal on the detainees.
And, in late 2006, he did.
It's called the Military Commissions Act. It was a terrible idea from the very beginning, and it was one of two federal statutes undercut by the Justices last Thursday. It's no wonder the nominee is taking the defeat personally.
After first insisting that federal law clearly and unambiguously outlaw "torture," McCain suddenly caved to White House pressure on the MCA, allowing the Administration to insert into the law a clause that effectively allows (and, indeed, legally buttresses the efforts of) the executive branch to implement torture as a means of interrogation.
Without McCain's pander, there would have been no bad law for the Court to strike down last week. Without McCain's grandiloquent appeal to Democrats and moderates during that lame-duck session, there quite possibly might have been a better law that just might have passed its constitutional test this term.
McCain's sell-out on the torture language is not the reason the Justices declared the MCA unconstitutional. It is not the reason why the detainees now have more access to federal courts than they did before. But it is emblematic of the larger and much more destructive, seven-year-long sell-out of the legislative branch in the legal fight against terrorism.
And that emblem, thanks to the Supreme Court, now has John McCain's face on it just in time for the run-up to the general election.
This is not necessarily fair. It's not just John McCain who failed or refused to do the right thing. Last week's ruling was the fourth defeat in a row for the Administration at the Supreme Court. And on the past three occasions the Congress has responded not by embracing the hints and clues left by the Court's majorities - by, say, brokering a desperately-needed deal between executive and judicial branches over a terror law policy - but by siding with the White House.
McCain and other so-called "moderates" have had the power for years to avoid these Supreme Court showdowns and show-ups. They just haven't had the political courage to exercise that power.
All of which means the Supreme Court isn't the only reason why the terror detainees remain in legal limbo. The White House is to blame for pushing beyond the legal limits of executive power. And the Congress is to blame for allowing it to happen despite entreaties by the judiciary for help.
If I were a good man like McCain, I'd be embarrassed by this. And perhaps he is. And perhaps that embarrassment is expressing itself in anger instead of consideration. In any case, it's misguided.
Contrary to the angry candidate's remarks, last week's Boumediene ruling is not on a par with the Court's 1857 Dred Scott decision that tagged slaves as "property;" its 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision that endorsed the "separate but equal" doctrine; or its Korematsu v. United States decision that affirmed the detention of Japanese-Americans during World War II.
In fact, the recent ruling on detainee rights will be revered, not reviled, by future generations, who will study the first decade following the terror attacks on America with a curious mix of regret and sadness about lost opportunities, legal and otherwise, that hampered our collective response.
© 2008 CBS News
91 Comments so far
Show AllThe frightening thing is that four justices voted with Bush and McCain.
Although McCain's chances of being appointed to the presidency are slim; he still would like to have the ability to jail everyone, whenever, for whatever. This is why the current regime of lice at the head of our government, and all those who support, them need to impeached; and, then jailed(with their habeus corpus rights intact)to await trial for treason and misprison of murder.
The victim becomes the perpetrator once again.
Why Does GOP Candidate Scorn Supreme Court's Affirmation Of Right Of Habeas Corpus?
____________________________________
Because he's an ambition-crazed, power-addicted imbecile.
McCain = More of the same
In addition he wants never-ending war and war profiteering at our expense --- and privatization of Social Security to name a couple of things.
Because they can't tell the difference between a real war with battlefields and an enemy with uniforms that easily identify them as such. The war on Terror, where ever it is waged, inevitably has "collateral" damage at an unacceptable rate, and jailing of innocents, also at an unacceptable rate. The practice of rounding up people in non-combatant zones, other countries, and based on rewards and unsubstantiated claims by others who are settling scores, or ridding themselves of a competitor is so misguided and stupid that such a decision is indeed needed.
As usual the Bush-Cheney administration, McCain and their Republican comrades miss this point and can't see that they have abused the authority and a basic premise of American Justice of presumed innocence. When you have an enemy that is clearly identifiable, perhaps they have an position. But t they have clearly maimed and destroyed far too many innocents to allow them the luxury of decision making and such a "real" war-time power. This is what makes them war criminals- their distain for justice and presumed authority to do what ever it takes.
Aw, he's just trying to paint himself as an extreme version of the grumpy old geezer who had to walk 40 miles to school in the driving snow and bare feet.
