Looking At Presidential Pardons
Nov 25, 2008 Political
Presidents have the authority, under the Constitution, to grant pardons and their decision to do so is absolute so no one can overturn them. Clinton pardoned a number of people and in the flurry of activity during his last day in office he granted a pardon to Marc Rich. That was a bought and paid for pardon but it cannot be overturned. Charges could have been brought against Clinton if it could be proven that he was paid for the pardon. Clinton also pardoned members of the FALN, a violent Puerto Rican nationalist group. One of Obama’s nominees had a little something to do with the Clinton pardons…
President Bush has been stingy with the pardon pen and has issued about half of those Reagan or Clinton issued. This past week President Bush issued pardons or sentence commutations to 16 people. Some of them are for people who were involved in drugs (either smuggling or using) and others were for a variety of crimes, none of them appear to be for people who committed violent crimes. There are two pardons that are missing and should have been made a long time ago.
Border agents Compean and Ramos, who were convicted of shooting a drug smuggler, still sit in jail while Bush pardons drug smugglers and users. These two border patrol agents were doing their jobs and shot the man in the line of duty and they ended up in jail while the US government granted immunity to the smuggler so he could testify (and we paid for his medical treatment).
The idea that two men who risked their lives in an attempt to keep our borders secure and our country free from the drugs that are smuggled in could end up in jail is mind boggling. What is even more a miscarriage of justice is that the president has yet to right this wrong by pardoning these men and returning them to their families where they belong. We need more of these kinds of people guarding our borders because God knows the Congress has no intention of doing it. The only mistake these two made was they did not kill the guy when they shot him. Then there would only be one story to worry about.
George Bush needs to pardon these men right away.
There are folks who have requested pardons or to have their sentences reduced. Two prominent ones are Randy Cunningham, a Republican California Congressman and Edwin W. Edwards, former Democratic Governor of Louisiana. Both were sent to jail after being convicted for corruption while in office.
These are two people who should not receive a pardon or shortened sentences. They used their office for personal gain and they violated the public trust. What they did is inexcusable and they should have to serve every day of their respective sentences. Every politician who is convicted of corruption should be put away for a very long time as a deterrent to others in office.
What kind of country is this where politicians who abused their offices expect to get pardoned while border guards who actually did their jobs are ignored?
There is also concern that Bush will issue a blanket pardon to everyone associated with him so that they cannot be prosecuted when the Democrats start their witch hunt. I have no problem with this. The Democrats have no reason to go after people and only want to try and dig up any little thing in order to embarrass the president and those who worked for him.
We can’t get these idiots to work full time as it is so they need to focus on the important things. If Bush issues the blanket pardon it will take away the distraction and allow the Democrats to work on more pressing issues.
But, if they go after Bush and those who worked for him they should keep in mind that they will not always be in power. Pay back can be a son of a gun.
Source:
Times Online UK
If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader.
Tags: border patrol, Bush, Clinton, controversy, pardon, reagan
Obama Plays Politics With The Troops
Sep 15, 2008 Political
For all his posturing, for all his claims to support them, for all his claims to want them out of Iraq immediately (that was what he wanted before he changed to a sensible withdraw) and for all his claims that he is looking out for them the reality is that the troops are pawns to Barack Obama.
Obama likes to tell everyone he opposed the war from the start. He didn’t oppose it when he was campaigning for John Kerry and praised the Senator and his tough decisions, blah, blah. Nonetheless, his claim of change, and one that made him different in the primary, is that he could make the claim that he always opposed the war because he was not in office when it was voted upon. No one really knows how he would have voted since he votes with Democrats 97% of the time.
One thing is certain though, Obama has little regard for the troops. He ignored the wounded when he went overseas. He could have visited them but chose not to. There are no excuses because there is NEVER an excuse to not visit our wounded. A leader would know that.
Obama talks a good game but word out of Iraq is that Barack Obama tried to convince the Iraqis not to broker any kind of draw down of US troops until the next administration was in office. As he campaigns he says he wants them out quickly (but responsibly) and that he will negotiate to get them out and let the Iraqis take control of their own destiny. However, in private he was busy trying to swing back room deals with the Iraqi government not to make any deals with President Bush.
WHILE campaigning in public for a speedy withdrawal of US troops from Iraq, Sen. Barack Obama has tried in private to persuade Iraqi leaders to delay an agreement on a draw-down of the American military presence.
According to Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari, Obama made his demand for delay a key theme of his discussions with Iraqi leaders in Baghdad in July.
“He asked why we were not prepared to delay an agreement until after the US elections and the formation of a new administration in Washington,” Zebari said in an interview.
Obama insisted that Congress should be involved in negotiations on the status of US troops – and that it was in the interests of both sides not to have an agreement negotiated by the Bush administration in its “state of weakness and political confusion.”
