Libby Commutation: Grossly Unpopular

It turns out that people really, really don't think Bush should have commuted Scooter Libby's sentence:

There's got to be a campaign issue in this somewhere. It'd be nice to think the press might offer more follow-up reporting on this story than on John Edwards' scandalously fashionable haircuts.

Comments

Because all presidents are pardon-crazy this seems more a dissatisfaction with political favoritism in general. I don't think it could advantage the democrats.

Posted by judson | July 10, 2007 3:41 PM

judson, No. The poll question specifically asked about Libby. A President's pardon power hasn't made news in six years so I doubt these results are due to some type of American "pardon fatigue". If you think it points to a more broad issue about pardon power please show some proof.

Posted by Joshua | July 10, 2007 3:49 PM

Libby? YAWWWN!

Posted by cleek | July 10, 2007 3:54 PM

the official right-wing position (as articulated on the wsj editorial pages, for instance) is that libby should have been pardoned, so what i like about this poll is that it gives us a good idea of exactly how extensive right-wing kool-aid drinking is: 6 people out of 100.

now, let us compare that to the percentage of right-wing kool-aid drinkers invited to opine on the libby commutation in our various political talk shows on television. i guarantee you it's been more than 1 out of 16....

plus i agree with joshua....

Posted by howard | July 10, 2007 3:55 PM

Save the footage of the GOP debate where each of the candidates stood up for pardoning Libby. Save the footage of Thompson leading the charge for a Libby pardon.

Ad script:

[GOP Candidate X] talks a good game on the need for law and order, but when Vice President Cheney's Chief of Staff, Scooter Libby, was convicted of serious felonies, [Candidate X] favored letting him off scott free.

[ROLL FOOTAGE]

[Democratic Candidate] understands that law and order means that the law must apply to all, including the power brokers in Washington. [Democratic Candidate] pledges to restore respect for the police, the Constitution and rules that Americans live by every day. [Democratic Candidate] will restore the 100,000 extra police that former President Clinton dispatched, which give the US its lowest crime rate in recent history.

It's time for a change. Vote for [Democratic Candidate].

Posted by Ephus | July 10, 2007 4:12 PM

When I saw this presented in the form of a graph, it reminded me of the polling on the Terri Schiavo mess. Seems there were similar options to choose from and the Bushies and their media cheerleaders were all SHOCKED to find that most of America thought they should have stayed out of it.

Just an observation.

Posted by RandyH | July 10, 2007 4:14 PM

People are always leaving campaign issues in Reid's and Pelosi's offices. Scattered about on the floor, atop coffee tables, in the bathroom. The night crew cleans up the mess and Nancy and Harry are none the wiser.

Posted by steve duncan | July 10, 2007 4:16 PM

Ajami-Peretz-Matalin-&-Co. wanted the pardon. That's all that was necessary.

Posted by otto | July 10, 2007 4:25 PM

Because all presidents are pardon-crazy this seems more a dissatisfaction with political favoritism in general. I don't think it could advantage the democrats.

But it could. Andrew Sullivan today quotes Byron York quoting Clinton about the pardons the day after he left office in 2001 - "The next day, the new ex-president, explaining his decisions in several controversial cases, told reporters, "You're not saying that these people didn't commit the offense. You're saying they paid, they paid in full, and they've been out long enough after their sentence to show they're good citizens, so they ought to have a chance to get full citizenship.""

That's the difference between pardons the way they should be done (like what Romney should have done with that guy who shot someone with a BB gun in MA when he was 13 and now can't become a cop), and playing "in your face" political hardball to cover up investigations into alleged executive branch criminal acts. The Rublicans have repeatedly done it with Nixon, Weinburger and the Iran/Contra crew, and now Libby. Huge difference between the two parties approach to pardons - and if Democrats decided it was worth making the case, the American people would recognize the difference.

Posted by Ethel-to-Tilly | July 10, 2007 4:29 PM

"Everybody sort of likes the president, except for the real whack-jobs..." - Chris Matthews (while Bush approval was in low 30s)

The Washington press insiders are possibly the least well informed subset of the American population. I don't know how to explain it. Perhaps, unlike apathetic ignorance, they have ignorance actively instilled into them from constant exposure to complete rubbish. They are so constantly subject to spin that knowledge itself becomes an impossibility for them.

Posted by Njorl | July 10, 2007 4:32 PM

The value of a campaign issue is not primarily on how many support and how many oppose, but rather on how many care enough to vote on the issue. I might wish it were otherwise, but I doubt the Libby pardon is an election turner.

Posted by Lon | July 10, 2007 4:32 PM

This is an issue that will have some symbolic resonance with people, the President's cronies get special favors even when they are convicted of crimes by a jury. The Washington Courtiers aside, Americans still have a pretty stubborn attachement to equal justice under the law. That theme more than Libby himself could be a powerful theme for the Democrats in the fall, especially Edwards or Obama, if they'll use it.

Posted by AJ | July 10, 2007 4:35 PM

The full poll results show that the Libby pardon didn't play as large a role in reducing confidence in Bush as something else did. Finding out what that other issue is will be left as an exercise.

Posted by TLB | July 10, 2007 4:51 PM

I think even some of the wingnut dumbasses who are spoonfed the Ministry of Information's latest propaganda on FucksNews every night right after their latest spending binge at Wallyworld will get this meme:

Equal justice for all, but for my friends, it's a little more equal.

Even the Members Only guidos from Sopranoland can understand how fucked up that is. Might be a little beyond some of the dumbfuck WWJD megachurch megadouches, though.

Posted by WTF | July 10, 2007 5:04 PM

I might wish it were otherwise, but I doubt the Libby pardon is an election turner.

Not in itself, but it could well be a focal point for anger at the broader pattern. Put it this way: there's one law for you and me, one law for the rich and powerful, and no law at all for the Bush administration.

Posted by Tom Hilton | July 10, 2007 5:29 PM

To quote Shailagh Murray: YAAWWN.

That's what we can expect out of the MSM, SCLM, or whatever we're calling them these days.

Haircuts and brown suits are what they care about.

Posted by low-tech cyclist | July 10, 2007 5:36 PM

A President's pardon power hasn't made news in six years

And it also hadn't been used in six years. That only proves that it only makes the news when the president actually gets somebody out of jail.

Posted by David | July 10, 2007 5:36 PM

You'll notice they don't report what percentage have no clue who Libby is. Polling companies never like to report just how out of touch on political matters much of the public is.

Posted by Steve Sailer | July 11, 2007 12:51 AM

google up Bush Pardons / he has pardon people but none of this makes the news

Posted by Katherine Hunter | July 11, 2007 10:14 AM

But the 6% supporting a full pardon includes all the right people [/Sally Quinn]

Posted by calling all toasters | July 11, 2007 3:19 PM