Are you kidding me???
That's absurd...he was convicted. Does that mean nothing? Not that this is the first President to do such an amazingly stupid thing, yet it's just *another* thing this man has done to our country.
The president’s decision drew praise from Mr. Libby’s defenders. “That’s fantastic. It’s a great relief,” said former Ambassador Richard Carlson, who helped raise millions of dollars for Libby’s defense fund. “Scooter Libby did not deserve to go to prison and I’m glad the president had the courage to do this,.” he said, according to The Associated Press.
But Democrats assailed Mr. Bush’s move.
Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, a Democratic presidential candidate, said in a statement that the commutation of Mr. Libby’s sentence “cements the legacy of an administration characterized by a politics of cynicism and division, one that has consistently placed itself and its ideology above the law.”
The House speaker, Nancy Pelosi of California, said the decision showed Mr. Bush “condones criminal conduct,” according to The A.P.
And the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, told The A.P.: “Libby’s conviction was the one faint glimmer of accountability for White House efforts to manipulate intelligence and silence critics of the Iraq war. Now, even that small bit of justice has been undone.”
On the morning of May 6, 1997, Governor George W. Bush signed his name to a confidential three-page memorandum from his legal counsel, Alberto R. Gonzales, and placed a bold black check mark next to a single word: DENY. It was the twenty-ninth time a death-row inmate's plea for clemency had been denied in the twenty-eight months since Bush had been sworn in. In this case Bush's signature led, shortly after 6:00 P.M. on the very same day, to the execution of Terry Washington, a mentally retarded thirty-three-year-old man with the communication skills of a seven-year-old. Let me get this straight, Bush will not save a mentally challeged man from death, but let his friend get a harsh sentence.
Bush wrote in his autobiography that it was not his job to "replace the verdict of a jury unless there are new facts or evidence of which a jury was unaware, or evidence that the trial was somehow unfair" (italics added). But new information about a mentally retarded man's battered, abused childhood that his jury never got to hear—wouldn't that qualify?
We all have our priorities. I'm so tired of the "Good Ole Boys." I can not wait until next year when we can at least have something "different"--I am not even fully convinced that it will be better just because it is not Dubya, however, I can firmly believe that it can not get worse.