“However, as an Iraqi, I prefer to have a security agreement that regulates the activities of foreign troops, rather than keeping the matter open.” Zebari says.
Though Obama claims the US presence is “illegal,” he suddenly remembered that Americans troops were in Iraq within the legal framework of a UN mandate. His advice was that, rather than reach an accord with the “weakened Bush administration,” Iraq should seek an extension of the UN mandate.
While in Iraq, Obama also tried to persuade the US commanders, including Gen. David Petraeus, to suggest a “realistic withdrawal date.” They declined. New York Post
This is nothing more than Obama playing politics with our troops. He does not want the Bush Administration to receive any credit for getting this done and Obama is worried that it might give republicans a leg up in the election especially when one considers that Obama was tragically wrong on the surge. It has been the opposite of all the doom and gloom failure that Obama predicted. His opposition and incorrect predictions demonstrated how inexperienced he is for the job of Commander in Chief.
We have business to conduct whether or not there is an election going on. If the Bush administration is working to end the war or move into another phase it should not be a political issue for Obama. If Congress should be involved then let the do-nothings currently in Congress get involved. We do not have to wait for the next administration for Congress to get involved..
Barack Obama can say anything he wants but in the end he is just another politician who does not care about anything but winning. John Kerry said the troops were stupid and Obama thinks they are pawns in a giant chess game.
And this guy wants to be their boss.
No thanks.
Tags: Bush, chess game, Iraq, Obama, secrets
George Bush Saved The Gulf Coast
Sep 2, 2008 Opinion
Hurricane Gustav is losing strength by the minute though it will likely stall out and cause flooding in some areas along its path. However, the levees in New Orleans held, for the most part, and though there will no doubt be some flooding, the devastation will be nowhere near what it was during Katrina. This is because of George W. Bush.
Now I know George Bush did not rebuild the levees, he did not drive the evacuation buses and he did not open shelters to house people. In fact, all he did was lead from the top and provide assistance that state governors requested. But since the left blamed him for all the failures that occurred when Katrina hit, it is only fair to give him all the credit for the successes that occurred during this disaster.
It would seem ridiculous to give him ALL the credit when the five Gulf State REPUBLICAN governors worked together to ensure success by planning early and requesting federal assistance in a timely manner. However, since the president was to blame when state and local leaders were woefully inadequate he must be credited with the success when other leaders do their jobs well.
During the 2006 election season and during last week’s Democratic Convention we were reminded about the failures during Katrina. The stories about Americans being abandoned never mentioned the Democrats in charge of Louisiana as part of the problem. We were (and have been since Katrina hit) led to believe that this was a failure of George Bush and his administration.
Now that things went fairly smoothly during Gustav Americans must be reminded of how well the plans worked with REPUBLICAN leadership. America must be informed that George Bush did a great job when he was not hamstrung by a Democratic governor who was afraid to ask for help and too overwhelmed to demonstrate real leadership.
George Bush saved the Gulf Coast. I bet the Democrats who laughed about this disaster approaching are taking a second look. You see, when real leaders are in charge the probability of success increases.
I wonder if the MSM and the Democratic party leadership will acknowledge this amazing feat that President Bush pulled off. I imagine not since they were blaming him this far into Katrina and they have not said one word of praise since Gustav arrived.
The five Gulf Coast Republican Governors all worked well together and coordinated with the federal government. They were not lying in a corner sucking their thumbs like Ray Nagin during Katrina (he did a much better job this time) and they were not on TV crying about the destruction like Blanco did back then. They were leading people to get things done. Thank God Louisiana has Bobby Jindal as its Governor this time around.
I have little use for New Orleans and have been soured since the way people acted about Katrina. Having said that, I am glad that people evacuated and that the levees held. Those who stayed behind did so at their own peril and they are the only ones responsible for their fate. I pray for them and the rest of the Gulf Coast as Gustav exits and Hannah and Ike prepare to make their presence known.
Let us pray that the people down there get things back in shape before the next one hits.
Tags: blanco, Bush, gustav, jindal, katrina, leadership, nagin
The Squeeker of the House
Jul 18, 2008 Political
Nancy Pelosi, the worst Speaker in the history of Congress, has evidently decided she did not like being called such by me and millions of other people who see her for the ineffective moron that she is.
