Why Huckabee's softness on Dumond is MUCH WORSE than Dukakis' Willie Horton problem

[BurtWorm]

From Talking Points Memo, a commenter makes excellent points. (Huckabee should have "Rapist Enabler" tattoeed on his forehead):

http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/Talking-Points-Memo/~3/195884939/060402.php

TPM Reader CR on Huckabee and Dumond:



I've seen the Wayne Dumond affair referred to as Huckabee's "Willie Horton" problem a number of times, including on this blog this afternoon in a post by David Kurtz linking to Murry Waas' excellent piece. But this case is only superficially like Willie Horton. As I recall, Michael Dukakis did not advocate the release of Willie Horton specifically, whereas Mike Huckabee *did* advocate specifically for the release of Wayne Dumond. Of course, Dukakis as governor *did* move to continue the program of furloughs for prisoners serving life without parole as a measure he believed would effectively rehabilitate prisoners, and in my opinion that was both dangerous as a matter of public policy and stupid at a purely political level. But the equivalency developing between the Willie Horton story and the Wayne Dumond story is ridiculous.

The bottom line is simple. Mike Huckabee championed the release of a specific convicted rapist who, once release, raped and killed a woman in Missouri. The furlough policy advocated by Mike Dukakis led to the furlough of Willie Horton, who raped a woman in Maryland and stabbed her fiancee. But Mike Dukakis had never heard of Willie Horton, whereas Mike Huckabee was well aware of the crimes and dangers posed by Wayne Dumond. Anyone who doesn't see the substantive difference between the two cases just isn't looking.

[Gold Metal Flake]

1. "The furlough policy advocated by Mike Dukakis..."

Wasn't that policy instituted my Dukakis' republican predecessor? Also, the policy, which predated Dukakis, was being managed by the prison system of that state. So, we see that Dukakis was even further away from the program than the TPM poster suggests.

[fishnfla]

2. the worst part is: he did it for poltical reasons and more importantly

He willfully ignored pleas from WD's victims specifically warning that if freed he would rape again and next time kill to silence witnesses .

Its one thing to hate Clinton. Its another to ignore innocent victims and create more victims

[wtmusic]

3. I don't see this issue getting legs

Possibly a regrettable error in judgement. But it's not that simple (good objective analysis):

Wayne DuMond Case: Is Huckabee Responsible?

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2007/12/wayne_dumond_case_it_huckabee_1.php

[TwilightGardener]

4. Regrettable error in judgment? Are you serious? It was politically motivated--

he wanted to get the Clintons and have the Freepers proud of him. Dumond's victims BEGGED Huck not to release him. Two women are dead because Huck wanted to score political points and also demonstrate Godly "forgiveness" for a man he deemed worthy of it--he did not even read the court case! And then he tried to give himself political cover by making the parole board meeting private, with no recorded minutes. And NOW he's very clearly lying about his responsibility, calling everyone else liars and blaming everyone else but himself. One of the murdered ladies' mothers asked him to apologize, and he refused. He's a sick, terrible man who let his power as governor go to his head. Why are you defending him??