Be Careful what you wish for...

Is the main issue of the stunning property rights decision handed down yesterday, by the "Liberal Majority" of SCOTUS.

Roundly scorned by most liberals and conservatives, alike... this decision is the result of years of Constitution twisting by the various branches and lawyer-legislators.

While 'Progressives' attack it as kow-towing 'to moneyed interests' (Big Corp)..the real effect is that local governments will be using it to look after their OWN interests at the expense of the 'little guy'... who, after all has only one vote and doesnt pay 'listen to me' money into various campaign funds.

So this is NOT a matter of Liberal and Conservative... it goes deeper than that.

Coupled with the ridiculous flag burning legislation, it points out the scorn with which the 'elite' regard those who put them in office or who share their views.
Summary view: "The average voter/guy is an idiot and I am here to look out for him."
George Will: Damaging 'Deference' doesnt even get 'ALL' of it.

This started long ago when citizens -perhaps too smug in their OWN 'Law-Abiding' cocoon-, began to accept their rights being morphed into 'privileges'.

The easiest example to point out being the'Privilege' of driving. I dont believe ANYTHING is done accidently when it comes to wording such as this. This is preposterous when you think about it, The right to take a driving test and get a license becomes a 'privilege' once you get it... while any court should have the ability to suspend a 'right' by means of abuse of that right... it smacked of big brother-ism... so lets call it a privilege to get that license in the first place. Thus this was deliberately couched so that authority might more easily suspend that 'privilege'.

Do you think that the government holds any more enlightened view of the OTHER rights? Such as the right to apply for and hold a passport so as to travel freely?

So, now while this issue may cause the citizens of New London to throw out the city governemnt in the next election, the damage has been done... you cant un-bulldoze those houses, and you cant get a legislature full of lawyers to pass a new, more definitive amendment.... esp since it COULD NOT have been MORE clear as to intent in the first place! All they would have had to do is look at the Constitutional Prohibition on barracking troops in private residence.
While the more hot-button issues define the agenda of the Left, to some of us... we all, Lib and Coservative alike better look at this as a warning, and try to reverse it on its face, if only by the better examination of a judges past record in rulings... not their speeches, so as to truly determine "Who is Looking out for Whom".[/url]

 

It pains me to agree with you, pettyfog... I pride myself on having some sort of comeback... But when I saw the headline of the verdict, I figured it was Scummy Scalia and Horndog Thomas who were leading the charge... lo and behold I read the story and just about puked on myself...

This was a dumb one... a really big dumb one...

I was also a fan of your quote:

Nice to know you're not TOO much of a wingnut

 

Gee, faint praise... but welcome anyway.

("Horndog" Thomas?!!! You're jesting, right? And you voted for Clinton? (I did too, in 96). Those 'hearings' were a joke.)

The flag-burning vote is nothing but grandstanding... no thinking conservative wants that to go thru... burning a flag defines the burner, not his issue; and certainly not his credibility.

It's like I said; they are lawyers and lawyer-politicians think everyone that uses common sense is an idiot.

Scumbag Scalia dissented, .. and Janice Rogers Brown is on record in a very public opinion about use of hotels in "Peoples' Commune of San Francisco" about the subject.

Back to the subject... That majority's opinion is being couched as not willing to interfere with local government.. thus using the "States Rights" card. Again, handy when it fits, and ignored when it doesnt... Roe v Wade.

But go back to my point about barracking.. What would these guys decide if the case was about NY State forcing citizens to barrack soldiers under a martial law situation?

Do you know that if you loaned your car to a friend and he was stopped, searched and found to have a toke iin his shirt pocket, you could lose your car at the whim of the local cops?

All the carping about Rights of Expression being 'taken away' seems pretty shallow when the same judges who have said you're allowed to use any speech, whether it's offensive to others or not and the same as has been considered rude for centuries... THOSE are the same as just gave away those people's legacies.

"You can say what you want, all you have belong us!"