Posted on 07/22/2005 6:17:20 PM PDT by wagglebee
An advertising entrepreneur leading an effort to seize David Souter's home in response to the high court's controversial eminent domain decision is encouraging citizens to mount a campaign against leaders of the justice's New Hampshire town.
Logan Darrow Clements said today on "Joseph Farah's WorldNetDaily RadioActive" program that the five members of the board of selectmen of Weare, N.H., rejected his proposal to take Souter's property, prompting a call for their removal from office.
Clements wrote to the board, explaining he needed to find out if they already opposed the proposal so he would know whether it was worth the money and effort to produce a formal presentation.
Selectman Joseph Fiala replied, saying in conclusion, "While I understand your frustration with the offending decision of the Court, I hope you will reconsider your position and take one I'm sure you are more comfortable with – that is to defend the property rights of all citizens, whether we agree with them or not. Peace, Joe Fiala, Weare Selectman"
But Clements contends Fiala doesn't understand that in taking that position, he is giving Souter special rights.
The Los Angeles entrepreneur is encouraging people to write to the selectman board members "and explain that giving Mr. Souter a special exemption from his own ruling is not defending property rights, as they are trying to assert."
"Equal justice under the law means we all are treated equally," he said.
Clements said he's asking the residents of Weare to continue with a ballot-initiative drive to circumvent the board and to investigate whether local laws allow them to remove the entire board of selectmen from office.
"America now needs the assistance of the residents of Weare so that the torch of liberty can enlighten one who has so soundly turned his back on all those who died to keep it lit," Clements says on his website.
The town of Weare has been inundated with calls in support of the proposal since WND first publicized the story of how Clements plans to turn eminent domain against one of its champions.
Clements says he's received more than 5,000 e-mails and over 400 phone calls.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 two weeks ago that local towns and cities can seize homes and private businesses through eminent domain and turn the properties over to private developers for no other reason than the fact that it would result in higher tax revenues for the municipality.
A few days after the ruling, Clements faxed a request to Chip Meany, the code enforcement officer of Weare, seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road, the present location of Souter's home.
Clements wants to build "The Lost Liberty Hotel" on the property as a kind of museum commemorating the lost right to private property in America.
The Kelo v. City of New London decision allows the New London, Conn., government to seize the homes and businesses of residents to facilitate the building of an office complex that would provide economic benefits to the area and more tax revenue to the city.
Though the practice of eminent domain is provided for in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, the case is significant because the seizure is for private development and not for "public use," such as a highway or bridge. The decision has been roundly criticized by property-rights activists and limited-government commentators.
"Equal justice under the law means we all are treated equally," he said.
Unfortunately, the leftists have NEVER seen it that way.
Just a heads-up.. This guy is on Hannity and Colmes in just a few minutes. It will be good to actually see the guy say something and help me figure out if he has the bark to go with his bite..
Let us know.
" It will be good to actually see the guy say something and help me figure out if he has the bark to go with his bite.."
This guy has stated previously that he wants all the face time he can get to promote a TV program he's developing. The guy is an absolute moron.
Thanks for the post. Been trying to keep up with this. Clements is awesome!
A letter is not an application for squat. The town has not legally denied him anything.
He needs to submit a plan. This is going to cost $$ and it's not a process for those not willing to go the distance.
The dumbest thing in the world to do is confront the council with a letter saying "give me Souter's property" He's just starting an argument with them, not acting on his goal.
And, email the list below and let them know you support the development of a Hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Rd, Weare, NH
Supreme Court gpoaccess@gpo.gov
Chip Meany Code Enforcement Officer cmeany@weare.nh.gov
Robert ChristensenTown Adminisrator rchristensen@weare.nh.gov
Laura Bouno, Chair Person lbuono@weare.nh.gov
Leon Methot, Vice-Chair lmethot@weare.nh.gov
Heleen Kurk hkurk@weare.nh.gov
Joseph Fiala jfiala@weare.nh.gov
Donna Osborne dosborne@weare.nh.gov
Big deal. So are half of SCOTUS. They should be educated enough to know better. I'm all for shaming the guilty publicly. If I opined on what the founding fathers would do, I'd be banned.
" I'm all for shaming the guilty publicly."
Clements is the one that should be shamed at this point. The Weare Selectmen met June 28th and addressed the issue. Their statement was that the property of Judge Souter, just as all property owners in Weare, is safe from seizure unless and until the property taxes are in arrears.
They also stated that the eminent domain issue would not be revisited for political purposes.
Clements is simply looking to promote his TV idea.
I have personally met 3 people who have started to experience eminent domain proceedings since this $hit began.
Whether or not the promoter of seizing Souter's home is either sincere or even has a single clue, it's time, it's high time, and it's WAY PAST time to ram some of these ludicrously anti-Constitutional decisions of the SCOTUS right up each of their collective a$$e$.
Have any of you visited 34 Cilley Hill Rd, Weare, NH? I have just recently and believe me you don't want to put a hotel there. Cilley (pronounced "Silly" according to the locals) Hill Rd. is about 4 miles from the main road, Highway 77. The road from Hwy 77 to Cilly Hill Rd., South Sugar Hill Rd., is two lane and very twisty.
Cilly Hill Rd. itself is a dirt, dead end road only about a block long.
Here's a map.
"you don't want to put a hotel there"
Oh, yes I do !
I passionately do !
Souter is truly evil. And so is Ruth Ginsberg - she even looks like a really nasty babe.
Someone needs to point out to the residents of Weare that the property tax revenue from the Souter Liberty Hotel could be sufficient to substantially offset their OWN property taxes. The town doesn't need to be in arrears to make new property tax revenue a good idea.
Why not tear the house down and put the ''Justice Souter Memorial Septic Tank (or System, if you like)'' on that spot?
This would be entirely in the spirit of Souter's supposed Constitutional views; for the good of the whole community, the public ''good'' -- even, I daresay, every day the public ''use'', thus complying with the language of the 5th Amendment in so many words.
Now, ''just compensation'' (also the wording of the 5th Amendment, btw), well, because this turkey has attempted to VOID, by his assorted rulings, various parts of the Constitution, I'd say the ''just'' compensation would consist of: ''Thank you very much, now get out!''.
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.