Glenn Beck is spot on, and Brian
Kilmeade shows us that he doesn’t even realize he has an incredibly scary side. At a minimum, this is why sports guys are not constitutional lawyers…
Beck: “He’s a citizen of the United States, so I say we uphold the laws and The Constitution on citizens.”
Kilmeade: “He’s a threat to the country, that’s different.”
Beck: “So are a lot of citizens of the country…he has all of the rights under the Constitution.”
Kilmade: “How about he tried to blow up a city block in the last 48 hours?”
Beck: “We don’t shred the Constitution when it is popular. You do the right thing.”
Kilmeade: “If he knows information that can wipe out some of your friends and family, you don’t want that?”
Brian Kilmeade should be ashamed of himself for resorting to purely emotional drivel to try and convince people that it’s okay to suspend the rights granted to US citizens when it’s politically expedient.
Perhaps I’m wrong, but shouldn’t we just charge inadvertent Islamic Terrorist Candid Camera participant Faisal Shahzad with terrorism and then if convicted…ummm—kill him? Brian Kilmeade’s attempt to portray Glenn Beck as a heartless fool who would rather see his friends and family die instead of getting actionable intelligence out of terrorist is the kind of intellectual bilge Janeane Garofalo would pull. If you watch the video you can almost see the condescension. And that’s sad, because that’s the sort of thing I expect from Keith ““Everyone who disagrees with me is a racist” Olbermann.
I can completely understand the urge to beat the Shahzad out of Shahzad in order to get information that would lead to the arrest of other terrorists and jihad-sympathizing bottom feeders. Perhaps doing so would even result in the apprehension of an Adam Gadahn or two or three…(who, again, I wouldn’t mind being tried for treason and executed if convicted).
However, the long-term threat to the nation by being able to strip US citizens of the rights afforded to them by the Constitution because they’re deemed a terrorist, far outweighs any short-term gains The Kilmeade Doctrine would provide.
We live in a world where the left is itching to tar Tea Party participants terrorists, (i.e., YOU). Because of this, I think it’s time to reflect on the wisdom of Friedrich Hayek:
“The very magnitude of the outrages committed by the National Socialists has strengthened the assurance that a totalitarian system cannot happen here. But let us remember that 15 years ago the possibility of such a thing happening in Germany would have appeared just as fantastic not only to nine-tenths of the Germans themselves, but also to the most hostile foreign observer,” (Hayek, The Road to Serfdom).
If you don’t think the United States could fall victim to the same totalitarian nightmare that has engulfed most of the world throughout its history, you haven’t studied history. Granted, I think such forces would have one heck of a fight on their hands after having seen the Tea Party activists in action…but it’s still something that is a very real, very plausible threat. I’m not keen on giving a group of Congressmen intent on creating a Nanny State on Moral Relativist Steroids the power to strip anyone of their rights as a US citizen.
I’m sure that some of my regular readers are irate with me right now, but I can’t help it. I look at a world filled with Neal Gabler Moral Relativist Mole Men and I know that when they’re in power, things get dicey. And The Kilmeade Doctrine would only tease out the worst—not just in them—but all men.
Convince me otherwise. I’m open to intelligent arguments.