More Insults About the 'North American Conspiracy'

Human Events ^ | 1-5-2007 | Jerome Corsi

[Toddsterpatriot]

"Kelso?

Yes, Kelso.

[Eastbound]

"Which TTC are you talking about?"

Can we get back to the Kelo decision, or do want to pass on that? If so, I will understand.

[Eastbound]

That's him! ;>

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm not surprised Kelso lost his case. He's not very bright.

[Ben Ficklin]

Are you a union man? In the Featherbedders Union?

[Eastbound]

"Are you a union man? In the Featherbedders Union?"

It is evident that you are not going to opine on the Kelo decision. But then, your silence is opinion enough for me, and I suspect is opinion enough for everyone else reading this who has an interest in preserving the Union of States.

Go west, young man. Fresh markets for all that snake oil in your wagon.

[Ben Ficklin]

Reread 274. It tells you everything you need to know.

Of course you could add the fact that there are private operators of other toll roads in the US. Did you notice that there are over a 100 private bidders for the PA turnpike.

[Toddsterpatriot]

But are you going to deny that the TTC is part of the NAU transportation plan again?

What is the NAU transportation plan?

[1rudeboy]

It is evident that you are not going to opine on the Kelo decision.

I think most of FR has opined on the Kelo decision. If you wish to hear those opinions again, why not begin by explaining what Kelo has to do with any of the topics discussed on this thread?

[Eastbound]

Please ping me if anyone manages to see Ficklin give a straight answer to a straight question. Thanks.

[Eastbound]

Answered in my reply 273.

[1rudeboy]

The taking of private property for public use is covered by the Fifth Amendment. Kelo, the abomination that it is, concerns the taking of private property for private use.

[Ben Ficklin]

Karl Rove hired me to keep you mixed up. He was correct when he told me it would be an easy job.

[Eastbound]

" . . . the abomination that it is, concerns the taking of private property for private use."

Yes.

[1rudeboy]

But the TTC is not considered "private use." You really need to think this kind of stuff through.

[Eastbound]

Five to four. Not exactly a mandate on something so important, eh?

Conservative dissenting justices.

I'll side with the conservatives.

[1rudeboy]

So do I. So what's your point? Do you have one?

[Eastbound]

"So do I. So what's your point? Do you have one?"

Well, yes!

[1rudeboy]

Not from where I sit. Would you consider that you couldn't get Ben Ficklin to respond because you bored him to death?

[Paul Ross]

But the TTC is not considered "private use."

A position that is debatable. It is not really "public use" is it when it merely pits importers against domestic production and transport. Especially since it is evident there is already plenty of infrastructure for transport. This needs to be more fully thought through by you, when you look at the facts as to who really is the beneficiary of the expropriations. There is an ulterior motive for the TTC.

Even the White House has openly acknoweldged as beneficiaries...the Importers of Chinese and East Asian manufactures. [The explicit monetary justification for...and incentivizing the whole project...and diverting around the "spendier" longshoremans' unionized ports in U.S. West Coast states] As against domestic Producers. As against domestic cartage.

So of course, the Import Lobbyists are not for real free trade. Certainly not within the country. They are for misusing governmental authority to abet subsidizing themselves and their interest...the imports. This is why I have often noted the import lobbyists are phoneys. They are no longer, if they have ever been, for free trade.

They are expropriating to abet their segment (imports)...and adding injury to insult...the domestic manufacturing firms and cartage firms are going to be TAXED to support this governmental intrusion on the market.