Fitzy

I made no presumption about you or democrats in general . I simply said " for all of Bill Clinton fans/Anti Bush people WHO are upset.. and have no problem with Clinton's pardons... I did presume however, that there were people who fit that criteria but not that all democrats did. It is those people who I directed the comment to. If you are a Clinton fan and not a bush fan yet still see the obvious , that Clinton pardoned more dirty rotten scumbags that made scooter Libby look like a girl scout, then you have no worries.. You were not my intended audience. It's the others who are blinded by the light reflecting off the (democratic) Ass that I meant to attract.

Somebody tell me why the Scooter Libby issue is even worthy of debate.. It's like the Paris Hilton drama. It is stupid and irrelevant. Why am I even blogging about these issues? Maybe BK has an answer for me...

Fitzy and Mt. Goat

Is it appropriate for any convicted criminal to be pardoned? Is it morally acceptable to look past the crime of an individual who has been tried and convicted in a court of law and then excuse them of their crime entirely? If the answer is yes, then what crimes are worthy of a pardon? Which are not? Who decides which crimes should or should not be worthy?

As it stands, the constitution says that is acceptable to pardon somebody for a convicted crime and the person who is allowed, by the letter of the law, to decide which criminals and which crimes are to be pardoned, is the President of the United States.. Whether we like it or not.. All presidents have pardoned questionable criminals and they will continue to do so.. Take a gander at the list of criminals that have been pardoned.. Its pretty amazing that some of them have even been considered... Drug dealers, deserters, tax evaders, etc. etc.