Pelosi struck back in order to deflect from the low approval ratings she and her Congressional minions have posted and called George Bush a complete failure. The news reporting this claims that it is a departure from her usual attacks which take place in private but that is a bunch of bunk. She has been attacking the president for a long time and now she has stepped up those attacks:
“You know, God bless him, bless his heart, president of the United States, a total failure, losing all credibility with the American people on the economy, on the war, on energy, you name the subject,” Pelosi replied. She then tsk-tsked Bush for “challenging Congress when we are trying to sweep up after his mess over and over and over again.” My Way News
The economy is slow and has the potential to collapse but we have had a great economy for seven years since Bush took over the Clinton recession and dealt with 9/11. Unemployment is low and though volatile, the stock market is hanging in there. Nancy and her Democrats are responsible for the down turn because it all took place while they were the majority. If they blame everything from the past on the majority Republican Congress it is only fair to return the favor. Nancy told us she had a plan for gas prices. They went from $2.19 to over $4.00 on her watch. She and her moonbat buddies are refusing to allow us to drill in the places where we know there is oil. There are platforms off the California coast over known deposits but they remain idle because of Congress. The Democrats have opposed any effort to help the energy problems so Nancy should keep her yap shut. Let’s not forget that Democratic policies are partly responsible for the housing problems. Give everyone a loan or you are discriminating.
The war is going a lot better and despite the best efforts of the Democrats to lose it, we are winning. The surge is working and we will soon employ those tactics in Afghanistan and squash the resistance.
As for them having to sweep up after the mess? The only mess left behind by a president was the stains Bill Clinton left behind. This Congress is the true do nothing Congress. They have not passed any of the budgetary items and will likely use continuing resolutions until after the election because they believe they will have Barack Obama as president and he will rubber stamp their wasteful bills.
Pelosi has been an absolute disgrace as Speaker and she lacks leadership skills. I doubt she could lead a group of people out of a burning building. When you watch her and the rest of the Democrats it looks like the blind leading the blind. It is truly amazing to see them in action. If Pelosi had any brains she would actually be dangerous.
Has this president made mistakes? Sure he has and there are some things that I disagree with him on but I know we have not been attacked since 9/11 and that attack was the result of Clinton’s weakness. How many attacks on US interests took place on his watch? We had 9/11 and the response made some people think twice about screwing with us.
The reality is that Nancy Pelosi is an idiot. She either has no brain or the Botox was injected too far and paralyzed what few brain cells she has. Either way, she is a disgrace and needs to be replaced by a button that does absolutely nothing more efficiently.
Tags: attack, Bush, disgrace, Pelosi, poor performance
Pelosi the Mediator is Loose with Facts
May 29, 2008 Opinion, Political
Nancy Pelosi has indicated that if the Democratic nomination process is not settled prior to the convention she will step in to get it settled. She said that Democrats cannot afford to go to the convention without a chosen nominee. Seems to me that Nancy Pelosi is rewriting the rules for the Democratic Party. Their rules say that there are super delegates and that those selected as super delegates are free to choose whomever they want for president regardless of any other influence including the popular vote, delegate count and number of states won. The purpose of the super delegates was to ensure the people got it right (in other words, make sure we can get who we want) and to select a candidate if none wins outright. Pelsoi seems to be indicating that she does not want this process and that she will step in to make sure that all of it is settled before the convention, the time set aside to actually settle such issues.
Nancy also said a few things in response to questions about the electorate and the current president. Nancy demonstrates the typical liberal mindset with one answer and then distorts the truth with another.
“I totally agree … this war is a big lie. It was a lie to begin with, and it continues to be a lie … at some point, maybe the lies just got too heavy for him to carry.” [in response to a question about Scott McClellan’s book]
Republicans “will try to use it [California gay marriage ruling] in the rest of the country” during the election, but voters are “tired of people who will take you to war and get you involved in (these) cultural battles. … They want to know: ‘Are you getting me a job?’ … They’re tired of these cultural issues being the currency of the realm.”
This president will go down in history as the worst, whether you’re talking about jeopardizing our national security… (or) the worst record of job creation.” SFGate [emphasis mine]
In response to the first item, has Nancy Pelosi read the book? She agrees with it 100% and yet she has only been privy to the excerpts we have all seen. If McClellan states that all Democrats are criminals and molest young children will she still agree 100%? Perhaps it would be prudent for her to read the book before commenting on it. I see it, so far, as a man who is trying to make some money off his bitterness especially since many folks are saying he was not part of the big meetings and was rarely included in those things. I seem to remember that Tony Snow wanted to be included in meetings before he agreed to replace McClellan. If it was standard practice he would not have needed the assurance. I will wait to pass judgment on the content until I have read it. Pelosi has done with this book just as she has with the war on terror in Iraq. She has made judgments without having the facts in front of her.
