mtn_mouse Posted October 27, 2008 Posted October 27, 2008 At least snaffles are not socialist. Every rodent for himself. Quote
ScottP Posted October 27, 2008 Posted October 27, 2008 The fact that you (fairweather) equate the "civil rights movement" as a "redistribution of wealth" scheme strongly suggests that you are racist. I believe this has already been established, time and again. Quote
Winter Posted October 27, 2008 Posted October 27, 2008 OMFG it's been confirmed by Fox News Fox News Stevens will appeal until dead and will officially die an innocent man. Ala the Enron execs. Quote
RuMR Posted October 27, 2008 Posted October 27, 2008 i think ivan is my new favorite poster. i'm still your fave! Quote
dougd Posted October 27, 2008 Posted October 27, 2008 The day I found out about emminent domain and the the governments ability to condemn a persons property and legally take it away from him/her, I learned this is not a free country and the government is necessarily socialist in some respects. I think reagan was president then, not that it matters... I think it's funny a guy like fw get's on Barack Obama when he voted for a guy like bush twice and he has expanded government, increased spending and national debt to record levels and is nationalizing banks and corporations as we speak. reagan was also a big spender and expanded government. the biggest liars in politics are republicans it seems. fw just keeps on lovin fox news and drinkin the coolaid. too funny. d Quote
Fairweather Posted October 28, 2008 Author Posted October 28, 2008 The day I found out about emminent domain and the the governments ability to condemn a persons property and legally take it away from him/her, I learned this is not a free country and the government is necessarily socialist in some respects. I think reagan was president then, not that it matters... The case you are referring to was in 2005. But before you embarrass yourself any further, you should know that the ruling was supported and passed by the liberal side of the court - Stevens, Ginsberg, Bryer, Souter, along with the more moderate Kennedy. Scalia, Thomas, Rehnquist, and O'Connor voted against the measure and I believe the Bush Administration had filed a Friend of the Court brief against the seizure by the city of New London. So much for your argument there. But, seriously, do any of Obama's comments in the link concern you at all? Quote
rbw1966 Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 Eminent Domain has been around far longer than 2005. Quote
WylDanimal Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 Reparations...Best economy boost we could imagine...ala David Chappelle Quote
Winter Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 FW, read the constitution. The Fifth Amendment created the power of eminent domain. The case you referred to interpreted the scope of "public use." Quote
Fairweather Posted October 28, 2008 Author Posted October 28, 2008 Eminent Domain has been around far longer than 2005. I'm pretty sure he was referring to a certain (outrageous) case. Quote
Fairweather Posted October 28, 2008 Author Posted October 28, 2008 FW, read the constitution. The Fifth Amendment created the power of eminent domain. The case you referred to interpreted the scope of "public use." Since I've never met anyone who did not already know this, or disagrees that a certain degree of eminent domain is necessary, I was assuming he was referring to the case that made big news a couple years ago. BTW; how are your efforts to close the road to Cloudcap going? Quote
AlpineK Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 FW doesn't give a fuck about the first 10 amendments all he cares about is #2. Quote
Fairweather Posted October 28, 2008 Author Posted October 28, 2008 FW doesn't give a fuck about the first 10 amendments all he cares about is #2. Fuck off you clueless tool. Quote
Winter Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 FW, read the constitution. The Fifth Amendment created the power of eminent domain. The case you referred to interpreted the scope of "public use." Since I've never met anyone who did not already know this, or disagrees that a certain degree of eminent domain is necessary, I was assuming he was referring to the case that made big news a couple years ago. BTW; how are your efforts to close the road to Cloudcap going? We're implementing a socialists only policy, so I guess you're shit out of luck. Quote
Fairweather Posted October 28, 2008 Author Posted October 28, 2008 FW, read the constitution. The Fifth Amendment created the power of eminent domain. The case you referred to interpreted the scope of "public use." Since I've never met anyone who did not already know this, or disagrees that a certain degree of eminent domain is necessary, I was assuming he was referring to the case that made big news a couple years ago. BTW; how are your efforts to close the road to Cloudcap going? We're implementing a socialists only policy, so I guess you're shit out of luck. Sounds like a confession to me. Quote
ivan Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 Eminent Domain has been around far longer than 2005. the Magna Carta from 1215 contains some fun pearls like this'n: "31. Neither we nor our bailiffs shall take another's wood for castles or for other private uses, unless by the will of him to whom the wood belongs." Quote
Doug Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 Jeebus Fairweather! The fucking election is a week away. McCain is convinced he will win it. Isn't it a bit early to be acting like a sore loser? Quote
ivan Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 Jeebus Fairweather! The fucking election is a week away. McCain is convinced he will win it. Isn't it a bit early to be acting like a sore loser? dude, republicunts are sore WINNERS - i remember bill maher had this geriatric senator on back in 2004 the friday after bush won and bill was trying to congratulate his party for actually getting the most votes the 2nd time around and the gop-grandpa went fucking bat-shit and starting spray molten-crazy all over the set about the evil of liberal-fucks, which seemed strange, if for no other reason than he was an old friend of maher's Quote
ScottP Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 FW doesn't give a fuck about the first 10 amendments all he cares about is #2. I would imagine he has some problems with the XIVth. Quote
marylou Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 I like #14, matter of fact it's one of my favorites, so versatile. Quote
ivan Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 I like #14, matter of fact it's one of my favorites, so versatile. and yet, it would seem, so utterly easy to ignore? Quote
Fairweather Posted October 28, 2008 Author Posted October 28, 2008 FW doesn't give a fuck about the first 10 amendments all he cares about is #2. I would imagine he has some problems with the XIVth. Which section are you referring to? Quote
dougd Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 fw you missed the point completely and made an incorrect assumption. that, is not surprising. I was not referring to a specific case. My reference, simply, was to roughly 30 years ago when as a young construcion worker. I met a property owner that had had his property condemned for a project I was working on. This man was in tears over it. It was very painful for his family this happened. this land had been in his family for generations. as a veteran, and proud american, I couldn't believe it was possible but understand now it is a necessary evil for the common good. But, and here's the point in simple terms fw, it could be called socialist, this right of eminent domain. the "bailout" legislation your president recently signed could also be called socialist. this legislation was of course also a necessary evil due mainly to republican's crying for deregulation of the financial sector in 2000/2001. dubya's breaking of fisa laws and evesdropping on american citizens could also be called "socialist"... this "socialist" label people are trying to stick on Sen Obama is just more political bullshit and you should know this. after reading some of your posts though, it becomes quite clear why you may not... I believe Sen Obama is a man for the times. perfect? of course not. the man is however a much needed change in intelligence and attitude from what we now have. d Quote
RuMR Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 speak in slow, careful little words so that toolbag (fairypants) can understand... Quote
ScottP Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 You know very well what I am referring to... the final nail in the coffin of Dred Scott vs Sandford. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.