"What are you complaining about, hippie? Why when I was your age, I'd undergo 5 hours of waterboarding before breakfast, and breakfast was usually whatever portion of a live rat I could pry from the mouths of the hungry pirhannas that shared my tank with me. And I was only getting off so easy because I was a true hero. Stop being such a liberal."
Obama and McCain are saying things to get elected. The question is, will I trust someone that says things just to get elected? The answer is no in both cases.
Despite mounting evidence, CBS still loves McShame: "invested no small amount of his own treasured (and well-earned) historical capital "..."a good man like McCain"
Corporate Media Bullsh!t, as usual. What's surprising is that they are critical at all.
Fascism has always had tremendous appeal to those for whom money can not flow fast enough out of our pockets and into theirs. The thought of having to stop and consider the plight of the people who struggle to create the wealth that the rich luxuriate in, is not something that McCain or any of the other Neocons waste much time with.
After the Democrats get done impeaching Cheney and Bush, they ought to impeach those four justices for lying about their loyalty to our country and the Constitution. That is if they aren't in fact on the same side as McCain and Bush.
Spike said: ..."This is why the current regime of lice at the head of our government,..."
That is one of the wittiest, most accurate, out-of-control, lines I have heard since the facists took over.
I LOVE IT!!!
You go.
Nuff said :)
Dear Spike. Nobody becomes "appointed" president I hope because I intend to vote in November.
I and my family have suffered greatly from Nazi fascism during WW 2. I beg all of you who throw the term "fascist" around as if it is a frisbee to study what fascism really was and discover that the GOP, despicable as it is, is not a fascist movement nor is Senator McCain a fascist "Fuehrer". When you misuse "fascist", "Hitler","Nazi" that is a clear sign that you have left rational analysis.
And don't think McCain has a "slim chance of being appointed", or elected "in November" Spike. For years the media has not let the facts get in the way of their great story about McCain being the greatest maverick, allegedly bucking the system. Elections and appointments are not won based on facts, the STORY wins out every time.
It's utterly terrifying that John McCain has actually been nominated for president by one of America's major parties. What has happened in our nation since Bush and Cheney stole the election in 2000 could only have been the story line of a bad novel thirty-five years ago. In the 1970s we thought Nixon was a fascist. Today, Nixon would be considered a moderate.
McCain is senile. The mind is going...from drunk and stones Prez to Senile? Obama, who is a constitutional lawyer/teacher for me!
Remember, the "Supremes" appointed der Bush and disenfranchised the entire American electorate. One man in black appointed der Bush and initiated eight years of horror, greed, mal and misfeasance, murder, poverty for the millions and inconcievable wealth for the Oligarchy.
Now we have another hairline decision to bring a modicum of civil rights back into our legal system. One more fascist appointee to the SCOTUS and there will never be a chance to put our Constitution and Bill of Rights intact and functioning, back in the Halls of Government.
I would love to see a Populist candidate dedicated to bringing the Constitution back, but if we have to have one of the alleged two parties in charge, I think I'd rather see an Obama/Kucinich ticket. Kucinich would be a strong force in helping Obama keep on track and, he would be excellent assassination insurance as Kucinich would be even more undesirable as President than Obama to the type of fascist thugs that have no hesitation about assassination, whether character or physical.
He scorns this ruling because he hates America!
Hey, the truth is that these concepts are fundamental to the notion of what America was meant to be. The founders had just fought a long and nasty revolution to try to get rid of the concept of an over-powerful executive who could do what ever he wanted in the name of 'security'.
This is the key concept of America. That people have rights, and that the government is limited by those rights and must respect those rights.
Thus, it can truly be said of McCain and most of the Republicans today that they really do 'hate America'. Personally, I think they should be told that if they don't like America, then they are free to leave. Because I'm going to stand and fight for an America that really is a land of free people and which really is a government of the people, by the people and for the people.
"After first insisting that federal law clearly and unambiguously outlaw "torture," McCain suddenly caved to White House pressure on the MCA, allowing the Administration to insert into the law a clause that effectively allows (and, indeed, legally buttresses the efforts of) the executive branch to implement torture as a means of interrogation."
