Skip to comments.Ann Coulter Says Marco Rubio as VP Pick Would Be a ‘Mistake’
Posted on 04/01/2012 12:18:45 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
Is it still your contention that the US adopted English Common law instead of just the concept of common law?
Surely you have to defend my calling you wrong on such a basic issue...especially with you being a lawyer/attorney (you've said you're both at various times).
The fact that you make wild claims, make ridiculous unsubstantiated charges, and express yourself as indicated above, does not mean that I have some sort of obligation, imposed solely by your whim (Lincoln freed the slaves some time ago and it was in all the newspapers), to make believe that you are so worthy of response that I should do your legal research for you. For someone at your level of understanding, and assuming you can read, I would recommend that you go to Wikipedia, look up American Common Law, the third paragraph thereof, then look up Reception Statutes. Unless you reside in Louisiana which is a unique American jurisdiction in using Code Napoleon, all the other states including the one where you live, have adopted pre-Revolutionary War British common law. It is in the nature of the common law that American common law, state by state, diverged thereafter (i.e., after British and American jurisdictions were separated by the Revolution) and Britain's from ours and, ummmm, Massachusetts' from Connecticut's from New York's from New Jersey's, etc. States admitted later than the original thirteen likewise.
It was never the intention of any state other than Louisiana to do other than adopt many centuries of British common law rather than having to reconstruct the common law and its principles, state by state, without credit to centuries of England's common law. The principles governing the British common law governing the determination of which civil party in litigation stole which's pig did not change merely because in American cases, the pig, the thief and the victim were an American pig, thief and victim. By reference to prior Brit common law, such challenging legal concerns did not have to be governed by what may have appeared to be original thinking when an American judge would be cribbing from published Brit decisions. BTW, have you ever been stolen in the US other than in Louisiana?
You are making the obvious mistake of hallucinating that I give a sh*t as to your opinion of me personally or of whether you find me credible or not or of what I post. Dry up, blow away and stop wasting my time. You have too much time on your hands and waste it wantonly.
I know darn (or some word like that) well that it was not Pius XII's fault or that of the late and sainted Rene Barrientos of Bolivia, nor that of the Cristero martyrs of Mexico or of their colleagues.
It is not your reliance on erroneous "facts, (which are nothing of the sort) as to matters apparently beyond your competence...
Well then since you've not bothered to correct me, as I have with you, then I must be right after all.
...your persistent rudeness and your bigoted expressions against the Roman Catholic Church and your insistence on stalking and your ungentlemanly (or unladylike) behavior which disqualifies you for such an exchange.
I'm not bigoted against the Catholic Church. I'm against the leftists within the Catholic Church who wish to wrongly use it, and religion in general, as a means of implementing their political agenda.
And if your tender sensibilities are hurt by my occasional rudeness then you need to get out of the kitchen since you obviously can't handle the heat.
The fact that you make wild claims, make ridiculous unsubstantiated charges...
What claims of mine, specifically, are "wild" and what charges, specifically, are ridiculous and unsubstantiated?
Dry up, blow away and stop wasting my time.
You have too much time on your hands and waste it wantonly.
Translation - Leave me alone so you don't expose me.
Who are you to tell me what to, and not to, do with my time?
Sorry, ain't gonna happen. You're just another undercover troll who needs exposing in my book.
So now to the crux of the issue...your third paragraph in no manner gives any credence whatsoever to your claim that America adopted English Common Law. Your statements are wrong again and restating them in a different manner over and over again with a slight rewording doesn't make you right.
It was never the intention of any state other than Louisiana to do other than adopt many centuries of British common law rather than having to reconstruct the common law and its principles, state by state, without credit to centuries of England's common law.
Credit was given to centuries of England's common law through the adoption of the concept of common law.
You can't "adopt" a court decision (common law) that isn't based upon your own laws, can you?
America made its own laws anew as it saw fit after the revolution. America started making its own case law (common law) based upon the concepts and principles of common law as soon as the cases started to be heard. America had to construct, not reconstruct, its own common law.
And you have the audacity to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about?
The principles governing the British common law governing the determination of which civil party in litigation stole which's pig did not change merely because in American cases...
