Replies

I'm adding the South Florida Sun-Sentinel to the growing list of organizations, mostly news agencies, who, in my opinion, are irresponsibly passing along wrong, politically correct ideas about what the Constitution and its history actually says about our rights, property rights as per this example.

AP
Herald Sun
U.S.News
Patriot Post
Washington Post
Heritage Foundation
Wikipedia
Star-Tribune (Minnesota)
Reuters
Social Security
South Florida Sun-Sentinel

"Of course they can take it. Kelo says so. Well, not Kelo herself. But 5 stinkin judges did." --Past Your Eyes

"7 of the 9 justices who sat on the Supreme Court at the time of Kelo vs New London were appointed by Republicans.

The Republicans turned their back on the Constitution a long time ago, in my opinion." --MrsEmmaPeel

This post (<-click) explains why, in my opinion, the USSC properly defended the Constitution, particularly the eminent domain aspect of the 5th A., when it decided Kelo v. New London in New London's favor.

Note that I was upset like many other people when the USSC decided Kelo in New London's favor. But have since researched the issue and wised up to what's going on. That's why I get angry with news agencies that are still passing along politically correct garbage about our property rights. How can the free press help to protect our constitutional rights when the press is evidently ignorant of the Constitution and its history?

Regarding this current property issue, the bottom line is because the constitutional division of federal and state powers has been largely forgotten by today's generation, the people don't understand that the federal Constitution's 5th A. "public use" restraint on the federal government for eminent domain does not apply to the states. So if the majority voters in a given state want their state's eminent domain laws to reflect the 5th A.'s "public use" restrain on the federal government, for example, then they are obligated to do the following. They must speak up, exercising their voting power if necessary, to have state lawmakers make appropriate laws to likewise protect their property within their state.