Mike Huckabee's chance to be president of the United States could be going up in smoke this week.

The former Arkansas governor and Republican presidential wannabe is at the center of a story involving a "person of interest" in the shooting deaths Sunday of four police officers in the state of Washington.

Huckabee as governor pardoned the man -- Maurice Clemmons -- in 2000

Indeed, the facts of the case appeared much different at the time of the commutation, when a teenager (17 years old) faced nearly a century in prison for some non-violent crimes. Clemmons was recommended (by the board of paroles) for and received a commutation of his original sentence from 1990. This commutation made him parole eligible and he was then was paroled by the parole board once they determined he met the conditions at that time. He was arrested later for parole violation and taken back to prison to serve his full term, but prosecutors dropped the charges that would have held him. It appears that he has continued to have a string of criminal and psychotic behavior but was not kept incarcerated by either state.

That guy was never going to end up in custody, alive.

I thought the same thing. How interesting that the officer who found him was alone.

For years and years, I've been hearing folks say, "What goes around, comes around."

This is the first time I have ever seen it so absolutely spot on a revisiting. This is truly, very truly, a cosmic payback for "Willie Horton." Amazing.

Tragedy is, it took four lives. Somehow I can't feel gratified.

And I happen to like Huckabee as a person. Was very impressed by him when I heard him speak while he was Governor of Arkansas. Especially sorry it had to be him to take the penalty. Would've rather'd it be that guy who is Governor of Texas. Don't like him very much. Sounds too much like somebody wearing Confederate flag decals on his underwear.

Enjoy.


jd

Democrats are the best grudge-holders I've seen.

Congratulations to the Democrats for celebrating the "ending" of Presidential aspirations for someone who never had realistic aspirations to win the Republican nomination in the first place.

Maurice Clemmons was 17 years old when he recieved combined sentences of 108 years for robbery, burglary, theft probation violation and possesion of a firearm.

* Sentenced to 5 years for robbery in Pulaski County, Aug. 3, 1989.

* Sentenced to 8 years for burglary, theft and probation revocation in Pulaski County, Sept. 9, 1989

* Sentenced to an indeterminate amount for aggravated robbery and theft in Pulaski County, Nov. 15, 1989

* Sentenced to 20 years each for burglary and theft of property in Pulaski County, Feb. 23, 1990.

* Sentenced to 6 years for firearm possession in Pulaski County, Nov. 19, 1990.

The record shows some sentences were concurrent and some consecutive. But the total effect of all these sentences was a sentence of 108 years. You will note.. these are ALL non-violent crimes.

This was a 17 year old black kid... who is it now, with 20-20 hind sight, that says... why commute his sentance.. the Dempocrats! I am sure it was the nasty Republicans that were requesting a black kid be treated with some concern back then.

On May 3, 2000, Gov. Mike Huckabee commuted Clemmons' sentence to 47 years, 5 months and 19 days (NOT RELEASE HIM!!), which made him eligible for parole that day. The Parole Board granted his parole July 13, 2000. He was released Aug. 1, 2000.

How stories change...

Lol.

Gopged, if the Democrats were the best "grudge holders," GW Bush would be, at the very least, on his way to the ICC under every conceivable charge that could be brought against a former American President. But, as you can observe, we have another (oh, how utterly tiresome) Koom bi yah (sp?) bipartisanship seeker, who has been sucked down the rabbit hole. And we have a whole bunch of other pussyfooting ("footing" optional) Democrats who are more concerned about being re-elected than they are about representing their constituents. I assure you, as a Democrat who has no "representation" from my Republican Congressman--and never have--Republicans can very well hold grudges, even against little old ladies. The privacy of the polling booth ends after the election, as precinct workers from both parties seem to have available every person's vote in the previous elections. I assure you, so does my Republican congressman. I do not get answers to any of my phone calls, even when I am trying to call their attention to a health insurance company that is stealing the American taxpayer blind. If it comes from a Democrat, they don't wanna hear it.

Your presumption/assumption is in error. Your accusation is false. Your charge is without foundation. Grudges may be held, but Democrats certainly do not hold grudges more tightly or longer than the Republicans. I don't mind your saying that, actually. But it just isn't factual. However, I'm sure it makes you feel better to hurl some more dirt at a Democrat, so feel free.

