23 Jun 05
WASHINGTON (AP) -- -- The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses -- even against their will -- for private economic development.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/23/scotus.property.ap/index.html
This is great....now, if the government gets a big enough "contribution" from a large, wealthy developer....they can take away your home and land even against your will. That is fan-freaking-tastic.
OUR GOVERNMENT ROCKS.
*sigh*
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by Shanshu311You know the irony here? I'll bet the people who are incensed the most about this are folks who are inclined to vote for liberals because they stand up for the little guy and conservatives are all pro big business. The 4 dissenters are all the conservatives on the court, and the guy who wrote the opinion for the majority is possibly the most liberal.
[b] WASHINGTON (AP) -- -- The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses -- even against their will -- for private economic development.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/06/23/scotus.property.ap/index.html
This is great....now, if the government gets a big enough "contribution" from a large, we ...[text shortened]... d land even against your will. That is fan-freaking-tastic.
OUR GOVERNMENT ROCKS.
*sigh*[/b]
Heaven forbid "W" get to appoint any more conservatives to the bench....🙄
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by The PlumberWell the conservatives made it harder for the small guy to sue big business... What happens here is their still playing us against them. Dems vs rebs, conservative vs liberal, when in reality none of them represent my viewpoint. Don't think for a second that one side or the other has your best interests in mind.
You know the irony here? I'll bet the people who are incensed the most about this are folks who are inclined to vote for liberals because they stand up for the little guy and conservatives are all pro big business. The 4 dissenters are all the conservatives on the court, and the guy who wrote the opinion for the majority is possibly the most liberal.
Heaven forbid "W" get to appoint any more conservatives to the bench....🙄
A system where we play two sides against each other does'nt accomplish anything but the facade of a bipartisan government.
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by Shanshu311even against their will? (like who's going to let their property be seized?)
[b] WASHINGTON (AP) -- -- The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses -- even against their will -- for private economic development. [/b]
24 Jun 05
1 edit
Originally posted by bobbob1056thYou're going to bust out your arsenal and shoot it out against the U.S. government?
even against their will? (like who's going to let their property be seized?)
This is bullshit. I am amazed anyone is ok with this. Well, I guess those who stand to profit by it would be ok with it.
24 Jun 05
Originally posted by NyxieDon't be confused. I never said that I thought one side or the other did a better job of representing my point of view (let alone, my interests). I was merely pointing out the irony (in this particular instance on the liberal/democrat side of the aisle) when all these folks think that their favorite liberal democrat is on their side versus big business, and it turns out that the liberals on the court are the ones who are abandoning the propertry rights that are one of the foundational pillars of our constitutional government.
Well the conservatives made it harder for the small guy to sue big business... What happens here is their still playing us against them. Dems vs rebs, conservative vs liberal, when in reality none of them represent my viewpoint. Don't think for a second that one side or the other has your best interests in mind.
A system where we play two sides against each other does'nt accomplish anything but the facade of a bipartisan government.
The truth is that the vast majority of politicians are in favor of bigger government, the only differences are what areas they want to concentrate big governments influence in.
24 Jun 05
Originally posted by The PlumberI was'nt trying to intone your belief either way. I agree with your last part anyway.
Don't be confused. I never said that I thought one side or the other did a better job of representing my point of view (let alone, my interests). I was merely pointing out the irony (in this particular instance on the liberal/democrat side of the aisle) when all these folks think that their favorite liberal democrat is on their side versus big busines ...[text shortened]... ment, the only differences are what areas they want to concentrate big governments influence in.