Posted on 06/24/2005 4:15:43 AM PDT by bwteim
Kennedy's Vast Domain
June 24, 2005; Page A12
The Supreme Court's "liberal" wing has a reputation in some circles as a guardian of the little guy and a protector of civil liberties. That deserves reconsideration in light of yesterday's decision in Kelo v. City of New London. The Court's four liberals (Justices Stevens, Breyer, Souter and Ginsburg) combined with the protean Anthony Kennedy to rule that local governments have more or less unlimited authority to seize homes and businesses.
CUT CUT
So, in just two weeks, the Supreme Court has rendered two major decisions on the limits of government. In Raich v. Gonzales the Court said there are effectively no limits on what the federal government can do using the Commerce Clause as a justification. In Kelo, it's now ruled that there are effectively no limits on the predations of local governments against private property.
These kinds of judicial encroachments on liberty are precisely why Supreme Court nominations have become such high-stakes battles. If President Bush is truly the "strict constructionist" he professes to be, he will take note of the need to check this disturbing trend should he be presented with a High Court vacancy.
URL for this article: http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,SB111957306808268311,00.html
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Good point. But "just compensation" typcially the govt. means, "fair market value," at least - that's my understanding.
Thanks for your post!!!
In affirming the City's authority to take petitioners' properties, we do not minimize the hardship that condemnations may entail, notwithstanding the payment of just compensation.21 (from p. 19 majority opinion)
And here is foot note 21 from above in that majority opinion:
21 The amici raise questions about the fairness of the measure of just compensation. See, e.g., Brief for American Planning Association et al. as Amici Curiae 26-30. While important, these questions are not before us in this litigation.
Like you, for years I've said that the Republicans do NOT defend themselves adequately. Even the most casual freeper could defend the conservative movement better. It's frustrating.
Paul Harvey at the noon hour today said - more or less -
We defeated communism in World War II but roots of communism are taking hold in New London, Connecticut.
"President to Consult with Democrats on Supreme Court Nominees." Why not just resign and hand all our futures over to them?
NO!!!!
I will be so ticked off. Oh, I just need to leave the forum for a while.
"I guess to some, the symbols of freedom are more important than actual freedom itself. "
Good point.
If we can only work on one issue at a time, I'd agree with you on re establishing priorities.
Bernard, thank you for your kind comments earlier.
I think you have misdiagnosed our problem. I did the same for a number of years, until my understanding grew, and I saw more clearly what was happening.
It is not a lack of clever tacticians or people who know how to frame issues for conservatives that causes the symptom that you have noticed. Conservatives have better tacticians, and more people who know how to frame issues than the left has. They have to or they would never be elected. The selection pressure for conservative politicians demands it. Politicians live in a media universe. They are elected and unelected by what is said in the media, and the media, until recently, has been overwhelmingly hostile to conservatives. Conservatives have learned to survive in this hostile universe; that has made them excellent at framing issues and using tactics.
Liberals, on the other hand, have lived in a media universe that has been overwhelmingly friendly. If they make a gaffe, it has been overlooked. If they are involved in a scandal, it is far less likely to be investigated. They have not had to be extremely careful about what they say or do, because the MSM would cover for them, as long as they "grew" (became more liberal).
I am encouraged, however, by the growth of alternate media that has made conservative viewpoints visible to a percentage of the public. A decade ago, we would never have seen a Durbin apologize for a similar comment. CBS would never have been caught. The MSM continues to refuse to sell advertising to the NRA, and to spike speeches by Conservatives, but now we have the Internet, Fox news, and Talk Radio.
We are starting to employ some of the tactics of the left that we never could before, because they were forbidden to us by the MSM.
It is significant that this disgrace happened in the SCOTUS, one of the last bastions of liberal power.
We are in for a long fight. The liberals will not let go of decades of work weakening this country easily. But, the trends are in our favor. The fight is ours to win.
