Re: An "Extraordinary Circumstance."

----- Original Message -----

From: "john mccarthy"
To:
Cc:
Sent: Friday, January 20, 2006 2:41 PM
Subject: RE: An "Extraordinary Circumstance."


Greetings, Dean Velvel

What's the matter with democrats?

That funny "God Damn piece of paper" called the Constitution/Bill of Rights
has an uncanny first five words: CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAWS......
Howsomever, Congress DID "adopt" The Feres Doctrine, which strips all
military service members of their inalienable Right to seek redress for
grievances for any crime committed by any member of the Government deemed
"incident to service". Congress adopted this ruling in 1950. The Supreme
Court made it a Law of the Land in the same year by upholding Feres.

Ironically, Supreme Court Judge William Jackson, appointed by President
Truman to be the lead prosecutor of the Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal,
stated in his opening comments to the Court: "The standards by which we
judge these defendents today are the standards by which we shall be judged
tomorrow." Ironically, after witnessing the evidence of crimes against
humanity and peace perpetrated by the Nazi leadership, Justice Jackson
then became the author of The Feres Doctrine.

If Alito is appointed to the Supreme Court by democrats who vote for his
appointment we can expect further erosion of the Bill of Rights which seems
as no big deal to all politicians.

So I guess "what's the matter with Democrats" has been wrong with them for
at least fifty five years; they either can't read and understand those first
five words above or they all lied when they took the oath of office to
protect and defend the Constitution.

Bests,
John McCarthy
http://johnmccarthy90066.tripod.com



>From: "Dean Lawrence R. Velvel"
>To:
>Subject: An "Extraordinary Circumstance."
>Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:52:13 -0500
>
>
>January 19, 2006
>
>Re: An "Extraordinary Circumstance."
>
>From: Dean Lawrence R. Velvel
>
>VelvelOnNationalAffairs.com
>
>
>
>Dear Colleagues:
>
>This shall be the shortest blog ever posted here.
>
>The Boston Globe reported today that, in a Wednesday meeting of Democratic
>Senators regarding the Alito nomination, a Democrat who intends to vote for
>Alito said that not a single Democratic Senator argued that the Alito
>nomination presented an "extraordinary circumstance," the standard for a
>filibuster adopted by the gang of 14. My question is this: How in hell can
>it not be an "extraordinary circumstance" to put on the Supreme Court a man
>who refuses to say he will not vote for the vastly expanded executive power
>that will destroy our constitutional plan and turn our country into a
>defacto dictatorship, and whose prior record and statements indicate that
>he will vote to allow this dictatorial executive power? Does no one in the
>Democratic Party understand how Hitler became all powerful? -- do they
>think there will be no "extraordinary circumstances" until people are
>packed off to jails or concentration camps by the tens of thousands, as the
>Japanese Americans were? What the hell is the matter with the Democrats
>anyway?*
>
> *This posting represents the personal views of Lawrence R. Velvel. If
>you wish to respond to this email/blog, please email your response to me at
>velvel@mslaw.edu. Your response may be posted on the blog if you have no
>objection; please tell me if you do object.


----- Original Message -----


From: Curtis & Rosemary Schalek
To: Dean Lawrence R. Velvel
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 5:33 PM
Subject: Re: An "Extraordinary Circumstance."

You seem surprised. They are self-serving scum. They grew up in the 60's and 70's when no one had to learn anything. I took the constitution test in 1957, and had to understand it. I had high school civics in 1961, it was required. Is it even taught now? It is probably thought to be irrelevant. After all, courses about "Sex and the City" are now more relevant....

Dean Lawrence R. Velvel wrote:

January 19, 2006
Re: An "Extraordinary Circumstance."
From: Dean Lawrence R. Velvel
VelvelOnNationalAffairs.com

Dear Colleagues:

This shall be the shortest blog ever posted here.

The Boston Globe reported today that, in a Wednesday meeting of Democratic Senators regarding the Alito nomination, a Democrat who intends to vote for Alito said that not a single Democratic Senator argued that the Alito nomination presented an "extraordinary circumstance," the standard for a filibuster adopted by the gang of 14. My question is this: How in hell can it not be an "extraordinary circumstance" to put on the Supreme Court a man who refuses to say he will not vote for the vastly expanded executive power that will destroy our constitutional plan and turn our country into a defacto dictatorship, and whose prior record and statements indicate that he will vote to allow this dictatorial executive power? Does no one in the Democratic Party understand how Hitler became all powerful? -- do they think there will be no "extraordinary circumstances" until people are packed off to jails or concentration camps by the tens of thousands, as the Japanese Americans were? What the hell is the matter with the Democrats anyway?*