Nancy Pelosi says that Americans want to know [from government] “are you getting me a job?” Since when is it the responsibility of government to get people jobs? Getting a job is an individual responsibility and it is up to every person to take this task on without the government. The Constitution of the United States has nothing whatsoever in it about getting people jobs. This is the problem with liberals. They think it is the responsibility of government to do everything for people including getting them a job. Nancy showed her true liberal colors with that statement and she left no doubt that she believes (as is her liberal indoctrination) that it is up to the nanny state to take care of everyone. She cannot imagine for one moment that people should do this for themselves. However, just to make it clear, those who want jobs (and are willing to go get them) can find them. The unemployment rate is low and it has been throughout the entire Bush presidency. His unemployment numbers are nearly identical to Clinton’s and Democrats tout that economy as the best ever. This leads me to the last item.
Her opinion of George Bush jeopardizing national security is a joke at best and complete stupidity at worst. There were far more terrorist attacks on the US or its interests during Bill Clinton’s presidency than during Bush’s. The 9/11 attack was the direct result of Bill Clinton refusing to attack terrorists each time they attacked us. He allowed them to attack embassies, naval vessels, and he pulled our troops out of Somalia after the Blackhawk down incident. This emboldened bin Laden to attack America, a country he viewed as a paper tiger. This is according to bin Laden himself and all the censorship and secret document theft by Clinton and his minions cannot change that fact. If Clinton had taken out bin Laden on any of the occasions that he could have (and there were at least three) then 9/11 probably would not have happened.
As for the job creation or the economy in general, the Bush economy is as good as the one Clinton had and in some measures better. Bush inherited a recession from Clinton and 9/11 occurred eight months into his presidency. Despite this, job growth is as high as Clinton’s, unemployment is the same and the largest amount of home ownership in history has taken place on Bush’s watch. The problems we are having now (not unlike the dot com bubble burst) are a result of US monetary policy and political correctness. Our monetary policy is poor and we continue to print money out of thin air. The more unbacked (as in a gold standard) dollars that they flood into the market, the less value each of them will have. As far as PC goes, we allowed race baiters to change how loans are given. Jackson and Sharpton cried that denying blacks (as well as other minorities) a home loan was racist despite the fact that the decisions were based upon credit worthiness. Rules were relaxed and people who should not have been given loans were. Now they are defaulting and the baiters are crying that the banks are at fault for lending to people who could not afford it.
The reality is, many people (minorities and not) took advantage of the great housing market but they bought homes they could not afford. Some lenders engaged in shady practices and dimwitted people entered into contracts for things like adjustable rate mortgages. When the rates adjusted people who bought more than they could afford lost their homes. With regard to jobs in this country, it is a fact that the unemployment numbers are the same as they were under Clinton. If Bush has been an economic failure then so was Clinton. They cannot have it both ways. One last thing. People should not fall for the balanced budget BS that they harp on. The budget was never balanced. They did a lot of stuff on paper that would have made it balanced if all those things were adhered to. In other words, if they did it all the budget would be balanced in the future. Congress likes to spend and they have spent us into debt.
If the Democrats want to insist that the budget was balanced then they need to give the Republican Congress credit for it. Congress deals with the budget and if it was balanced it was balanced by a Republican Congress. As I stated though, it was never balanced and has not been for quite some time.
Nancy Pelosi showed her true liberal colors and she distorted the truth. This is what they always do. Remember, she and her Democrats were going to fix the gasoline price problems, they were going to stop the war, they were going to do it all. One of them recently admitted that thye lied to America because they knew they could not. Keep this in mind when you hear them spouting off, they will lie to you in order to get your vote.
Pelosi has been the worst Speaker of the House in the history of Congress. She is inept and she cannot get things done without attaching items to war spending packages. None of her plans would ever pass on their own merits so she and her cronies resort to procedural games to get stuff passed.
Finally, Nancy Pelosi said that this would be a bad year for Republicans and it is shaping up that way. If the Democrats win I hope they win big so that they can pass everything they want. This is what happened in Maryland and now a lot of people have buyer’s remorse because of the extremely high taxes imposed by the fuhrer here. A Democratically controlled Congress will do the same and I have the same hope for any of America’s poor and elderly who put them there. I hope you have to choose between cat food and heat in the winter. I hope you are so burdened and put out by their imposing taxes and policies that you suffer the worst pain you have ever had. I want it to be a matter of life or death for you the entire time they are in office.
Sometimes people need to experience pain before they learn. Consider it a great learning experience.
Sources:
America’s North Shore Journal
Free Republic
derkeiler
Neal Boortz
Others with interesting posts:
Rosemary’s Thoughts, Alabama Improper, DragonLady’s World, Cao’s Blog, Democrat=Socialist, Pet’s Garden Blog, Allie is Wired, third world county, Faultline USA, Online Gym, Alabama Improper, Woman Honor Thyself, The World According to Carl, The Pink Flamingo, Chucjk’s Place, , Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.