"History is philosophy teaching by example." (Lord Bolingbroke)

New Email Address:

Thursday, October 06, 2005

Declaring War on SCOTUS, in the name of the Constitution of the United States

OK, the gloves came off regarding taking back the 9-11 Memorial at Ground Zero in New York City, and the home team won. The liberal anti-Americans will not get to build their anti-American memorial at Ground Zero. Just what happened to win and how serve as model and inspiration for all Americans. Now, it is time to take on the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), and fight it all the way to the win.

Right now, there is no way to tell how Chief Justice Roberts will influence SCOTUS, so we have to deal with what we know. We know that we have some really anti-Constitution justices who have made some disastrous decisions. Which justices? All. Those on the right have done their share along with those on the left.

SCOTUS has lately fallen into some glib classification of having four justices on the right, four on the left, and a swing vote justice. This is the gang that cannot think straight, judging from its decisions, books, speeches, interviews,and other statements.

The job falls to us, American citizens, to straighten out this mess. It might require amending the Constitution so that justices no longer have lifetime appointments. Those are some of the longer range issues we must concern ourselves with.

Right now, we have a bloody good issue to take to the streets, so to speak, and this issue is eminent domain. Never forget that on 23 June 2005, SCOTUS ruled on a case known as "Kelo versus the City of New London, Connecticut." Lead by Justices Souter, Breyer, Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Stevens, the Supreme Court dealt the Rights of Man, THE single most important principle underlying America, a mortal blow. In this decision, they declared that the property of any America may be taken by the initiation of force by any government to be used as it sees fit. In this case, the theft was sugar-coated to be made more pallatible by indicating that the theft was to give one man's property to another, because the government would improve the community, thus receive greater tax revenues.

The implications of this ruling are horrendous. For one, it makes all men (who are their own property) as well as the material things they own the property of the State. There is no way to minimize around this implication, and it will happen until this decision has been reversed.

In the future, we will deal frequently with this decision, its meaning, and what to do about it. For the moment, interested persons should consult the Institute for Justice website in order to get involved.

Numerous stories pepper the press these days about how opportunistic community governments are using the Kelo decision. Here is one of the latest:

Florida city considers eminent domain -- The Washington Times: "
By Joyce Howard Price
Published October 3, 2005

Florida's Riviera Beach is a poor, predominantly black, coastal community that intends to revitalize its economy by using eminent domain, if necessary, to displace about 6,000 local residents and build a billion-dollar waterfront yachting and housing complex.

"This is a community that's in dire need of jobs, which has a median income of less than $19,000 a year," said Riviera Beach Mayor Michael Brown. He defends the use of eminent domain by saying the city is "using tools that have been available to governments for years to bring communities like ours out of the economic doldrums and the trauma centers."

Mr. Brown said Riviera Beach is doing what the city of New London, Conn., is trying to do and what the U.S. Supreme Court said is proper in its ruling June 23 in Kelo v. City of New London. That decision upheld the right of government to seize private properties for use by private developers for projects designed to generate jobs and increase the tax base. "Now eminent domain is affecting people who never had to deal with it before and who have political connections," Mr. Brown said. "But if we don't use this power, cities will die."

Mr. Frederiksen said people with yachts need a place to keep and service them. "And we want to develop a charter school for development of marine trades."

Most of the arguments FOR this theft are to be found in this article excerpt (in bold). Every effort will be made to cloud the issue with all sorts of altruistic sounding arguments and tooting the "common good" horn.

Every argument deserves a "so what!" What is yours is yours, until you legally part with it.

Defend it now. Truly, American survival is at stake.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home