George Bush may have reminded McCain that he crashed for airplanes before finally being hit over North Vietnam in a fifth aircraft. He may have reminded McCain that he graduated almost at the bottom of his class at Annapolis. Perhaps he reminded McCain that he was responsible for the fire on the Forrestal that killed something like 137 men, after which he was immediately transferred to a different carrier group. He "wet started" his jet which caused a huge burst of flame against the plane immediately behind. This "cooked off" one of that jet's rockets which hit McCain's plane in turn setting off ordnance explosions and fire. Or maybe he reminded McCain of his 22 hours or less total combat duty. Maybe he mentioned McCain's COLLABORATION with the enemy. And finally, maybe he suggested to McCain that, although so far the MSM has ignored McCain's dodgy history, that perhaps it was nearing time for the executive branch to "remind" the press of these issues.
"one of the worst decisions in the history of this country." (?)
Really? How about the Courts decision to assign Blacks 3/4 of a white man in worth? How about the Courts decision to give corporations the same rights of free speech as individuals? How about the Courts decision to get into the election fray of 2000 and virtually assure Bush of the election? McCain's brain was fried in his stint at the Hanoi Hilton. He used to speak in a semi-rational manner but now I expect him to choose Cheney as his running mate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism
There is a typo in this article.
The line – "the Senator (a Vietnam torture victim himself)"
Should read – "the Senator (a subject of Vietnamese enhanced interrogation techniques himself)"
The least we can ask of CBS is that they make their propaganda more consistent.
Dear poopdeck,
I'm sorry, but I've spent most of my life learning and studying history. And there are a number of simularities between the current American Republican Party and the German National Socialist Workers Party and the Italian Fascist movements.
I do try to be careful about using those terms, as they are very loaded terms and most people do not know the details of the history. But on the other hand I would also say that such comparisons should not be completely out of bounds.
The Italian Fascist movement defined itself as putting the state in the service of corporations. And both the German and Italian movements were right-wing political movements. They are not something separate and distinct from right-wing politics, instead both in many ways are an expansion and continuation of right-wing politics.
In both cases, the movement started out as a minor branch of right-wing politics, but was then adopted and endorsed by the more main-stream right-wing movements of 'conservatism' (right-wing landed gentry) and the 'industrialists'.
The goals of economic policies in these cases are very similar to today's Republicans. Both are willing to completely dismiss any concerns of the workers in order to maximize corporate profits. And the foreign policies are very similar as well. If you read W. Shirer's Rise and Fall of the 3rd Reich and its description of the years of the invasions of the Rhineland, Austria, Czechoslovakia and Poland, you'll be shocked by how Hitler's 'negotiation' technique is almost identical to Bush's.
And the combination of using foreign enemies and a very aggressive foreign policy of invading countries that are not an immediate threat to build support for domestic politics are very similar.
What is different is that we have not seen open murders of political opponents in the US. Although I have my doubts about at least one plane crash. There's been nothing like Krystalnacht (probably mis-spelled). And so far we haven't seen any rounding up and putting into camps of political opposition (although again some particular instances might look a lot like people are targeted for political beliefs). And we certainly have not seen anything like the Final Solution of the Jewish problem. Even though the US military's approach to mass round-ups of any opposition in the countries they've conquered bares some eiry comparisons.
One key thing is to define exactly when you are talking about. This is a twenty year history of the rise of these movements immediately following the end of WWI to their overthrow at the end of WWII. So, while we might not be at the Final Solution stage of say 1943, that doesn't mean that there aren't some very valid comparisions between what we are seeing in the US today with earlier stages of what happened in both Italy and Germany.
"How about the Courts decision to assign Blacks 3/4 of a white man in worth?"
Technically, I don't think that was the Courts. Instead, its written directly into the US Constitution in how they apportion representatives based on population.
The money that made Bush President in the first place made McCain an offer he couldn't refuse. He could either abandon his more 'maverick' positions or he could abandon any hope of becoming President.
Samson @ 1:14pm, well-said.
poopdeck, the use of the term "fascism" is entirely appropriate in view of the corporate takeover of the machinery of government. cheney and the fascists of the last century differ only in degree, not in their fundamental natures.
as to mccain's being a "good man," that's true in the same sense that tim russert was a "good journalist."
poopdeck - Not only should NOT avoid using those terms, we should use them more. The neocons actions may not be the same as fascists and nazis in WW2, but their mindset is the same.
Ask yourself...what would America "look like" if Hitler and Moussilini "occurred" in the year 2000, in America itself, instead of in the 30's and 40's in Germany/Italy? My guess would be it'd be alot like what it is today. The utter brutality would probably be missing what with modern media and internet, but the actions would be similar to what we're seeing with the neocons.
