Skip to comments.
***Mary Frances Berry, Victoria Wilson, Bill Clinton and Tom Daschel***
Stardate: 0112.8
Posted on 12/07/2001 9:29:58 PM PST by The Wizard
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-154 next last
To: VRWC_minion
My point has been from the outset that this lady's posistion is not totally without merit which is where everyone on FR has started with their opinion. Well, since you've admitted that you haven't heard any of the legal talking heads on TV discussing this, I'll tell you what they all, to a person, say: she has NO chance, i.e., merit, if you will.
121
posted on
12/08/2001 3:06:41 PM PST
by
Howlin
To: GussiedUp
This is exactly how I feel. Whatever happened to graciousness? In my opinion this is why Bush will win this even if he loses. He will bring the partianship nastyness to the surface while staying at a safe distance.
To: Howlin
Well, since you've admitted that you haven't heard any of the legal talking heads on TV discussing this, I'll tell you what they all, to a person, say: she has NO chance, i.e., merit, if you will.Even Mario Cuomo, Hillary Clinton and her own attorney ?
To: GussiedUp
Neither her nor Clinton can change the law as written.
To: veryconernedamerican
I agree
To: Registered
bttt
To: VRWC_minion
Clinton can have no more authority than he was given by this law. Therefore Berry will argue that he only had the power to appoint her. His limitations on her appointment are not enforceable because the law didn't give him that power to limit.
Also, the fact that this law is silent as to how long her appointment is when filling a vacancy works to her advantage. Most other legislation in other situations clearly spells out that such an appointment is limited to the original term, its never assumed. In this case you want to assume its there even though its not stated.
I could argue that Congress intended that it wanted a such a member to fill out a full 6 years because its less disruptive to the committe.
To: VRWC_minion
that is as appointed, not as a replacement.
To: ChaseR
Ms. Berry sees racism around every corner and in every cloud. We've all known people like her, scarred by some personal matter and taking it out on everyone else. Hang around a major US University, the feminist groups, etc., and the hatred and bitterness is contagious and soul-destroying. For a very short time many, many years ago I was almost convinced that men were pigs. Plenty of my fellow classmates without strong men in their lives found a great deal of satisfaction in this mob mentality, as cruel and wrongheaded as it was. My own Dad was wonderful, so the lie couldn't hold up under the reality test.
I don't know the answer, but we don't need to take this from her. No one should accept slander on this scale. Republicans racist in Florida? No, Ms. Berry, you are.
To: The Wizard
that is as appointed, not as a replacementThat is the issue. Under this law there is no provision for replacement, only appointment. That is why she has a case.
To: VRWC_minion
I'm talking about REAL legal experts.
And as far as I know, Berry doesn't have an atttorney; Ms. Wilson does, which she can pay for out of her own pocket, since the DOJ told them they weren't permitted to hire attorneys for this stupid fight.
131
posted on
12/08/2001 3:19:21 PM PST
by
Howlin
To: ChaseR
Boy does that ever sound like fraud! Sounds like another case for JW!
To: VRWC_minion
In the intstant case their is no language (like there is in other enabling statues) that provides for limiting a member to the remaining term. There is the small matter that Wilson's appointment, a Presidential order by Bill Clinton states her appointment ends November 29, 2001.
133
posted on
12/08/2001 6:33:28 PM PST
by
RJL
To: Don Joe
my question is how the hell has Berry been on the commission since 1990 or did i misread that somewhere? that woman is an idiot and has certainly turned the US Commission on Civil Rights into an absolutely joke....
134
posted on
12/08/2001 6:39:33 PM PST
by
BamaDi
To: Ragtime Cowgirl
bttt
135
posted on
12/08/2001 8:20:07 PM PST
by
ChaseR
To: ChaseR
Bump.
To: TrueReform
i heard on the news that Reagan tried to fire her unsuccessfully, so she's been there too, too long.
137
posted on
12/09/2001 4:11:45 AM PST
by
liliana
To: VRWC_minion
we agree to disagree and that's fine, at least we're part of the VRWC which i joined when hillary founded it on the today show.
138
posted on
12/09/2001 4:14:55 AM PST
by
liliana
To: All
Has there been a case before this where someone was appointed to fill out the term of someone and it ended? That's not worded right, but I mean...... has there been another incident like this? If so then there is a precedent for this.
To: VRWC_minion
Neither her nor Clinton can change the law as written.
For an Appointment not a Replacement. The contract was altered then and there. All depends on the judge of course - you may get your wish if the judge is liberal. I of course, hope the judge is conservative and goes w/Bush's team. BTW, Actually Clinton did the same as "change" the law in my opinion - when you breaks laws knowing there is slim to none chance you'll ever pay the piper for it...you've as good as altered the law at least for yourself.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100, 101-120, 121-140, 141-154 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson