Consider how stupid the average person is, then recognize that half of them are even dumber, and the answer to that question becomes remarkably clear. With democracies people tend to get the kind of government they deserve, for better or worse.
The Democratic candidates running absolutely horrendous campaigns in 2000 and 2004 may have also had a bit to do with it.

Tell it to the AP, they're the ones who wrote the article I read it in, which said the two were convicted of killing the guy. I figured I didn't have to check their facts, but I guess I should have known better.
EDIT - Oh, and just so we are clear, my statement was not Bush bashing. The question asked was what do you think Bush will do with his last day. The actual answer (at least in part) was to commute those two sentences. How is that in any way Bush bashing?

Playing old games from GOG, as everyone does.

Heh, having a diarrhea attack all the day-long would be nice :-P

Maybe he's lighting a cigar using a lit Constitution.....

The only story I can find on AP doesn't mention murder... though that doesn't mean they didn't have one. I've seen first hand that the press is loathe to admit mistakes.
Be honest. You didn't relate that pardon so we could sympathize with George. You didn't post a feel good story about one of his other pardons. You posted the one where you thought Georgie made a boo-boo. (I still think it was a poor choice for a pardon, the officers attempted to cover up the shooting and the jury was convinced they used excessive force) Unless accusing someone of letting murderers go free could be considered a pat on the back or casual conversation.

Uh no, I was just relating a fact of what he did with his last day, as per the topic at hand. I don't know enough about the circumstances around the crime involved to form an opinion on whether or not it was a "boo-boo" (obviously, if I missed APs error). What you read into it may be an indication of your own biases, not mine.
BTW - Why would I even mention any of his other pardons and commutations when none of them happened on his last day?

What will people do when there is no one to bash for the next four years; since instead of looking at anything positive it is trying to find the worst to talk about. So much for change.
EDIT: I can only imagine when things go wrong it will somehow be related to the last eight years and still be Bush's fault. Just trying to stay ahead of the curve here.

Wow, are you afraid that the CIA are reading your thoughts too? You want to come over and make tinfoil hats and discuss paranoia inducing theories?
But on a more serious note: Shut up.

are you kidding me? you'll be able to bash Obama in just a few months. He's not perfect, every man makes mistakes.

Naturally, but there are mistakes, and then there are MISTAKES.
I don't think any president ever deserved to wear a huge "Bash me!" sign on his back as much as Dubya.

Yes, I know that, but the strident among us will not likely acknowledge this. Instead, when a problem comes up, it will likely be related to something that happened in the last eight years and therefore Bush's fault no matter what, or an excuse will be made why something is happening.
I take issue with somethings George Bush did, or did not do as well, but all the bashing is, well, tiresome.

You mean like W has tried to do with every one of his problems? The economy - the fault of Clinton's push to open up mortgages; 9/11 and the mid-East wars - Clinton failed to act on early (unreliable) intelligence; immigration - Clinton relaxed immigration standards. The fact is, every administration tries to blame their problems on whatever mess the previous administration left behind. The difference this time is Obama is starting his administration on the positive note of "yes, things are broken, who broke it doesn't matter, what matters is we need to fix it".

I'm just glad Obama is going to be president. Not a big fan of mourning the past.