Comments on: Screw Obama. Pardon Everybody.

By: Erick Brockway

Erick Brockway — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 06:02:42 +0000

ukuk n/t

By: AKSteveB

AKSteveB — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:41:45 +0000

category. Then again I’m a Mets fan .so take it for what it is worth. Obama is smart enough to know that the “Cheney is Satan” crowd is still fringe. It would just contribute to the idea that there is a congress and president completely out of touch with what matters (which at the moment is the economy). What I WOULD like to see is a full pardon for Scooter Libby. Bush owes that as simple human decency to a foot soldier. You don’t eff over a subordinate like that.

By: CJB68

CJB68 — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:34:27 +0000

I think that Obama, knowing his legislative record, will stand back and let the Reid-Pelosi Congress do all the dirty work. As we know, all they ever did in the past two years was investigate, investigate, investigate, (ad nauseum) etc.

By: ss396

ss396 — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 23:43:50 +0000

No, Obama won’t rule out investigating “crimes” by the Bush Administration. But it isn’t because he’s leaving that door open to do so; it’s because he’s afraid to make a declarative statement. Every time in the past 18 months that he actually stood up and took a position on something, he has had to recant - generally within about 72 hours.

By: 10ksnooker

10ksnooker — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 22:35:19 +0000

Decides to use the law to go after the previous administration, you know the nation is doomed. This is how it’s done in the land of the Juntas and in Kenya where you eliminate all opposition.

A point of fact, when the Democrats had the KKK going, they were an equal opportunity lynching crowd. Yes they lynched a lot of blacks to keep them down on the farm, but what you don’t hear much about is that they lynched about as many white people who were political opponents. A form of political assassination and intimidation if you will. About half of all the lynchings conducted by the Democrat party were of political opposition members.

So this new form of lynching, proscecution of political opponents has an old long history in the Democrat party. Now they just trump up false charges, get some BS Democrat prosecutor to file charges and destroy the persons life — ala Tom Delay. Which was a form of political lynching. Got rid of him, didn’t they?

By: Mike gamecock DeVine

Mike gamecock DeVine — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:53:07 +0000

By: SunDogII

SunDogII — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 21:14:16 +0000

would state emphatically that the Bush administration was engaged in wrong doing. It should not be done.

He should, however, pardon Scoter Libby, with a blistering and accusatory statement regarding Fitzgerald, Wilson, and Colin Powell.

By: olsmithie

olsmithie — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:10:52 +0000

He sure as heck hasn’t done anything for the country in the last couple of years.

There have been continuous witch hunts by the Socialists since they got the congress. Don’t expect that to change, unless you believe that habitual liar Reed-Pelosi about bipartisianhip!? (What’s that ? Repubs caving to socialists)

Regards

By: olsmithie

olsmithie — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:05:31 +0000

Race shouldn’t matter, guys.

It’s the emulating Lenin part that disturbs me.
Evil is equal opportunity.

Regards

By: birdmojo

birdmojo — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 19:55:59 +0000

How can you tell it’s time for the revolution?

Grab your gun and go out into the middle of the street. If you are the only one out there with your gun, go back inside. It’s not time for the revolution yet.

By: mbecker908

mbecker908 — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 19:31:26 +0000

We’re the side that’s armed, after all.

By: mbecker908

mbecker908 — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 19:28:30 +0000

I won’t be holding my breath.

By: mbecker908

mbecker908 — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 19:27:50 +0000

Hell, I’ll support him.

By: birdmojo

birdmojo — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 18:47:55 +0000

If Bush is the first president to do this, he sure as heck won’t be the last.

It’ll result in revolution.

By: Scipio

Scipio — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 18:27:39 +0000

Allow me to correct myself…

What I said: “While I’m uncomfortable with the idea of blanket pardons (some people may actually have done things that deserve punishment, and it is hard to distinguish) as a matter of personal perspective, in this case it is merited if Obama insists on maintaining this political brinkmanship.”