Unfortunately, the conservative movement has been very skillful is using those same terms, to discredit their use altogether. And they want those terms discredited because they know full well that THEY in fact are the new fascists and nazis. What better disguise than to eliminate the value of the terms. See, you and I read Orwell's 1984 as a warning...they read it as a guidebook.
McCain has already lost. Follow the corporate money. It always goes with the winner and tells you who the winner is going to be. The corporate money moved early to the Democrats. Before the Feb primaries, it was splitting between Hillary and Obama. But even this it was clear that the corporate money had shifted from the Republicans to the Democrats. If you remember, late last year McCain had to really retool and revise his campaign because all of his projected budgets were based on Bush-like levels of raking in corporate money and he found out it just wasn't there for him.
Since the Feb primaries, the corporate money largely abandoned Hillary and moved strongly behind Obama.
Unless there's a popular uprising of voters refusing to accept the corporate-chosen candidate, Obama's the next President. Follow the money.
The wikipedia link above has a great quote...
"The first truth is that the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism--ownership of government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power."
--Pres. Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1942
Remember, the Republican fundraiser Grover Norquists has described his goal as 'shrinking government to the point where he could drown it in a bathtub.'
Those are the sorts of comparisons that we should not refrain from discussing. But we do need to be careful about just throwing the terms around carelessly.
PRESS RELEASE: Arizona senator John Sidney McCain, Republican candidate for President of the United States, formally announced today that he has changed his name to George Anheuser Busch. The action was taken to show his love, respect and reverence for George Wanker Bush, 43rd president of the United States. The former Mr. McCain said he chose the new name because his wife owns the largest Anheuser Busch beer distributorship in the nation and without her money he would now be nothing more than a retired insurance agent living in Virginia, hanging out at the Bull Run Bar with his best friend George Macaca Bush (formerly Allen).
Lets see; the four descenting votes were from the right wing justices, all claiming to be 'STRICT CONSTUTIONALISTS'.
In other words, Judges who don't try and reinterprept the constitution, but adhere to its "literal sense".
So, what about Habeas Corpus don't they agree with? A corner stone of the Magna Carta and English law for over a 1000 years, all of it laid out specifically in the Bill of Rights, amendments three through 9.
Scalia, Roberts, Alito and Thomas are the enemies of freedom and I wonder - -
Why do they hate freedom so much?
The liberty-haters love to say: "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." If "our" government had nothing to hide, they would not so desperately fear open examination of "the facts of the case."
Cheney/Bush's final move to avoid all laws: award Halliburton a no-bid contract for the first US prison colony on the Moon, where, they will say, US courts have no jurisdiction.
Because he hates America (the constitution) and cannot be trusted to fulfill any presidential oath to uphold and defend same.
Ever seen "the Manchurian Candidate"?
Maverick of the Living Dead is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I've ever known in my life.
To: Poopdeck
Dear Spike. Nobody becomes "appointed" president I hope because I intend to vote in November.
I think you are incorrect Bush was appointed president by Supreme court in 2000. Against the wishes of popular voters. How can the supreme court decide the will of the people. At least not in a true democracy.
The point Richard Condon was trying to make in his novel "The Manchurian Candidate" was that the far left and the far right were one and the same. In our case, Nazis, Communists and reactionary Republicans of the Bush/Cheney kind are, in fact, one and the same. George Wanker Bush is our Manchurian Candidate. But who, through a technique "part light induced, part drug induced" set this traitor up to finish off the United States?
As JM reacts badly to gentle jibes about his thinning hair, is this story such a surprise?
Perhaps everyone is reading far too much into what this insecure Senator says, and should listen less?
John McCain is a soulless war pig
George W Bush was appointed to the presidency in 2000
McCain's criticism of the Supreme Court's decision upholding the right of habeas corpus is part of an overall Republican strategy of playing upon people's fear of terrorists in order to win votes. This is a theme that they have used to their advantage on many previous occasions, but their luck with it is about to run out. Obama is derelict in not responding with a full-throated defense of the Court as well as the Constitutional protections that are afforded to everyone without exception. Once these rights are denied to anyone, they may be denied to everyone.
