Eminent Domain Disaster

The recent Susette Kelo v. City of New London, decision is a horrible application of the limits of eminent domain. The Supreme Court ruled that the government could take away people's homes claiming emminent domain for the development of business. I'm shocked. The constitution is rather clear, saying "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation." The Court also expanded on Hawaii Housing Authority v. Midkiff, 467 U.S. 229 (1984). The decision reaffirmed that land may be claimed under emiment domain for 'public benefit' not strictly for use by the public but recinded the limitation that: "one person’s property may not be taken for the benefit of another private person without a justifying public purpose, even though compensation be paid"

Instead of business having to give monetary incentives to working class neighborhoods if they want to develop, they can bribe government officials to declare emminent domain. Instead of a developer having to pay residents a good share of money to move (and people will almost always move if you offer them enough), the developers will be able to "convince" the beaurocrats to seize land at a price much cheaper than having to pay the ordinary joes. It is entirely un-American that land can be seized by the government for private use. Ayn Rand observed, "there is no such entity as 'the public,' since the public is merely a number of individuals . . . .the idea that 'the public interest' supersedes private interests and rights can have but one meaning: that the interests and rights of some individuals take precedence over the interests and rights of others."

Average liberals should take note who is actually supporting the little guy and maybe rethink that the real liberals-in-charge (socialist/communists) only use the mantra of "helping the unfortunate" to hoodwink people to furthur their ends. The decision to favour the "public benefit" over individual rights is right out of the Marxist playbook. Public benefit is not the same as public use. What could be considered a benefit to the public is so varying that any home could be seized at any time for any reason. However, the dissenters were the 4 of the more conservatives justices. The dominos will start falling quickly. Here, south of Houston, the mayor of Freeport is now going to use that ruiling to cease property for the development of a marina.

Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority, "The city has carefully formulated a development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including, but not limited to, new jobs and increased tax revenue." He was joined by Justices Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer; Justice Kennedy penned a separate concurring opinion taking a somewhat narrower view of local government power than that found in Stevens' majority opinion.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote for the dissent, joined by Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas; Justice O'Connor suggested that the use of this power in a reverse Robin Hood fashion--take from the poor, give to the rich--would become the norm, not the exception: "Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries
are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."

Thomas also penned a separate dissent, in which he argued that the precedents the court's decision relied upon were flawed. He accuses the majority of replacing the Fifth Amendment's "Public Use Clause" with a very different "public purpose" test: "This deferential shift in phraseology enables the Court to hold, against all common sense, that a costly urban-renewal project whose stated purpose is a vague promise of new jobs and increased tax revenue, but which is also suspiciously agreeable to the Pfizer Corporation, is for a 'public use.'...Losses will fall disproportionately on poor communities. Those communities are not only systematically less likely to put their lands to the highest and best social use, but are also the least politically powerful."

Junk Science in Britian

Junk science, known as global warming, is strangling British economy and poor. Higher taxes and less disposable income, poorer people will be forced to sell their "carbon allowances" in order to survive. However, global warming is a "fact" in the opinion of the British public, even to a degree that even their conservatives believe that it is as undeniable as gravity.

London (CNSNews.com) - British residents could face a form of energy rationing within the next decade under proposals currently being studied to reduce the U.K.'s carbon dioxide emissions to comply with the Kyoto Protocol.Under the proposals, known as Domestic Tradable Quotas (DTQs), every individual would be issued a "carbon card," from which points would be deducted every time the cardholder purchased fossil fuel, for example, by filling up a car or taking a flight.Over time, the number of points allotted to each card would decline. High-energy users would be able to purchase points from low-energy users, with the end result being a trading market in carbon similar to the one already in place in the U.K. for industrial users....Morley said the government was also considering a straightforward carbon tax, and acknowledged that the complexity of a centrally run system could be a major barrier. CNS

Senator Turban Durbin: "Torture" !