What I meant to say: “I’m uncomfortable with the idea of blanket pardons (some people may actually have done things that deserve punishment, and it is hard to distinguish) as a matter of personal perspective, there is a case for carefully tailored pardons to protect individuals who acted in good faith, especially if Obama insists on maintaining this political brinkmanship.”

Blanket pardons would not be an ideal solution, for many reasons, most of which discussed in USNJIMRET’s post above mine.

By: Scipio

Scipio — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 18:22:08 +0000

As the liberals are so fond of saying the inverse lately, somebody needs to remind Obama that he won the election, and he needs to get over it. The campaign is over, you won because the political moderates sided with you, and you need to govern as such. This was no sweeping win for liberalism, no great triumph for liberal-kind. Lead from that point, not from a place that still only exists in your head. I’ve heard it said that there are three rules of History, and one of them is “never humiliate the enemy” no matter what else you do, because “as sure as God made little green apples” it will come back to bite you, hard.* You and your party are already pushing that line with the repeal of the fairness rules in the House. Bringing criminal charges against members of the Bush administration will only cause Republicans to circle the wagons, and play their dirtiest. After all, we have little left to lose.

While I’m uncomfortable with the idea of blanket pardons (some people may actually have done things that deserve punishment, and it is hard to distinguish) as a matter of personal perspective, in this case it is merited if Obama insists on maintaining this political brinkmanship. The prosecution of any individual should NEVER be political motivated. That goes against the very idea of American justice. It doesn’t matter if the President or a local prosecutor is the source, it is never right, and should never be done. You cannot play with people’s lives for your political gain, Mr. Obama.

* This rule of History applies to politics as well, see Ronald Reagan, and no doubt see Sarah Palin in 4-8 years.

By: izoneguy

izoneguy — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 18:12:38 +0000

Dangerous game to playing Mr. Obama.
Let’s not forget - the same might apply to you
someday. However in your case I would imagine
you will pardon yourself on Jan. 21st 2009.
Spineless coward.

By: USNJIMRET

USNJIMRET — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 18:12:25 +0000

if President Bush does something along the lines being argued for.
However, a “Blanket Pardon” would be, IMO, a mistake, of epic proportion.
For a huge number of legal reasons, it would call into question the entire Constitutional issue of the President being empowered to issue pardons, without any review at all. THAT would be a very bad thing, and precisely the kind of thing that the left would seize upon to seek to change that power. And, while I realize it would take a Constitutional Amendment to do it, I honestly believe that it could made to happen. (Before anyone pooh-pooh’s the idea, who would have believed 36 months ago, that we would be 9 days away from President Barack Hussein Obama? Underestimating the left, and the power of the MSM to ‘influence’ the outcome is a big part of why “we” lost.)
Secondly a “Blanket Pardon”, worded as some have suggested to excuse everyone associated with the WOT during this Administration would, by definition, pardon some who have actually done wrong. And I don’t mean just the ‘legal’ wrong. Can’t you see every lawyer in the country suddenly looking to connect their clients actions, regardless of employment, to the WOT?
BTW, wouldn’t it be pretty easy to conclude that Border Patrol Agents are actually involved in the WOT, and thus a couple of men who the President has refused to pardon so far, are covered under a blanket? (And No, I am NOT saying that they don’t deserve a pardon, just that is serves as an example, IMO, of what a “Blanket Pardon” might bring about.)
I guess a small part of me is hoping against hope that the President IS doing something to protect the people in/during his Administration who have, in good faith, done their best to keep me, mine and the rest of us, safe for the last seven years. Hoping against hope, because if he is, it has been one very well kept secret thus far.

By: longwalker

longwalker — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 17:49:24 +0000

BDS types have been calling for investigations for almost eight years now. When you investigate a matter in public there is the problem of proof. First you must prove what has been done and how the act is in violation of actual law not some BDS’s wishfull thinking. I would love to see a televised investigation where the Democrats must “plead and prove” an illegal act.

By: longwalker

longwalker — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 17:49:24 +0000