As you can plainly see, I am no slouch at slinging some dirt at Republicans. Voila!!!

Matter of fact, the relentless determination and incalculable expenditures of money, ruined lives, ruined opportunities demonstrated by the Republicans in "getting" Bill Clinton was absolutely astonishing to me. The same procedure is currently being followed with Obama. I was not particularly impressed with either one of them, but I was even less impressed with GWB. But, when the Dems took power in 2006, to my great dismay, they didn't do "Jack" to nail GWB. They should have.

I wonder if Bill Clinton was the "come around" for Richard Nixon. Ya think?

jd

Enjoy.

if the Democrats were the best "grudge holders," GW Bush would be, at the very least, on his way to the ICC under every conceivable charge that could be brought against a former American President

There;s no jurisdiction for the ICC in relation to Bush, so that's just a misinformed, unfulfilled pipe dream.

I made no accusations, by the way. Just observations.

Having worked in a Congressional office I can tell you the staffers receiving requests to be followed up don't know the party affiliation of the constituent, unless that person chooses to make it known in their correspondence or phone call. If someone doesn't receive a response, it's typically a result of the attitude the person holds when contacting the Congressional office.

I do not doubt you, Bobspics. I was married to a Scorpio. lol. Been divorced 42 years. One marriage was sufficient to convince me to never again. Scorpios can leave indelible marks.

rofl. Bobspics, now that's my kinda humor. "Horror Movie" Hilarious. Thanks. I hope I may copy it? Please?

Gopqed, I've had the same congressman for ten years. It is not the first time I have contacted his office. It is not the first my name was made known to his staff. Usually it is just a call to go on record as supporting or being opposed to some bill or other. I haven't been rude. But I have never received a phone response on a personal matter, and one involved my disabled Navy vet son, and the other was this observation about the health insurance company we old farts were "forced---yes, forced" to sign up with. We no longer have Medicare, but are members of an HMO, the only one that was available at that time. There was no choice for people in my income bracket. We were simply put there and told it was the only company available.

I've never had occasion to work in a congressman's office. I have had an opportunity to do precinct calling and visiting, and on all occasions I was given a printout with those who had voted for my party in the previous election. I would find it strange that if a lowly precinct worker can be handed a list indicating who voted what that a sitting congressman's office, in the same locale, did not have access to the same information. Perhaps it has to do with State Laws, or State practices. South Carolina is not the brightest star in the Union.

By the way, Gopqed, one would think I would have learned from observing the long, long "billboard thread." Sooz, told it loud and clear.

We write something and we think the other person is getting what we meant by what we said, and, as importantly, how we meant it.

I wrote that last post laughing and was making noises of far greater hostility than I actually felt. I was engaging in my peculiar form of outrageous humor. Somehow, I expected you to understand that. At the last moment, it dawned on me the post was a bad idea. I somehow found what you wrote about the grudge holding to be funny, and sort of a challange of "can you top this?"

I was having computer problems, and, as it happened the wretched post got posted three times, and I had to delete two of them. I had intended to delete all three when I rethought how the post sounded. However, after deleting two of them successfully, Yuku would simply not load again, and I could not delete the last edition of that post. I would have rewritten it without my peculiar brand of humor and maybe put in more smilies or something.

At any rate, I couldn't put the genie back in bottle. My son needed to use the computer. I am just getting now getting an opportunity. Don't make too much of what I wrote. If it had been said face to face, you would have known to laugh and throw a few more handfulls of whatever passes for political muddslinging, expecting me to laugh, and I most likely would have.

Have fun, folks. I'll be on line very little for the next few weeks. Things happening. I'll be thinking about ya.

jd

Jeanne, I'm sorry I took your post in the wrong way - I may have to chalk it up to my head being unclear as the result of the flu I've been suffering from since Thanksgiving - I think the bastard bug got me and I've been getting a tax more surly day by day. I'm sorry it came out with you today. I'll be sure to think a little more deeply next time and avoid getting so far over the top.

I hope everythig goes well for you, and I'll be looking forward to posting with you when you return.

So we have one guy whose sentence was commuted (doesn't matter by who) who went on to commit further crimes. How many others have had their sentences commuted and gone on to lead good, productive lives?