Comments on: The More Things Change

By: IndyAries

IndyAries — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 05:09:40 +0000

Hello Jack. Thanks for the info.

By: IndyAries

IndyAries — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 23:09:40 +0000

Hello Jack. Thanks for the info.

By: jackthelad

jackthelad — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 16:04:25 +0000

IndyAries,

"I'm curious...what was the emergency that existed in Indiana in 1976 ??"

The "danger" of violence in Gary, Indiana, during the steel strike, 1976.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/RS21024.pdf

And, the Wabash floods of the same year.

By: IndyAries

IndyAries — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 09:35:32 +0000

Hmmm...I don't see "case law" listed anywhere in the Indiana Constitution or Indiana code. It's also missing from the federal Constitution.

So, where can I find something that tells one that We the People must obey "case law"?

IC 1-1-2-1
Hierarchy of law
Sec. 1. The law governing this state is declared to be:
First. The Constitution of the United States and of this state.
Second. All statutes of the general assembly of the state in force, and not inconsistent with such constitutions.
Third. All statutes of the United States in force, and relating to subjects over which congress has power to legislate for the states, and not inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States.
Fourth. The common law of England, and statutes of the British Parliament made in aid thereof prior to the fourth year of the reign of James the First (except the second section of the sixth chapter of forty-third Elizabeth, the eighth chapter of thirteenth Elizabeth, and the ninth chapter of thirty-seventh Henry the Eighth,) and which are of a general nature, not local to that kingdom, and not inconsistent with the first, second and third specifications of this section.
(Formerly: Acts 1852,1RS, c.61, s.1.)

I'm curious...what was the emergency that existed in Indiana in 1976 ??

IC 1-1-1-9
Effective date
Sec. 9. Because an emergency exists, the Indiana Code takes effect January 21, 1976.

By: Rico

Rico — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 02:26:42 +0000

It was not heard on a unanimous vote. It was 7 to 2 to hear the case. I effin know what the actual vote was.

And I happen to know far more than you on how the Supreme Court was intended to work. You've demonstrated your disdain for our forefathers intent for the Court by your support of our Affirmative Action justice Sotomayor. The justices of the Supreme Court aren't there to write law, but determine its constitutionality. Much of the downfall of this country has been due to liberal justices who want to legislate from the bench.

By: Think Again

Think Again — Tue, 29 Dec 2009 01:58:35 +0000

Oh, Rico…the cert was heard on a unanimous vote.

The actual case was a 5-4 vote.

Do you even understand how SCOTS works?

By: Rico

Rico — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 20:54:21 +0000

Once again, the Supremes decided to hear the case by a 7 to 2 vote.

And many of us are used to you being wrong, TA.

By: Think Again

Think Again — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 14:04:24 +0000

Hey, Rico–the SCOTUS decision was 5-4, with Madame Justice O'Connor later telling folks privately what most SCOTUS scholars already know: this was one of their darkest hours.

I was hoping you were taking a long winter's nap. Alas, I was wrong.

By: Randyknowsbest

Randyknowsbest — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 13:28:30 +0000

I think the Tsunomi (Spelling??) that killed over 250k people should definately be on that list. Doesn't matter what we think say or do, just reminds us that we are all mortal.

By: Fact Checker

Fact Checker — Mon, 28 Dec 2009 12:49:56 +0000

Rico, you can always be counted on to raise the level of discussion on this blog. You have a unique way of using your fourth grade insults to demean YOURSELF. Keep posting as it just reminds everyone of what a nut job you are.