Posted on 12/21/2006 8:42:35 AM PST by Graybeard58
NEW LONDON -- The woman at the center of a national battle over property rights has sent some not-so-joyous tidings to people involved in taking her house to make way for private development.
Susette Kelo's holiday cards feature a snowy image of her pink house and a message that reads, in part, "Your houses, your homes, your family, your friends. May they live in misery that never ends. I curse you all. May you rot in hell. To each of you I send this spell."
The cards were conceived and produced by a friend of Kelo's and sent to city officials and members of New London's development agency.
Kelo said she also considered sending the cards to five U.S. Supreme Court justices who ruled in June 2005 that New London had the right to take homes in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood to make way for a riverfront project slated to include condominiums, a hotel and office space.
On Wednesday, after news accounts carried details about the cards, Kelo apologized in a statement released by the Institute for Justice, which represented the homeowners in their legal battle.
"My card was meant as much in humor as it was in frustration," she said in the statement. "What I wrote shouldn't be taken as my literal wish for anyone. I'm heartbroken that this will be my last Christmas in Fort Trumbull and what I wrote rose out of that fact, but the bottom line is, it was over the top."
Kelo, one of the last holdouts, earlier this year accepted a $442,155 settlement, more than $300,000 above the appraised value of her home in 2000. Her pink cottage will be moved elsewhere in the city. She has until June 15 to move.
"It's amazing anyone could be so vindictive when they've made so much money," said Gail Schwenker-Mayer, a supporter of the development project who received one of the cards.
New London Development Corp. member Reid Burdick said he put the card on his mantel with his other Christmas greetings.
"I think the poor woman has gone around the bend," he said. "I haven't gotten any mail from her in years. I still feel bad for Susette. The sorry part of this is that the things she's angry about were not done to be mean-spirited toward her personally."
Fellow NLDC member George Milne, a former top executive at Pfizer Inc., called the card "immensely childish."
"It's sort of sad she elected to do this," Milne said. "We were trying to do things for the city. It was nothing personal."
Kelo, a nurse who handles lead paint and lead poisoning cases for the city of New London, said the card was her idea.
"This all could have been solved and ended many years ago," she said. "They didn't have to do what they did to us, and I will never forget. These people can think what they want of me. I will never, ever forget what they did."
The people who took her house are SO @#$%ING ARROGANT.
Typical big libs.
The big difference here is that your aunt had a choice, whether it was the right one or not is not the point.
LOL! I bet they do cash it - remember, it's just business.
Its not as if she had a choice to not take the money and stay where she is. I would still be pissed if they made me move my home..
More than likely, I would take the offer as well. However, as time passes, with this decision, the offers are likely to become lower and lower. The government can now force you to take the offer, whether you agree to it or not.
But it was her choice.
I hope her spell works. The misery they inflict should be re-visited on them ten-fold.
Next thing you know, there's a steak crawling across the counter and you're pulling your face off in the laundry room sink.
Well Gail, it could be that you came in a took someone's home from them so friends of yours could make more money.
New London Development Corp. member Reid Burdick said he put the card on his mantel with his other Christmas greetings. "I think the poor woman has gone around the bend," he said. "I haven't gotten any mail from her in years. I still feel bad for Susette. The sorry part of this is that the things she's angry about were not done to be mean-spirited toward her personally."
What part of "private property" do you not understand, Reid? She owned the land. You looked at her land and said, "I want your land". Then you went to court and took her land because you wanted it to make money for you.
Fellow NLDC member George Milne, a former top executive at Pfizer Inc., called the card "immensely childish." "It's sort of sad she elected to do this," Milne said. "We were trying to do things for the city. It was nothing personal."
So, I guess if I came and took your private property you wouldn't get upset either, huh?
What is the nature of this private party? Is it a corporation?
I, on the other hand, would not. And I'd be right pissed if I was forced at gunpoint to accept their 'offer'.
My fave:
THE ULTIMATE REVENGE BLACK CURSE
To inflict monumental revenge on someone who has done you wrong. To have them suffer tenfold the pain and consequences they have inflicted upon you.
May be worth the $33! :) Muahahaha!
If someone wants your home badly enough to use the government to *force* you to sell it to them at price $X, then clearly the home's true market value exceeds $X.
I wouldn't mind having a choice in the matter, however.
I love that part. I keep telling the guy, "Stop picking at your face!" If you saw your face was falling apart, why in the world would you keep picking at it????
Eminent domain is required to be for a public USE, not "purpose". Clarence Thomas was crystal clear on this in his dissenting opinion.
Offering a "fair price" is immaterial. Property ownership means that the owner is supposed to have the right to keep or sell their property, except where the property must be taken for a public USE. Increasing the tax base is NOT a public use. If she held onto the property and later regretted it - that's HER fault. But she was not allowed to exercise her ownership discretion. She was forced to sell to a developer.
Look at it this way... I am willing to petition the government to give me your paycheck because I will pay them more in income taxes. They agree, because they get more money. We will give you an amount equal to what you are making RIGHT NOW for the rest of your career, even though it will cost me some money in the short term. But I get to pocket any raises you get, but you will have a guaranteed income equal to your current take-home (provided you keep working).
Would you take the deal?
It said the appraised value of her home in 2000. What's the appraised value of the home now? There's been quite a real estate boom since 2000.
An apt comparison.
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.