In the Senate, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) decried the torture at Guanatamo. After a long speech filled with rhetoric, he finally got to the facts of what constituted torture:

• "On one occasion, the air conditioning had been turned down so far and the temperature was so cold in the room, that the barefooted detainee was shaking with cold"
• "On another occasion, the [air conditioner] had been turned off, making the temperature in the unventilated room well over 100 degrees."
• "The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor, with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally pulling his hair out throughout the night."
• "On another occasion, not only was the temperature unbearably hot, but extremely loud rap music was being played in the room, and had been since the day before"Statement

No, not no airconditioning!? What inhumanity! My brother just got back from doing reserve time over there and he dealt with 130 F heat everyday. And no airconditioning! Are we torturing are troops?
Did all people who lived in warmer climates before the invention of airconditioning were tortured?
A prisoner pulled his own hair out? My God! Not that! I bet there are thousands of prisioners in our own system that pull their own hair out.
The final insult: Loud rap music! Millions of black and white youths are torturing themselves daily because they are listening to rap music. Can I claim torture if my neighbors crank up the rap? Isn't that a bit racist actually? Being forced to listen to rap is torture?

The AIDS virus is racist...

Wow, teaching sex education to 5th graders sure hasn't curbed AIDS. Perhaps they aren't getting the message early enough. Although we shouldn't ignore the disease, I think it gets way too much attention for an entirely preventable disease. There is only going to be so much money donated to disease cure research. The more money and attention that is given to AIDS gets, the more money and resources that are taken away from fighting diseases of which people have no control over, like lukemia, cancer, Parkinson's, or Alzhemizer's diseases.

Looking at the stats, HIV appears to be racist! I wonder why the disparity is such? Actually is the AIDS problem in the black community here in America reflective of the AIDS problem in Africa? I wonder what is the precentage of heterosexual non-blacks? (don't say 8% because the 47% and the 45% could overlap, with gay black men)

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said that between 1,039,000
and 1,185,000 people in the United States were living with HIV in December 2003.
The previous estimate from 2002 showed that between 850,000 and 950,000 people had the AIDS virus....

The CDC's latest estimates indicate blacks account for 47 percent of HIV cases; gay and bisexual men make up 45 percent of those living with the virus that causes AIDS, the health agency believes. In 2003, the rates of AIDS cases were 58 per 100,000 in the black population, 10 per 100,000 Hispanics, 6 per 100,000 whites, 8 per 100,000 American Indian/Alaska native population, and 4 per 100,000 Asian/Pacific Islanders.

Forgiving $40 billion in debt

Erasing Africa's debt was Bush's payback to Blair for his support in Iraq. Living in Britian for a year has given me insight into their country and their politics. While America pays nominal attention when Bush and Blair meet, the British political pundits constantly wonder "what Blair (and Britian) will get out of the meeting" or mention that "if Blair doesn't get something for his support of Bush, that this could be a poltical failure for Blair."

Most of the British press, at best, view the war in Iraq and support of the War on Islamofacists as a favor to America, as if defeating global terrorists isn't also in Britian's best interests. Blair and the Labour government are all about "helping Africa," apparently clueless to the wanton corruption that plagues the continent. So Blair can go home and tell everyone what a victory the meeting was and the Labour Party can sleep soundly knowing that Blair "got something" for his support of Bush.

No wonder we can't hold a budget together. Spend, spend, spend, that's the new motto of the Republican party.

On a side note, what is really interesting is watching the ministers debate in Parliment on TV. The Prime Minister will openly debate leaders of the opposite party. It requires them to take blunt direct questions and be quick on their feet. Heck, even during the election debates, our two candidates couldn't even ask each other direct questions.

