That's...gonna hurt.

Hey, if it's true, it ain't "swift-boating".

I'm not trying to make a case for Huckabee, but can't people accept the fact that a parole decision inherently involves a prediction about the future conduct of the individual, and that some such predictions will be wrong?  Yes, it's a tragic event, but will any significant number of voters really take this as indicating that the guy is less fit to be President?  Yes, "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." (Mencken), but will this really hurt him?  The swift-boat ads hurt Kerry because they directly attacked the credibility of his claim to be a war hero; is this single erroneous decision (actually, apparently, only a recommendation to the parole board) really the same?

Was Huckabee's decision primarily or heavily influenced by Huckabee's views on the man's Christianity?

If so, those pols who argue that their faith is a crucial influence on their leadership, hence a dispositive reason for voters to elect them, will need to justify this example of a governor's religious principles (and/or dumb bias) leading directly to a disastrous policy decision.

Was Huckabee's decision primarily or heavily influenced by Huckabee's views on the man's Christianity?

If so, those pols who argue that their faith is a crucial influence on their leadership, hence a dispositive reason for voters to elect them, will need to justify this example of a governor's religious principles (and/or dumb bias) leading directly to a disastrous policy decision.

I am with Tarfon, Dumond was attacked and castrated while awaiting his first trial. He was convicted based on eyewitness testimony alone. In 1992, former Lieutenant Governor Jim Guy Tucker reduced DuMond's sentence to 39 years, which made him eligible for parole. In 1996, Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee planned to release DuMond from prison based on a lack of sufficient DNA evidence related to the rape investigation, and he was finally released in 1999. So here you had a guy who served over 10 years, who had been castrated, and was a good prisoner.

Unless we as a society say that there shall be no more parole, and greatly increase prison terms, then there will always be recidivism. Is that the kind of society we want? He can certainly express regret at what happened, but he shouldn't apologize for what happened. Dumond is the criminal, not Huckabee.

Tep, so what if it is based on his view of Christianity? Do you think Democrats should now try to out punish the Republicans? Should every violent felon be locked away for life? Christianity teaches second chances, it is true, but don't Liberals as well? Are you saying that Liberal values are good, but Christian values are bad? Are values not a crucial influence on leadership, be it Christian or otherwise? I have no problem if you disagree with his values, but if you agree with any of them, why attack them just because they are based on Christianity?

I think this is not a fight we need to get involved in. We can defeat Huckabee (if he makes it) based on his public policies and his being a lightweight, lets not descend to the Republicans level.

blackie, let me re-phrase: was Huck's evaluation of the man's character sandbagged by Huck's gullible belief that overt piety = near-zero or zero risk of recidivism?

cf "I have looked into Putin's soul, and found him to be a man I can trust"

maybe Tep, as to me, the fact that he (Duumond) had his testicles sliced off and flushed down the toilet would leave me to believe he was not at the highest risk to commit rape again. Yes, I know rape is a crime of violence, but considering the cost he had paid you would think he would have learned something.

What is it with these Arkansans?  When one of their own goes national they seem to regard it as a betrayal.  Or is it just that they have it in for guys from Hope?