Of course the lliberals are going to be all over George W. Bush's commuting of "Scooter" Libby's prison sentence. And while it is a curious move, to say the least, for the leader of a party desperately foundering in the polls, it is inconsistent in every way for liberals to criticize this move.

First we must consider what good the incarceration of Libby would serve. While liberals press for early release for violent criminals, it is odd that they would even consider locking up nonviolent criminals whose actions, while ethically deplorable, do not pose a threat to the general public. Libby has been largely disgraced, his career has been hurt badly, and his name has been dragged through the mud. At what point does it stop being justice and start becoming politically motivated vengeance.

Second, most of the camp that would decry Bush's actions would be the first in line to declare that the proposed bill to legalize illegals was not amnesty. Why is it that when we give illegals a small fine for breaking the law to enter and remain in the country it doesn't constitute amnesty, yet when Bush leaves a rather large ($250,000) fine and a two year probation intact, it is?

Lastly, let's not forget the conga line of suckholes that attached themselves to the rectum of one William Jefferson Cllinton to find themselves released from prison at the end of Clinton's tenure as President. Those sentences weren't commuted, they were given a full Presidential pardon, and the actions of some of the recipients of those pardons DID cause damage, if only to the pocketbooks of those affected.

Those who know me no that I am no lover of Bush. And, in fact, it is through gritted teeth and with the taste of bile rising in my throat that I say Bush may have done the right thing in this case. While I still maintain it was a politically curious move, it was nonetheless not improper. Bush actually resisted tremendous pressure to pardon Libby. All he did was eliminated the prison sentence. The only mistake he made, in my opinion, is in not urging people with control over the prison system to apply the same restraint to other criminals whose actions do not directly affect others in a substantial way.