SwiftVets.com

[Ohio Voter]

Yes I said Communism. This is what the political left has brought to us. If the recent Supreme Court decision to allow private enterprise to take private property for the "public good" is not blatant Communism, then what is it?

Democrats that continue to support the leftists in politics should take a hard look at what they are voting for. It isn't union rights, civil rights, animal rights. It is now their American right to keep and own property. Now even their property is not safe.

[Tanya]

http://www.nysun.com/article/15999

Eminent Danger

New York Sun Editorial
June 24, 2005

~snip~
"The irony, as in so many instances, is that it's the so-called liberals who are siding with the rich and powerful, and the so-called conservatives who are defending the poor and the downtrodden. "The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory," Justice O'Connor writes in her stinging dissent issued yesterday."

[Ohio Voter]

I can almost hear the wheels turning in the minds of every city council across this nation, thinking "Ah ha, now we can get that stubborn old coot out of his house so we can proceed with our plans to expand...[insert project name].

There seems to now be no exception to hold someone from taking what they want if they have the money and influence to do it.

If someone's sights are set on your property or mine, we have no recourse. Government can get it and private enterprise can get it for some broad interpretation of the "public good".

Tanya wrote:

http://www.nysun.com/article/15999 Eminent Danger New York Sun Editorial June 24, 2005 ~snip~ "The irony, as in so many instances, is that it's the so-called liberals who are siding with the rich and powerful, and the so-called conservatives who are defending the poor and the downtrodden. "The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory," Justice O'Connor writes in her stinging dissent issued yesterday."

[LewWaters]

If this doesn't wake citizens up to the onslaught of the Union of Socialist States of America, I don't know what will. Even the looney left is upset over this decision.

Now, will they stand firm against their very ideals that brought this on? I doubt it.
_________________
Clark County Conservative

[BuffaloJack]

Lew, what do you mean stand firm on their very ideals?
We all know that they are mindless sheep. If they weren't they wouldn't be Liberals.
They will go with whatever flow the high muck-e-mucks of the party tell them.
_________________
Swift Boats - Qui Nhon (12/69-4/70), Cat Lo (4/70-5/70), Vung Tau (5/70-12/71)

[DADESID]

[Ohio Voter]

Someone asked how that decision can be called Communism because it is capitalistic to allow big business to take over the little guys property.

We tend to forget there is a whole generation that has no idea what Communism is since it has been politically incorrect to use the word communist in describing a persons political ideology.

It seems to me the land grab is classic communism. Communal property is basic to the old communist order. It is property that is used for the "greater good" of the society.

[FreeFall]

I remember in college that the main difference between capitalism and communism was two words, private property.

While eminent domain has been around for years, this thing where the local governments are taking private property and turning it over to developers for remaking into another type of private property, to get more tax money, really bothers me. I wonder what will happen in California, with so many older folks living in homes under Prop 13, which is the only way to have really low property taxes. Worries me.

[Uisguex Jack]

As a farmer on a lovely river immediately outside of a quaint little town..... This totally freaks me out. A couple of things (among many) to consider.

I've put our land into 'conservation easement' disallowing any further building on what is environmentally sensitive land. This is supposed to guarantee a agriculturally minded tax evaluation for some time to come.

Well I'm thinking all that is totally moot. The only person who can't build on it is me. A nice big resort would do well here and surely pay more taxes.

Next.... how much do churches pay in real estate taxes in townships and cities? Could this be a assault on the existence of churches?

This is no small deal and I can't fathom how it got thru the courts.

[Deuce]