President Bush spared former White House aide I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby from a 2 1/2-year prison term in the CIA leak investigation Monday, delivering a political thunderbolt in the highly charged criminal case. Bush said the sentence was just too harsh.
What kind of message does this send to the people? Has our basic government structure deteriorated to low that basically anything goes?
2007-07-05 05:04:00 · 7 answers · asked by smckech1972 4 in News & Events ➔ Current Events
While he does have the legal power to do so, I believe it was wrong. Pardoning someone just because they're your buddies/fellow politicians is favoritism.
2007-07-05 05:08:00 · answer #1 · answered by txofficer2005 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It would be hypocritical for me to criticize this. After all, I was happy when Bartlet pardoned Toby...
Seriously, I'm not convinced that we're seeing the whole case. Libby and everyone else involved seem to be caught up in some sort of grudge match that, apparently, has been going on for years. There has to be more to this case than "Scooter Libby is a bad bad man and should go to jail for a long long time." Maybe, despite his apparent myopia, President Bush can see through this case and knows that it bears elements of the ridiculous.
This sends the message that our media doesn't - or can't - report all the nuances of a story, that people don't always tell the truth, and we don't all draw the same conclusions from a particular set of circumstances.
Our government structure has not deteriorated. It isn't a perfect system, but it has withstood dishonesty and inappropriate behavior for a long time, and will continue to do so. However, our moral judgement has deteriorated. We shriek and scream at the hint of scandal in Washington, and we wax poetical on ethics and standards, but we would be appalled if someone tried to hold us to those same standards.
Instead of shrieking and screaming, let's work on ourselves. Teach your children to tell the truth. Support those who are ethical. Be honest. Have you ever fudged details to make yourself look better? Don't. Let's change the ethical standards of this country by changing ourselves.
2007-07-05 12:21:53 · answer #2 · answered by another.amanda 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think calling it a "political thunderbolt" is way over-rating it. It is much less than the pardons granted by Clinton to some of his friends. At least the conviction remains as well as the fine. Most presidents have used this power to some extent, and there is always criticism. But let's not get are pants in a wad over it. 10 years down the road, you won't even recall who Scooter Libby was or what he did.
2007-07-05 12:26:51 · answer #3 · answered by ghouly05 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have no problem with the commuted sentence. It is expected that each president with commute sentences or more frequently, issue a complete pardon. I find it very interesting that there is such a bruhaha over this comutation from people who had no issue with the pardons provided by Clinton. The president has the power to do so and the founding fathers must have been good reasons for granting the power.
2007-07-05 12:43:52 · answer #4 · answered by hemi_55 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Doesn't matter what anyone thinks about it. The President has the power to do it. I could be wrong but he's not the first President to that. And we have survived as a people through many a fool as our President. Long live the Queen.
2007-07-05 13:11:36 · answer #5 · answered by Mister Bald 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My disappointment is that the real cuplrits, Cheney and Rove, are not being held accountable. Libby was the "fall guy", so I am not opposed to Bush commuting his sentence.
2007-07-05 12:08:05 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
What is the big deal, all Presidents have done this in the past. Or is it just right when the Dem. do it but not when a Republican does it.
2007-07-05 12:12:21 · answer #7 · answered by evildragon1952 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