A better legal mind (actually, any better mind) than mine would have to address your conundrum. I will ask my divorce attorney in the meantime... ;)
By the way, it's not polite to quote from DU but here's one posting. Mispelling included:
"2. On this particualr ruling, I prefer to put the blame where it belongs. As often as we DUers complain that the RW uses the "they all do it" as justification for something totally outrageous, I think I'll avoid doing that in this instance. Unless there's something buried in the decision to change my mind, I think the RW nuts on the court got it right."
While there have been some very focused Pubbie message-framers in the tradition of the late Lee Atwater, it's the weak-kneed daily responses of our Congress-critters that causes dismay. Not only do they capitulate almost daily on important legislation without much of a fight (today's example: restoration of the PBS budget cuts!) but they usually lie down without a fight when attacked. They're doing a little better in recent years but the fumbled response to Hillary's recent hate speech is typical.
One problem is that "our side" doesn't speak with a single voice like the Rats do. We have big and little "L" libertarians, neocons, paleocons, religious conservatives, non religious conservatives, country club conservatives, values conservatives, and people who think they're conservatives but really don't know what conservatism is. A good day on FR will provide a sampling of all the above and maybe other kinds.
Since conservatives don't congregate in mindless ideological swarms like the Rats, we tend to dilute our message and often have silly fights amongst our own. And, frankly, we're not nearly as mean-spirited as the Rats and do our best to act like ladies and gentlemen in public instead of smash-and-grab artists.
One problem is that "our side" doesn't speak with a single voice like the Rats do. We have big and little "L" libertarians, neocons, paleocons, religious conservatives, non religious conservatives, country club conservatives, values conservatives, and people who think they're conservatives but really don't know what conservatism is. A good day on FR will provide a sampling of all the above and maybe other kinds.
Since conservatives don't congregate in mindless ideological swarms like the Rats, we tend to dilute our message and often have silly fights amongst our own. And, frankly, we're not nearly as mean-spirited as the Rats and do our best to act like ladies and gentlemen in public instead of smash-and-grab artists.
Sorry if I have missed your previous posts. There is a lot to read on Freerepublic.
There is much truth in your comments. I would add, that we have to overcome the inertia of decades of timidity in the face of a hostile media. While conservatives tend to be more individualistic than leftists, the left also has a large number of factions, perhaps more than we do, because their principle philosophy, socialism, has been discredited, while the conservative philosophy of limited government and individual rights has been proved correct in the test of harsh reality.
I remain cautiously optimistic, while acknowledging that there is much work to be done.
How this Supreme Court is consistently labeled Conservative by Rats is beyond me.
The 'Dems will have to do some rethinking, reshuffling, and reframing in order to come out good. See #70 above.
I think it's more important to get over the habit of being in the minority. It's been said often, but Pubbies just don't know how to handle being a majority. The Rat gang is simply better at knife-fight politics. While I don't suggest we lower ourselves to the same level, it's crucial we start acting like the majority party and refuse to allow the Rats and RINOS to impose minority rule as they've done so effectively lately.
My point earlier is that while the Rats have as many factions as us, they're also mindlessly ideological and lack real ethical principles. They're happy to work as a single political entity under the fearsome rubric of the end justifying the means. Whether it's affirmative action, environmental activism, feminism, homosexual "rights," whatever, the Left always reverts to its unifying Marxist "principles" and methods. I have hope but not as much as I did yesterday. At some point we have to close ranks and do real battle.
the United States today looks a lot more like the USSR than the US during WWI...
Congress could quickly repair the damege done by this ruling by outlawing the taking of private property for the gain of others. They won't.
"Thursday's Supreme Court ruling will make matters worse. But it shouldn't stop people from fighting to keep government and private developers from stealing the keys to their castles. They should begin by petitioning state lawmakers to tighten the criteria for declaring areas in need of redevelopment, which smooths the way for towns seeking to use eminent domain to acquire property. This is a battle well worth fighting."
From: http://www.app.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050626/OPINION/506260357/1029
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.