Log in

No account? Create an account
More "Kelo" Shame on the Left and Right. - Alan, Esq.

Alan, Esq.
Date: 2005-07-02 02:58
Subject: More "Kelo" Shame on the Left and Right.
Security: Public
The Agitator has posted a press release from the Institute for Justice, which is leading the fight against Eminent Domain abuse following the Supreme Court's decision in "Kelo". As you can see, town officials across the Nation are using the decision as a green light to take people's land. In one situation in Lodi, N.J. where the town is trying to rip 200 trailer park residents off of their land, the mayor had this revealing quote:
Lodi Mayor Gary Paparozzi called the Kelo ruling a "shot in the arm" for the town. He told the Bergen County Record, "The trailer park is like a poster child for redevelopment. That's the best-case scenario for using eminent domain."
Agitator then remarks:
Telling of how the left's lust for government power really affects the poor, isn' it?
One small problem... Gary Paparozzi is a Republican. Although, I quickly am learning that being a member of the GOP does not exclude one as a big-government-loving leftist...

Anyway, back to the quote. "Trailer Park Residents"??? Regardless of the mis-identification of political party, Agitator nails down the point that the "working poor"; i.e. those with limited incomes but still struggle to purchase land, will be the ones most victimized by this outrage. What was it that (now former) U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor said about "Kelo"? Oh yeah:
Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms. As for the victims, the government now has license to transfer property from those with fewer resources to those with more. The Founders cannot have intended this perverse result.
And before I let the Democrats off the hook, let's see what House Minority Leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has to say about "Kelo".
Q Could you talk about this decision? What you think of it?

Ms. Pelosi. It is a decision of the Supreme Court. If Congress wants to change it, it will require legislation of a level of a constitutional amendment. So this is almost as if God has spoken. It's an elementary discussion now. They have made the decision.

Q Do you think it is appropriate for municipalities to be able to use eminent domain to take land for economic development?

Ms. Pelosi. The Supreme Court has decided, knowing the particulars of this case, that that was appropriate, and so I would support that.
Read Pelosi's remarks in the full context and you will grasp how little of the decision she understands and how much of a moron she is. And she's the most powerful Democrat in the House of Representatives, folks. I also wonder if the U.S. Supreme Court overturned "Roe v. Wade", if Pelosi would also calmly respond, "It is a decision of the Supreme Court. So this is almost as if God has spoken. They have made the decision."

Post A Comment | 3 Comments | | Link

everything is never quite enough
User: mikeijames
Date: 2005-07-02 08:13 (UTC)
Subject: what else could she say?
i don't respect the decisions of the supreme court? especially those decisions made by the liberal justices of the court?
Reply | Thread | Link

Alan, Esq.
User: alanesq
Date: 2005-07-02 08:49 (UTC)
Subject: Re: what else could she say?
what else could she say?

I dunno... Something like...

"I'm going to work day and night crafting legislation designed at protecting low-income working Americans from being preyed upon by big bad evil corporations looking to take adavantage of the poor... I will even cross party lines and work with the Republicans in protecting Americans from eminent domain abuse."

However, what she did say proves two things.

1. She doesn't understand the opinion and
2. As a dyed-in-the-wool leftist she supports the state's right to take away private property for any reason the state desires... public use or not.

As for your comment that she would never say that she doesn't respect the decision of the Court authored by the liberal Justices... you have identitified one of the major differences between liberals and conservatives.

Conservatives have no qualms whatsoever of attacking Scalia, Rhenquist, Thomas (and at one time) O'Connor, when they drifted off the conservative reservation. Frankly, I'd respect Pelosi if she was willing to take on the liberal wing of the Court. Aren't Democrats supposed to be the party for the working man?
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

everything is never quite enough
User: mikeijames
Date: 2005-07-02 08:58 (UTC)
Subject: Re: what else could she say?
while i tend to agree, i don't supposed we'd see that sort of rhetoric in an environment where one's judicial philosophy plays so immediately into the discussion we're having right now about appointing judges. if she disagreed with a decision, it'd become a television commercial before the end of the day.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link

my journal
December 2010