Oh please. The left is angry about this ruling not because private property is being taken but because of *who* that property is being taken from and given to. If this land were being given to some conservation group to protect a spotted owl or some cave bugs, they wouldn't blink an eye. And if it were being taken from some Big Evil Corporation, they'd be doing cartwheels in the street. They've been taking people's stuff and giving it to others for decades. Now suddenly they're shocked, shocked! that the government is taking someone's stuff, even though they've spent years begging the government to do so. "But nooooo, we don't want to give it to *those* people; we want to give it to some *other* people." Oh well, too late. As long as they have no respect for property rights, they have no principled leg to stand on with their complaints. All they object to is the End, not the Means.
BINGO! Well put and completely accurate.
I also have less problem with that than with the taking of our land to give to a corporation.
But considering that the lefties are as angry over this as we are (although as you said for different reasons), we may be able to use this to our advantage. Now we can tell them, "By blocking Bush's nominations to the Supreme Court, preferring instead justices like Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg and Breyer, you are guaranteed more rulings just like this one." The wall put up to Bush's nominations might then start to crack.