You're truly an idiot! The principles governing the British common law had nothing whatsoever to do with a charge of theft. The law as written, and broken, would have been under criminal law, not case law. The principle of common law would then be that the case decision would be used as precedence after the case was decided.
America wrote it's own laws. The first pig thief would have been charged under American criminal law. The case would be the first of it's kind based upon American law and America would have it's first case governing the issue of pig theft, or theft in general, and would be the basis for the construction, reconstruction, of its own common law.
BTW, have you ever been stolen in the US other than in Louisiana?
Your translator isn't working again. That question isn't understandable or answerable.
1. You are NOT worth bothering with and you ARE a stalker.
2. IF you hallucinate, against all evidence, that you are somehow NOT a stalker or that you ARE worth bothering with, refer back to numbered paragraph 1 (now and forever).
And, again you have nothing of substance to say. And, just like every other time I've confronted you on an issue you disagree with me upon (where you take liberal/left position), you've tried to divert the subject, babbled on to no end, failed to defend or prove your statements/assertions and refused to directly answer questions which would further clarify your position.
So, since you can't defend your statements all you've got left is a feeble attempt at trying to disparage me and cast doubts as to my character. Furthermore, judging by your statements, you're going to try and slink away without anyone being the wiser to your duplicity.
When I see you on a thread and I see you talking rubbish I'm going to call you out on it. That isn't stalking you, that's confronting you, just like I've been doing on this thread. I didn't go looking for you, I merely found you walking down the same street with your brightly lit neon sandwich board.
I was hospitalized for a couple of days. I know you missed me but I am back. Do you have any idea how hard it is to disparage you beyond the depth to which you disparage yourself? But it IS quite doable.
It is certain that neither Pope Pius XI nor Lincoln Diaz-Boehlart did it either! Nor the magnificent Rene Barrientos! But Ernesto "Che" Guevara might have. He's probably on your tee shirt. If you send him a message, he might send you one back.
When Catholics, the real Catholics, want your opinion of our Church, we will let you know right away. Prudence for you? Don't hold your breath waiting.
And what you are doing is stalking. I slunk nowhere but the local hospital with a blood chemistry for a brief and necessary tuneup.
Not a friend of and/or to the Catholic half of your own family or any among those Catholics??? Wow. Whattaguy!!! How not surprising! And the sun still appears to rise in the east. How unfortunate for those Protestants, though. You had actual friends??? Who'd a thunk it?
And once again you don't refute a single thing I've said.
Instead you go into some pathetic, marginalizing diatribe with what...?...an intent to get me to respond in kind?
No, unlike you I'm able to keep on track and I'll bring the topic back to your error...
America didn't "adopt" English Common Law.
Please review the history of this thread and of another and shorter thread linked by philman_36 at #132 as "@24."
I have asked philman_36 to stop stalking me on both threads. I have responded to some of the insults and intemperate assertions and sometimes with reference to such matters as The English Common Law as it was adopted here. He does not agree. Fair enough, however wrong. BUT he apparently is obsessed with a desire to have me humor him by making believe he is right. I have my doctorate in law and am retired from practice after 25 years active practice including constitutional litigation. The stalking began when I cut off answering his questions poised to me personally on the topic of the thread but also as to personal identity questions (as though he imagined I had an obligation to submit to his interrogation. He was free to ask and I to refuse further answers. He seems to feel a need that I submit to his opinions on law when I know to a moral, academic and professional certainty that he is flat out wrong.
This has been going on on this thread alone for almost the entire month of April to date. As you may know, I very seldom communicate to management asking that you intervene. I have had enough of being stalked, badgered and personally insulted by this fellow philman_36 and I ask that you consider a) making JimRob aware of this situation before any action or decision and b) admonishing nor further contact here between philman_36 and me. I have pinged arrogant bustard since this stuff started here when he was being attacked by philman_36 and I rose to arrogant bustard's defense.
I am not getting any younger. I am not getting any healthier. I just got out of the hospital on Tuesday after two days in-patient for blackouts due to unexpected sodium deficiencies and I have no interest in spending any more time on philman_36 now or ever. I prefer the more respectful exchange of views which, while sometimes heated or colorful, is actually informative and which normally characterizes FR.
Thank you for your attention to this matter. As ever, whatever decision is made will have my compliance. JimRob's living room. JimRob's rules.
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.