Time to hear about the Romney pardons as he left Mass. ……

Carnac on January 12, 2012 at 12:16 PM

Answered my own question. As it turns out, Romney HAS been running for President for many years now ….

“As governor of Massachusetts, Romney refused to grant a single pardon.

Massachusetts does not have the death penalty, so Romney never faced that ultimate decision. But among the pardon applicants Romney denied was a decorated veteran of the Iraq War whose only offense — at age 13 — was shooting another child with a BB gun.

The veteran, Anthony Circosta, had been awarded a Bronze Star and wanted a pardon so he could become a policeman. Romney denied Circosta’s pardon application twice, according to an Associated Press article.”

Referenced Source

Is this really a controversy? No, Haley Barbour is simply a scum sucking pig, just like every other Congressman and the current President. No controversy.

He’s either paying off supporters or he’s hiring assassins for later use.

Gregor on January 11, 2012

Since very few facts were presented, that response is a wee bit over the top, doncha think? Unless I’m wrong of course and you know all about them.
As for Gov. Barbour being some type of swine, I smell a troll. Haley Barbour would make a dämn good President.

~(Ä)~

Anyway, as to the level of discourse around these parts, yes it has devolved quite a bit over the past 4 years I’ve been here. It first started when the C4P crowd bum rushed the place, and started acting like the Spanish Inquisition towards anyone and everyone who didn’t kneel or flagellate themselves at the feet of Our Lady of Wasilla. Now it appears that we’ve picked up of fair number of inhabitants from Media Matters/HuffPo this go round, and we’re just now beginning to see the effects here of their intolerance to opposing viewpoints that they’ve displayed elsewhere. Definitely going to make for a fun 2012.

If you have specific beefs, you need to be specific. There’s uproar over what, 4 of the 200? Because the stories are compelling, or because he’s a Republican, and Dems think they can make transmute gold from lead? I would rather of had the murderers put to death, but they weren’t, that is the real story. Irony alert, Dems are against death penalty, for ‘rehabilitation’, less ‘criminals’ because it’s not their fault, less sentences, etc.. How many anti-Republicans anti-Conservatives, anti-Southerners, are hoping the pardonees relapse asap?

This is political, but thanks for playing along, non-substance jamboree. Now he’s going to be Huckabee’d.

What is with these supposed “tough on crime” Republican governors (Schwarzenegger, Ryan, Huckabee, Barbour) who turn out to have a great big soft spot for murderers? Disgusting.

when Ryan was Gov. of my previous state, he moratoriumed the death penalty. The lead, liberal attourney (sp?) pushing him to do this, was stabbed to death by his son. Makes sense doesn’t it?

single stack on January 11, 2012 at 9:01 PM

I didn’t start it. I didn’t call you any names. If you read back further you would see me recant my defense of Haley, based on him pardonning murderers.

As far as condescending towards the south? I ran from the Northeast as fast as I could. I think the south is the last bastion of sanity in this jungle.

good hog hunting to.

Buy a double.

Is Corey Maye on the list?

He was released last July.

Yes. Quite Aware. Previous RNC chair. Now Gov of some state. I’m also aware of perps. You??

WryTrvllr on January 11, 2012 at 7:54 PM

“some state” Could you be any more condescending?
He’s now the ex-governor of the state I’ve lived in for over 20 years.
And I’m very well aware of the 208 pardons the SOB gave. It’s been a matter of much discussion and anger around here.

Douchebag

Ick on that picture of HB. It looks like he’s about to manhandle a pair

…of voters Partons.

bettycooper on January 11, 2012 at 8:03 PM

FIFM

Which means the pardons should not have been granted. But granting the pardons was not the fault of the accused. The governor essentially waived that requirement (apparently illegally).

Crispian on January 11, 2012 at 8:28 PM

Good point. I think their release is indeed imminent. How long can an ‘innocent’ person be held in prison? And how much will the sue for after the injunction has lifted? haha.

Apparently some of the inmates did not meet the requirements of the constitution to give public notice.

demotheses on January 11, 2012 at 8:21 PM

Which means the pardons should not have been granted. But granting the pardons was not the fault of the accused. The governor essentially waived that requirement (apparently illegally).

It is my educated guess that the pardons can’t be undone. The freedom is a right granted to those pardoned. There is no legal proceeding to take away that freedom because of the wrongdoing of another. Certainly Barbour or the state of Mississippi could face sanctions.

Crispian on January 11, 2012 at 8:19 PM

Apparently some of the inmates did not meet the requirements of the constitution to give public notice.

Barbour’s people apparently sent out a press release trying to explain the issue by stating that the overwhelming majority of the people pardoned had already been released prior to being pardoned. That, of course, is not the issue. The issue is the few major cases (murder) where they had not been released. I hate attempts to obfuscate.

McDuck on January 11, 2012 at 8:05 PM

Curious.. Since several people mentioned it.. Do you support the death penalty??