Supreme Court upholds government land grabs for developers (Something is freezing over)

WSWS ^ | 6/27/05 | John Andrews and Barry Grey

[Borges]

Can't recall the last time there was such a large majority iof people on completely opposite sides of the political spectrum who agreed so thoroughly on a given issue.

[RockinRight]

I'd actually be interested at what the DUmmies over at DU have to say about this...

[handy old one]

A mans home is HIS castle.

[joesnuffy]

Once LaRaza gets enough political clout they can condemn
CA, AZ, NM, CO, TX and evict the citizenry..:)

[cvq3842]

Right.

Generally, many liberals fear big business and many conservatives fear big government.

This ruling expands big government AND gives big business more options.

Often the two are seen in conflict.

But one thing is clear: the "little guy" is getting the short end, from someone.

An overly simple analysis, I know, but maybe a start . . .

[TXBSAFH]

They are basically thing two things.

1. They too decry this travesty of justice.

2. They are looking for ways to distance their party from these justices by deigning they are liberal.

[Meldrim]

President Reagan made a huge error in not fighting harder for Robert Bork.

[Roccus]

Didn't the pigs say,"Four legs good, two legs better?"

[mlo]

...the decision is deeply anti-democratic.

No, the decision is very democratic. Sometimes democracy just sucks.

The decision is left up to the elected representatives of the local governments. That's democratic. We can get our state governments to pass laws to limit the practice. That's also democratic.

The court might have ruled that these takings were prohibited, which may have been the right decision, but it wouldn't have been a democratic one.

[Blood of Tyrants]

They are just as outraged as we are. HOWEVER! They would not go so far as impeachment because they are afraid of losing their right to murder their unborn if the judges were replaced with strict constitutionalists.

[Borges]

'Anti-democratic' is a socialist code word for anything that's not socialist.

[carumba]

I imagine they feel the same way I do. Come on Supremes, stick up for the little guy. Don't 'stick it to him.'

[sauropod]

mark

[RockinRight]

Something we can agree on...


...do any of them say anything about the fact that it's their OWN KIND that made this decision??

[Marysecretary]

It's time to put in CONSERVATIVE JUDGES who give a crap about people and not government or private projects. Disgusting.

[jackbenimble]

Can't recall the last time there was such a large majority of people on completely opposite sides of the political spectrum who agreed so thoroughly on a given issue.

Take a look at the opinion polls on illegal immigration. Most show that about 80% of the American public wants it stopped so that includes a majority of the folks on the other side of the political divide.

The common thread between these two issues is that the common folks are pitted against the elites. The elites benefit from illegal immigration and they benefit from property takings through eminent domain. There are not many politicians looking out for the little guys in either politcal party and we are getting shafted.

[alessandrofiaschi]

Yes, but it was Bush senior, not Reagan, he who failed one appointment (the other is Hon. Thomas). We need a reshape as soon as possible.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Their problem is that this is fascism and they are socialists. I don't think they have a problem with the government seizing property to be redristributed, they just don't want private businesses to get it.