Posted on 07/09/2005 9:48:23 AM PDT by grundle
http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1345&dept_id=432723&newsid=14823796&PAG=461&rfi=9
July 07, 2005
Last week, both the state Senate and House of Representatives, controlled by Democrats, defeated a GOP measure that would have prohibited local governments from seizing owner-occupied residential property for private economic development.
State Republicans may have to wait until next year to address the issue again, said one local legislator. "We'll try for another special session, but I don't think we can get it," said State Sen. George "Doc" Gunther, a Republican legislator for more than 30 years whose district encompasses Shelton and parts of Stratford and Seymour. "The Democrats can override us."
Gunther was highly critical of his Democratic colleagues in the Senate for voting down the proposed legislation offered at the special session.
"It's a shame what the Democrats did," he said. "They voted against it to a man. We needed that legislation now, not next year." The Senate defeated the proposal 22-11, mostly along party lines, while the House killed a similar proposal 82-50.
(Excerpt) Read more at zwire.com ...
We need to keep this in the news because the subject of eminent domain could have a major impact on public support of conservative judicial nominations.
Yes. And also because of general elections, too. So many of the major newspapers that endorsed Kerry for President also endorsed the ruling in Kelo v. New London. This proves that the Dems do not care about the little guy.
Remember the demo rat party was created by slavers and during the war of northern aggression rose in opposition as copperheads.
The last great demo rt president was Jefferson and he was a slaver.
Rats have gone back to their roots.
agreed....but you know damn well the MSM won't cover it.
I can't believe they voted it down. This a vote in favor of expanding eminent domain should be all it takes to kill a candidate in a campaign.
Democrats see voters as serfs.
Democrats are entitled to THEIR votes from the black voting block.
Democrats are entitled to THEIR votes from the unions voting block.
Democrats are entitled to THEIR votes from the women voting block.
Democrats are entitled to THEIR money from the pay they allow to USA workers.
Democrats are entitled to say what THEIR serfs are allowed to own and not own.
Any Ideas here as to how all of this is going effect elections?
Lets just hope Hillary isnt in to use this little thingy.....
"Under "REX" the President could declare a state of emergency, empowering the head of FEMA to take control of the internal infrastructure of the United States and suspend the constitution. The President could invoke executive orders 11000 thru 11004 which would: 1- Draft all citizens into work forces under government supervision. 2- Empower the postmaster to register all men, women and children. 3- Seize all airports and aircraft. 4- Seize all housing and establish forced relocation of citizens."
Last week, both the state Senate and House of Representatives, controlled by Democrats, defeated a GOP measure that would have prohibited local governments from seizing owner-occupied residential property for private economic development.
This shouldn't surprise anyone at all. It reaches to the core of liberal philosophy.
We should never forget nor overlook the philosophical underpinnings of their choices Manifesto of the Communist Party, by Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, published in 1848.
"The proletariat will use its political supremacy to wrest, by degree, all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state ... . Of course, in the beginning, this cannot be effected except by means of despotic inroads on the rights of property ... . These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in he hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc. "
11. No one is allowed to own a gun.
I can't see it as being any good for the Dems, that's for sure.
This proves that the Dems do not care about the little guy.
Also makes me think that overall perhaps what is happening is the gradual clear delineation of certain states as 'the' place for liberals to live. i.e. it makes sense to me to have certain states where they all congregate, and leave the more conservative states for those of us who want to live in that environment. Now if we could only put all the Islamic nuts in one place too...
Washington State may be very blue, but we have a law on the books, protecting private property. We also have a law on the books which allows a public referendum on all tax increases, which has been very effective in holding back the Democrat controlled state legislature. It drives the lefty loonies in King County crazy.
Well i hope your right...but the Democrats always never cease to amaze me, or is that nauseate.
I am sorry--I don't understand something. What difference does it make if a local jurisdiction passes a law prohibiting the condemnation of privately-owned land for public use or private development, if the Supreme Court has already ruled that this is permissible and constitutional? Any such local law will surely be overturned post-haste. Can someone enlighten me? Would such a law afford any protections at all?
That's a good question. The Supreme Court said in its ruling that state governments can pass laws to restrict the use of eminent domain.
bump
I do believe that the States have the right to over-rule the rulings of the Supreme Court -- not so supreme after all in this case. That's where the power should be anyway -- in the States. That's where abortion should be decided, too -- so that all those supporting abortion can migrate to the states that allow it and those against to other states. Eventually, those supporting abortion will not exist, as they will continue to kill their unborn children and have less and less children. There were articles written on this phenomena back in the time of the '04 election. I can't remember the name for it, but the fact that the Liberal Dems are having less and less children and are aborting in great numbers and are turning more and more to gay marriage and unions -- they will "extinct" themselves. On the other hand, conservatives who believe in families and marriage between a man a woman and who are anti-abortion, will continue to have more and more children. Unfortunately, this is happening in a different way in Europe (and let's hope not in the U.S.) where the European woman are producing around 1.5-1.6 babies per woman while the Muslim women are producing around 6 per woman. You can only see the natural outcome of that disaster. The eventual taking over of Europe by the Muslims. (As if it isn't already happening.)
Even my own mother...a confirmed leftist is having second thoughts regarding the dem leadership and philosophy on this issue alone. At least it might motivate her to vote third party in 2008, like she did in 2000.
Well I voted Libertarian. So I can understand that. Maybe she could vote Green.
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.