Posted on 02/11/2016 4:06:19 PM PST by kiryandil
Glen Beck is both. And now so ate you I guess,
Shall I repeat my question?
There is simply no way that redistribution be force from one individual to a different individual is what the Founders intended or what any conservative would accept.
Cults of personality rot a persons mind and their soul.
Who ate me?
It's called the 5th amendment, and it actually limits it to public use not just public purpose.
"At the hearing, Katie Spohn, a deputy attorney general, argued that the "common carrier" clause does''t apply to interstate pipelines like the Keystone XL,-- Common carriers "operate in Nebraska and through Nebraska, but not outside of Nebraska," according to the common law definition, Spohn said.
Bear in mind she is arguing FOR the pipeline.
No, she wore a set of these
As did we all, so we know far more about animal excrement and how to get rid of it.
[ Should a presidential candidate take money from casinos? ]
The person who owns them should be able to give money to any candidate, as should anyone else be able to (freedom of speech also means time and time is money) , but a casino, as a private entity should never take property via eminent domain.
Please provide a link to any statement by Cruz about using ED for Keystone...
The Institute for Justice, which argued the Kelo decision in front of the Supreme Court, has a pretty firm grasp on what should constitute an unconstitutional taking and the Institute has taken no position on Keystone because they don’t believe it falls into the category of an obvious private party to private party transfer - as was the case in Kelo.
see http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/03/01/3625804/keystone-kelo-eminent-domain-property/
Pipelines are infrastructure projects that are directly tied to national security.
I’m sure you’re well aware he’s on record in favor of the project. SInce he’s alleged to be such a brainiac, I’m guessing he realizes ED will be utilized.
Then again he may assume it’ll be suspended by rainbows.
“Pipelines are infrastructure projects that are directly tied to national security.”
If your talking about canadian national security you may have a point.
The attorneys arguing FOR the actual pipeline disagree.
But that is irrelevant to the fact Cruz fought for the pipeline as a jobs program.
So to be clear then, you have no evidence that Cruz is in favor of ED for the Keystone pipeline. It is funny, Trump supporters cry foul when we point out things Trump has actually publicly said - but you have no problem condemning Cruz for things he has never said, because you ASSUME he thinks them.
Speaking in Lubbock in November, Cruz said, if elected, "we will approve pipelines across the country." And he ripped Obama for rejecting the northern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline, calling the project's approval "as close to a no-brainer as any decision you'll find in politics,"
But don't worry folks CA Conservative and Cruz says if you like your property, you can keep your property !
You’re hanging your hate on the opinion of one deputy attorney general who doesn’t represent the pipeline. That is hardly conclusive. Maybe you might want to read the Reason article I posted earlier. It gives a fair summation of the both the pros and cons of arguing that Keystone is a proper subject of eminent domain.
hate = hat
Fact remains. Foreign private company which uses ED in it's pursuit to deliver it's product. Cruz openly supports it. He's a hypocrite.
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.