Comments on: Pick a Topic, Any Topic

By: IndyAries

IndyAries — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 09:47:00 +0000

TA, why would you be concerned with what's written in our Constitution? Legislators and judges certainly aren't. They go out of their way to find ways around “that pesky Constitution.”

We had Delegates, not Founders. The Delegates provided a mechanism to amend our Indiana Constitution — Article 16.

By: IndyAries

IndyAries — Fri, 04 Dec 2009 03:47:00 +0000

TA, why would you be concerned with what's written in our Constitution? Legislators and judges certainly aren't. They go out of their way to find ways around “that pesky Constitution.”

We had Delegates, not Founders. The Delegates provided a mechanism to amend our Indiana Constitution — Article 16.

By: pascal

pascal — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 13:06:54 +0000

Because the wife wants the Sunday paper I am obliged to also get the Star's Thursday paper. I note a front page article on ISTA. But, I don't see that article in the on line version.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:51:11 +0000

Anecdotally & from the mosaic distance of I-465, structurally, judges may be all too subject to the pressures of morbidly proportioned government (big govt disease); the insatiable institutional bias for revenue at the expense of the financial well being of citizens & their systematically dismissed concerns about public spending.

Corrections are herein welcomed / encouraged; but doesn't the unduly ISTA influenced GA, also control compensation & retirement benefits of the very judges entrusted with the responsibility of Constitutionally safeguarding the people? If that's the case, it's structurally flawed to the distinct disadvantage of the people, or is the aforementioned pressure be somehow nonexistent?

By: pascal

pascal — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:41:36 +0000

For ease of readers and to provide a proof to all courtesy of the State Government site, “http://www.in.gov/legislative/ic/code/const/art13.html” would be the aforementioned Article XIII. Pay close attention to “any manner” and judge yourselves.

By: Taxpayer 834512

Taxpayer 834512 — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:30:12 +0000

1) Afghanistan- bad, without much more contribution by other countries interested in the outcome. Take the money we want to spend on this and secure our borders. Keep bad guys out and limit illegal immigration.
2) Property Caps- good, but only with alternate funding methods if the people (district/county, etc.) want to pay for more services. At least some taxation based on consumption is needed.
3) Bauer re Ethics- good, I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop, but if he can persuade Senator Simpson and others of both parties to get rid of the revolving door to lobbyist- go get 'em. I'll believe it when I see it.
4) Safe perceptions- good, but I believe Melyssa pointed out it's a very personal interpretation, like religion or politics. There seem to be less glaring headlines about murders and an attempt to tackle reform in the police dept.

By: pascal

pascal — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 12:16:45 +0000

The discussion procceeds without examination of the current Constitution's Article XIII property tax cap. When you read the clear language whose meaning was very clear for at least 100 years you wonder how a df judge could “discover” that it meant something else. So, are you going to believe the Constitution or are you going to believe whatever df lawmakers or judges say? Neither political party can be trusted on this matter as they both gang rape the property owners and, of course, violate their oaths of office in so doing-not that either bothers them excessively. The intention of the “Founders” in at least their 1851 version, was quite clear to any student of Indiana history although opaque to judges with an agenda and political support for thievery.

By: Think Again

Think Again — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 10:47:45 +0000

I'm still waiting on the full plate of evidence regarding Durham. It is funny to watch the scattering of his “friends,” like roaches when you turn on the lights.

I might favor tax caps, or even more harsh realities for Indiana's cities, towns, school boards, etc. But not via an Amendment. Never. Ample statutory language exists for the solution. We need to get over this insane desire to amend the Constitutions for problems solved by statutes. It was not the Founders' intention.

By: varangianguard

varangianguard — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 14:14:23 +0000

You know, I would think that given our (now) long experience in Afghanistan we would be able to develop a narrowly focused plan to achieve some substantial military goals, then pack it up and go home.
.
All the technologies, all the Harvard grads, and yet we get the same old stale “solutions” time after time.

By: melyssa

melyssa — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 14:06:18 +0000

I didn't go to the MKNA meeting last night because I was meeting with the guy who will be installing my woodstove this month.

However, I did not intend to go because I knew that it would be heavily managed and all questions vetted to get the desired result....CAPS.

While the neighborhood association is good in some matters, MKNA has been lame in the work of protecting homeowners from property tax abuses.

People need to understand that the property tax caps are a trick. The caps do not protect you from a government who can declare that your house is worth anything they want it to be.

In a down economy (from 2008 to 2009) they raised the assessed value of my house and that of 200 of my neighbors between $40,000 and $50,000.

So even though our legislators promised they heard us, they socked more tax burden on folks in the middle of a major recession and down economy when home prices are in a free fall.

If that's not a gangster government, I don't know what is.