The debt-forgiveness deal would aid 18 nations. U.S. and British officials presented their proposal Friday at a meeting in London of the finance ministers of the G-8 nations. If accepted by the finance ministers this weekend, the deal probably would be adopted.
The individual G-8 countries have already erased the debt owed to them by poor countries. The U.S. and British plan would wipe away an additional $40 billion owed by 18 countries.... Eliminating the debt, which would cost the United States $1 billion annually, would relieve the countries of making debt payments, freeing them to spend new money -- from loans or grants -- on social programs and economic development projects....
Two administration officials said Bush plans to announce additional aid to Africa at the G-8 besides the $674 million in new assistance he announced at this week's White House meeting with Blair. Some administration officials are lobbying for Bush to commit to doubling the $3.2 billion annual aid budget for Africa. SF Chronicle

The 9/11 Memorial Hijack

The below WSJ article regarding the memorial at the World Trade Center is a must read...and read the whole thing so follow the link. Hijacking the memorial and turning into a leftist
1. To morally equate other wrongs committed by America in the past to those actions by Muslim terrorists today. This makes all guilty-feeling, self-loathing liberals feel happy.
2. It attempts to diminish the reaction of the visitors by distracting them from the horrific event of 9/11 by introducing with other images. People are much less likely to leave with a renewed vigor against those that caused the atrocities.
Planned exhibits include Abu Grahib, Nazi Holocoust, and lynchings in the 20s. See more here

...The World Trade Center Memorial Cultural Complex will be an imposing edifice wedged in the place where the Twin Towers once stood. It will serve as the primary "gateway" to the underground area where the names of the lost are chiseled into concrete. The organizers of its principal tenant, the International Freedom Center (IFC), have stated that they intend to take us on "a journey through the history of freedom"--.... The public will have come to see 9/11 but will be given a high-tech, multimedia tutorial about man's inhumanity to man, from Native American genocide to the lynchings and cross-burnings of the Jim Crow South, from the Third Reich's Final Solution to the Soviet gulags and beyond. This is a history all should know and learn, but dispensing it over the ashes of Ground Zero is like creating a Museum of
Tolerance over the sunken graves of the USS Arizona.... WSJ

The Recent EU Constitution Failure

The failure of the EU constitution is complex, but the biggest challenge facing the Europhiles is that the British, French, and Germans see themselves as such instead of Europeans. While the EU can serve as an economic community to a decent degree, it will never do well as a political entity. All members of the EU are in it for the advancement of their own national interests. It can be best summed up in the following humourous exchange on the British TV series, Yes Minister from way back in 1981. Little has changed:


Jim Hacker: "Europe is a community of nations, dedicated towards one goal."
Sir Humphrey: "Oh, ha ha ha."
Jim Hacker: "May we share the joke, Humphrey?"
Sir Humphrey: "Oh Minister, let's look at this objectively. It's a game played for national interests, it always was. Why do you suppose we went into it?"
Jim Hacker: "To strengthen the brotherhood of Free Western nations."
Sir Humphrey: "Oh really. We went in to screw the French by splitting them off from the Germans."
Jim Hacker: "So why did the French go into it then?"
Sir Humphrey: "Well, to protect their inefficient farmers from commercial competition."
Jim Hacker: "That certainly doesn't apply to the Germans."
Sir Humphrey: "No no, they went in to cleanse themselves of genocide and apply for readmission to the human race."
Jim Hacker: "I never heard such appalling cynicism. At least the small nations didn't go into it for selfish reasons."
Sir Humphrey: "Oh really? Luxembourg is in it for the perks; the capital of the EEC, all that foreign money pouring in."
Jim Hacker: "Very sensible central location."
Sir Humphrey: "With the administration in Brussels and the Parliament in Strasbourg? Minister, it's like having the House of Commons in Swindon and the Civil Service in Kettering."

The Deep Throat Dog Wag

What timing for the revealing of Deep Throat! Just as Newsweek was taking tons of heat for publishing a false Koran flushing story, Deep Throat is revealed removing all attention from Newsweek. It just so happens that Newsweek is also owned by the Washington Post.

It certainly seems odd that now, after the onset of dementia, Mark Felt decided to reveal himself, yet he was still adamant in his denials in 1999. Vanity Fair certainly didn't uncover the story by investigative journalism. According to the article, Woodward dropped by Felt's unexpectedly in 1999. Then, they continued to communicate. In 2001, Felt had a stroke. Perhaps the family was planning on coming out about the subject eventually, but Woodward called and asked to put out the story now, in order to take heat off of Newsweek. If Mark doesn't do any TV interviews himself, I'll be suspicious that this "coming clean" isn't entirely of his own making.