Go to A Distant Drum of the Coming Revolution
- Add a comment
- Go to Kiss your house goodbye if big business wants to develop your property!
Applying This Law Would Certainly Empty...
...our overcrowded prisons considerably, because it would decriminalize stealing.
After all, these bank robbers could simply say that they were exercising the power of eminent domain!
Write On!
AJ 
posted by
Ainsley_Jo_Phillips
on July 2, 2005 at 4:04 PM
| link to this | reply
Good comments!
Kingmi, I think you’re on to something about the civil rights erosion rhetoric being a false front. Hating and opposing Bush is the sole concern of these people.
Good points, twodog! The states also have the right to limit the application of this new concept of eminent domain; I understand Utah has already done so.
Welcome back, Jethro! You have been missed, good buddy.
Numinous, you have a good idea, but I in no way rendered this as Republican versus Democrat. It’s liberal philosophy versus conservative. There are conservative Democrats and, perversely, liberal Republicans. It is the mindset that I addressed in my followup posting on this that strict constructionist judicial nominees must be opposed at all costs that adds the divisiveness to this.
posted by
WriterofLight
on June 25, 2005 at 10:49 AM
| link to this | reply
Writeroflight
I think that the concern over the recent ruling that you speak of is the most important issue here. The justices where interpreting the laws; they do not make the laws. It is obvious that he law needs to be changed and for that we need to pressure our congressmen and representatives.
I don’t think that any private citizen, republican or democrat, feels that this is an acceptable ruling and I feel that if there was ever an opportunity for people of both parties to pull together to get something changed, this would be it.
I don’t think you should have tried to make this a republican vs. democrat issue, it is divisive at a time when we all need to be together.
posted by
Numinous
on June 25, 2005 at 8:44 AM
| link to this | reply
There has not in recent history been a court ruling that so clearly exposes the lie that the left in on the side of the "little guy". Pray for some new judges this next decade that will overturn this terrible ruling.
posted by
jethro
on June 24, 2005 at 8:50 PM
| link to this | reply
Winteroflight
If there was ever a reason why all the citizens of this country should be interested in appellit appointments, this decision is it. The thing is, if folks knew the document these hacks used to base the decision on, they would find out these hacks didn't use the document they claim they used to base the decision on, to make the decision. I keep a copy right here, on my desk, for quick reference when my memory fails.
And, contrary to popular belief, the Supreme Court can be overruled, it's right there, in the Document these knot heads claim to be expert on. If, the Legislative, We the People, and the Executive, the Pres and his bunch, decide the Robes are full of strawberry pudding, they, have the Constitutional authority to tell the Robes to take a hike. Yep, it's there, in the Constitution. That's why the Framers designed three separate branches of government. So that, if any one branch exceeded their authority, the other two branches could overrule any action, decision, the two branches found unacceptable. That's the truth of it, plane and simple, right there in the old Constitution of The United States, not that it makes much difference I guess.
posted by
twodog
on June 24, 2005 at 10:34 AM
| link to this | reply
WoL, I do not think liberals are worried about invasion of privacy underthe
Homeland Security laws. I think they just want to have a toe-hold to attemp to undercut, disempower and demoralize the effort against terror.
posted by
kingmi
on June 23, 2005 at 6:32 PM
| link to this | reply