RE:
"poopdeck June 16th, 2008 12:57 pm
I and my family have suffered greatly from Nazi fascism during WW 2. I beg all of you who throw the term "fascist" around as if it is a frisbee to study what fascism really was and discover that the GOP, despicable as it is, is not a fascist movement nor is Senator McCain a fascist "Fuehrer". When you misuse "fascist", "Hitler","Nazi" that is a clear sign that you have left rational analysis."
HUH?!
WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE!
You must not be capable of rational analysis.
This situation we seemt o be stuck in this country, this so-called conservative revolution, is actually the right-wing rise of American fascism.
Short List-
1. Congress and Senate voting the interests of corporate Amerikkka over its citizens' interests
2. Patriot Act removed illegalities of forced entry police search and seizure of private property
3. Indefinate detention without trials of Gitmo detainees
4. Legislating torture as a means of entrapment and to coerce false confessions
5. Removal of the basic human right of habeus corpus
6. Removal of the right to a fair trial in a reasonable amount of time and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty
Fascism definition:
"
fas·cism Audio Help /ˈfæʃɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[fash-iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. (sometimes initial capital letter) a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) the philosophy, principles, or methods of fascism.
3. (initial capital letter) a fascist movement, esp. the one established by Mussolini in Italy 1922–43.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Origin: 1915–20; < It fascismo, equiv. to fasc(io) bundle, political group (see fasces) + -ismo -ism]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
"
As AdeleTheCzech pointed out yesterday re; habeas corpus as American creation, so correct. The 'Great Writ', 800 years old instituted by the Magna Carta. We have that point, we have Aricle.I.Section.9.Clause 2 and the Geneva Convention, Section VI, Chapter III - Judicial Proceedings(POW's), Article 99, allo these should have protected these POW's, 97% innocent but instead not just men, there are women, children and mentally impaired persons there. So I could care less that the 4 Supremes that dissented are mad, poor kids, it was overturned because 5 Supremes agreed, about time. The pigs like McInsane, Gingrich, every GOP member around can just wind up in a foreign jail as ICE has been doing as they profile American citizens they say appear to be Hispanic or Latino in Mexican prisons. So McInsane was a POW in Vietnam, he spilled his guts and as he did he was broadcast live on Vietnamese radio, he can call it whatever he chooses but it wasn't GITMO or Abu Ghraib.
Adele, I meant to inform that you stated , American, NO, which is exactly correct, sorry if it looks like I inferred the opposite.
Blessings and thanks to the wisdom of the Founding Fathers (& Mothers!) of this nation for designing and executing an unambiguous document which codifies into law the great concept of liberty. We, your progeny, cherish your wisdom and will fight against any and all darkness to keep hope and freedom alive. Thank you, endlessly, thank you.
kent shaw - thanks for those illuminating facts which i had, unsurprisingly, not heard anywhere before.
McBush has revealed his extremist true colors, as the recent NY Times revelation of a position paper about the Vietnam War he wrote years ago shows. If Obama hammers at McBush not only as Bush redux, but as an extremist in domestic and foreign policies, McBush won't be able to hide behind his mask of "moderate maverick" anymore.
President John McCain, VP Carly Fiorina, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Lieberman...or maybe National Security Advisor Lieberman.
It could happen.
Guys like John McCain have never understood the meaning of political freedom. Their world is just naturally run by "the big boys", the powerful elites with the "long view". McCain's always made a living running errands for the big boys. He has to oppose anything that limits their prerogatives.
I think it is fairly obvious that McCain has been running for President for decades. This whole "maverick" thing is just a contrivance, a branding exercise, like "compassionate conservative". If he has tied himself in knots as a result, well, no big surprise there. The depressing thing is the huge number of simpletons in the MSM and the general population who actually believe that shameless and incoherent pandering = political courage.
Mouse:
For more McCain Vietnam stories, check out Counterpunch.
Probably the same reason over 100 Democrats joined with Republicans to enact it. Wake up, lad.
I think that we have real problems here in the UK, and over there in the US with our elected politicians. It seems as though they have forgotten Habeas Corpus and all that it stands for.
The truth is, that it stands in the way of all that they desire!!
It is simple. One of the most enlightening benefits of the bushes adminstrations is the way the US military lies and covers-up. It is obvious the entire mccain war hero fiasco was a staged event which never happened. Just like the military lied and covered up for both bushes 41 and 43...
McCain is obviously running for president--of the Republican Party....Or, is he privy to something, a promise, an act, a miscount, to be played out in early November?