Hucakbee is a Baptist minister and forgiveness plays an important role but, I think this will turn out to be a huge dent in his chances at 2012. Joe Scarborough is right, it is a near impossibility to win a conservative primary when it is clear you haven’t been as tough on crime as would have been prudent. I guess there is always another side to the story. Unfortunately sometimes one side says all that needs to be said.

4 dead police officers in Washington state and 1,033 pardons/commutations (including 12 convicted murderers)

Even if a run in 2012 doesn’t pan out, Huckabee will probably stay on FNC….I guess it’s a consolation prize.

I thought that was the big takeaway for me. You guys need to toot your own horns more if you want strong readership!

And Huckabee’s done. He’s toast. Good riddins. I don’t want a theocracy but I want a near-sadist when it comes to crime. Turn the cheek on your own dime, Huckster. Bring me nooses and concertina-ringed tent cities.

Huckabee is irreparably damaged by the commutations. Yet he still faces a decision about his 2012 presidential aspirations.
If he chooses to run, he places his ego ahead of what is best for the conservative movement. He will be splitting the social conservative vote to the harm of the party.
If he has some humility about him, he will recognize that he will not be able to effectively pursue the role of President. For the benefit of the social conservative cause, he will stay out to enable another candidate with social conservative credentials to rise from the pack.
Will he choose his pride or how the country will be best served?

I now highly doubt that this will make a dent in Huck’s long-term prospects (anymore than it did in 2008).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1jfMFSfuC4&feature=player_embedded

Republicans will listen to both sides of the story before making a decision.

FACT: Prosecutors lodged no objection to Huckabee’s sentence reduction for Clemmons

http://race42008.com/2009/12/01/prosecutors-lodged-no-objection-to-huckabees-sentence-reduction-for-clemmons/

There’s an incredible amount of ego involved when you had out over a thousand pardons and commutations. Did Huckabee really know more than the jury that convicted these men, or the prosecutors that brought charges? I could understand a handful of these, but Huckabee was being absolutely reckless, and he now has blood on his hands as far as I’m concerned.

As a side note, if Republicans had a crowded and fractured primary that somehow gave the Presidential nomination to Huckabee, it would have been a landslide against us, and it would have repercussions for our “brand” for years. His brand of conservatism, a blend of fiscal liberalism, dovish foreign policy, and over the top, Pat Robertson-type social conservatism would relegate the Republican Party to a regional, minority party that at best could only win in the Deep South.

That is why this is such a big deal. People need to look up Wayne Dumond so see that this isn’t the first time Huckabee’s poor judgment has resulted in the needless death of others.

DavidHuck’sArmy is correct. The prosecutor didn’t object at the time. Also, at the time, the kid was 16 and had already spent 11 years in jail for the following crimes: burglary (when no-one was home), and robbery (when no-one had a gun). 11 years seems about right to me.

As far as him being an “animal”, how are you going to get to that point when there was no violence done in either case? I mean, that’s some serious, serious extrapolation AND hindsight going on there.

Huck commuted his sentence at the UNANIMOUS recommendation of the parole board. He applied for parole and was granted it. Later, he was rejailed for some crime I don’t recall.

It was really his time in Washington state where he went off the deep end, folks. There he was arrested for child molestation and then let go, and then he murdered four cops. So of course there were failures in the criminal justice system, but the failures are THERE — in the actions of the prosector, the police, and so forth, NOT in Huck’s action in this case.

And hey, one more thing — arguing from a lack of evidence really makes us conservatives look stupid. He commuted the sentences of X people; he paroled X number of people. Unless you have cold, hard, facts that show that these people should not have been let go based on the evidence available at the time, then you’re just arguing for guilt based on your feelings.

If you dislike Huck because of his position on illegals (or don’t trust him even after he signed the pledge), that’s at least understandable. If you didn’t like his Cuba position, fine. If you’re going to object based on some number of pardon/commutations (should he have commuted the sentences of only 500 people, or maybe 600, or maybe 10? What’s the magic number?) with NO evidence of the harm, what is that but liberal emotionalism?

That’s just par for the course here — argue by implication, not from facts. And oh, that bit about being respectful? I love the way y’all treat DavidHuck’sArmy — so respectful. Gah. Pass the RS Kool-Aid, please.