Posted on 04/20/2011 1:08:56 AM PDT by sinanju
This is called, of course, “eminent domain.” The Constitution’s Fifth Amendment allows the government to take private property for “public use,” so long as “just compensation” is paid. In the infamous 2005 Kelo decision, the Supreme Court held that “public use” could include, well, private use, so long as the new property owner paid more in taxes than the previous one. In other words, it allowed developers and the government to gang up on homeowners. The developer gets more land, the government gets more tax money. The only losers are the original owner and his property rights.
A decade and a half ago, it was fresh on everyone’s mind that Donald Trump is one of the leading users of this form of state-sanctioned thievery. It was all over the news. In perhaps the most-remembered example, John Stossel got the toupéed one to sputter about how, if he wasn’t allowed to steal an elderly widow’s house to expand an Atlantic City casino, the government would get less tax money, and seniors like her would get less “this and that.” Today, however, it takes a push from the Club for Growth to remind us of Trump’s lack of respect for property rights.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
This guy ain't no friend of us peasants. If he's really trying to take down the Bamster it's because he's bad for his business.
National Review is Romney Country.
was the lady compensated for the property? Its obviously worth millions
Let him take Zero out first. Then let’s see. It’s a gamble any way you look at it.
That said, this is the one thing I’ve seen reported with substance that would cause me to possibly not support a Trump candidacy. Especially the unequivocal support of Kelo quote to Neil Cavuto.
Agreed.
Trump’s case got tossed out in 98’.
Although the article doesn’t say if the widow Corker is still alive. Maybe she died and her heirs sold out.
Dude, this article isn’t about Mittens.
One more reason no self respecting conservative should consider Trump. A disaster in the making for the Republican party.
Didn’t say it was. I made my comment about Trump... but the fact of the matter is that NR is a political cheerleader for Romney and as such, this can only be seen as a campaign commercial, much like most of the posts here on FR.
Every time Chumps name comes up my reflex is to picture a conniving crook, just like Dingy Reid.
Are we really so bereft of good candidates that we are going to rely on RINO’s with name recognition and personal mega-fortunes to try to beat O’Bummer?
If so, we probably deserve to lose.
Just once I would like a candidate I can sincerely and happily support without reservation.
Apparently Trump is a commie at heart.
I agree... that’s why I posted in this very thread saying this could make me not vote for Trump. It shouldn’t be hard to find... there’s like maybe only 13 posts so far.
We’re not even in the primaries yet and Trump hasn’t even announced yet the Republican establishment and fake conservative magazines like NR have decided that Trump must be destroyed. They never mentioned Trump at all until he started talking about one issue... why is that?
Which doesn't change a thing about the article. Trump-chumps are so happy about the birth certificate's being discussed that they can't be bothered to learn anything about their boy. Rather like Obama voters, don't you think?
They never mentioned Trump at all until he started talking about one issue... why is that?
This is old news. It’s bad news — puts Trump in a very bad light — but it’s old news.
What is much newer is the way he recently trashed Ryan, and the way he continues to say/imply that a huge tariff on Chinese goods will solve our deficit problem.
The first act is that of an Obama-style dictator. We don’t need to hear from the cheap seats. Sit down and shut up.
The second is an opinion of mind-numbing stupidity. Does he know how the Great Depression started? It started with tariffs.
Trump has been boasting of his wealth. So he essentially got rich by divesting others of their property? Hard to be impressed by that. I’m glad he’s on the birther issue, but I don’t particularly care to see him in the WH.
I’m embarrassed enough by Obama. I don’t really want to have yet another POTUS that makes us a laughingstock around the world. Yeah, he’d be tougher than Obama in foreign negotiations etc. But as others have noted, a champion of high tariffs is the last thing we need. And it sure wouldn’t settle down the Middle East to have a POTUS declare we should just take over a sovereign nation’s oil fields.
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.