The US house of Representatives, responding to intense public pressure, just overwhelmingly passed the "Private Property Protection Act of 2005," which will bar the federal government, states and localities from using their power of eminent domain to seize property for private economic development projects.
Godfrey, Burdett, Jorgenson and Larsen are already crying their eyes out over this, and will be absolutely apoplectic when a similar bill sails through the Senate very soon.
Federal legislators of all political stripes will drive a stake through the heart of American mainstream Trostky-style neoCONS very soon.
We have to do our part locally, though.
Be sure to show up at the polls on Tuesday, to vote the BIG-GOVERNMENT, BIG SPENDING local neoCONS OUT!
Vote NO on Comrades Jorgenson, Burdett and Larsen.
Maybe we should fire that "professional lobbyist," too, since he'll be beating a dead horse VERY SOON -- and maybe we should apply that dough to the hiring of an independant accountant to look into Godfrey's possible financial shenanigans instead.
Just a thought.
I have a red-meat Stuart Reid expose coming up this weekend, by the way. Be sure to stay tuned.
What say our gentle readers about this?
© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved
14 comments:
It was a heart warming experience to watch the U. S. House of Representatives debate on C-Span (Channel 18) this afternoon on the Private Property Rights Protection Act (H.R. 4128).
Dozens of Representatives from both sides of the aisle took turns speaking for the Bill and decrying the U. S. Supreme Court decision in June on the Kelo case.
The clear message of the overwhelming vote is that the country is fed up with the unconstitutional practice by local politicians of seizing private property for other private parties under the guise of economic development.
I am prouder than ever of Utah's passage of Senate Bill 184 in March which helped set the stage for today's vote.
Passage of this bill is a clear message to Ogden City government to find a new way to abuse citizens.
you guys scare me with all this property rights crap. sounds like extreme right-wing drivel. and then you accuse city officials of being nazi-esque. what the hell is going on here?
"Property rights crap?
What's scary is that 5% of the American population seem to believe that enforcing private property rights is extremist.
You have the socialist disease, and you have it BAD!
Seek treatment.
Rudi -
Point of clarification please ... when you say NeoCON, do you mean new conservative? Just wondering what the jargon means to you. Thanks.
ANONYMOUS--
What planet did you originate from?
Are the words "constitutional rights" in your vocabulary?
You, the guy in charge of D-Mo's campaign, the aforementioned Tigresslover, don't know what "NeoCon" means.
Interesting. No wonder she's slipped badly in the polls.
And "anonymous." You must live in some low level rented flat, with your regard to property rights. What's going on here is slapping down Nazi bastards like you!
Rudi:
I would like to nominate this statement as the WCForum dumb ass quote of the year:
"you guys scare me with all this property rights crap"
Obviously comes from someone who has none.
Ouch Earl M.!
Sorry to have pissed you off - just honestly asking what that means.
Just to show that I can still live up to my moniker, the way the bill is portrayed in the article (haven't actually read the bill), it does not ban use of eminent domain for economic development by anyone other than the Feds. It only puts restrictions on it and it would seem the penalty is taking away some federal money that many, perhaps most, cities depend on.
And just to be clear Dorothy, are you hear to tell us that constitutional rights are not defined/interpretted by the Supreme Court? You say that what New London did was unconstitutional. That may be your opinion, but the SC said it was constitutional. Now until the SC says otherwise it must be considered constitutional. Congress may pass laws to restrict its use but that only would make it against the law not unconstitutional.
Again, these statements may or may not be indicitive of my views of certain topic but are simply an effort to point out where what is said doesn't seem to be correct in the technical sense.
ARCritic (Anal Retentive Critic)
Flame away if you must and attach the messenger as is common. I only ask you to address my points as well.
T-lover, you should have Googled the word, not asked it on this blog. You had to know something was coming at you for that. Not pissed off at all, just, uh, just, aw hell, didn't mean to knock ya down. Sorry about that.
Earl M. -
Thanks, I did google the word after your initial comment and found some good insights on the definition of neoconservatism. But this also raised a question of how it applies to Godfrey, Burdett, Jorgesen and Larsen. Are they anti-soviet/communism? pro-military? It seems to have become a big scary word with lots of strange connotations just wondering what part of the definition is being applied here.
I can see you need some definitional and political-philosophical guidance here, Tigresslover.
The articles that a google search provides are probably generally accurate, insofar as they describe the historical development of the "neoconservative" movement. They also fairly well describe neocon policics on a national level too. (If you're going to read your google-provided articles, be sure to read up on the founder of the American neoCON movement, Leo Strauss.)
For local application, though, you need a more general and more local definition; and I'll try to offer one for you, along with some background info.
Neoconservatives are one of two competing factions in the modern Republican party. Neocons can generally be characterized as nominal Republicans who favor aggressive centrist government intervention, profligate borrowing and spending (Keynesian pump-priming,) and the balancing of fundamental individual rights against "the greater public good."
The other competing faction, "traditional Republican conservatives" favor small, non-interventionist government, fiscal frugality, and jealous protection of individual rights as constutional absolutes. "Balancing" is a commie concept. Either you "own" your propety -- or you don't.
I hope this definition helps.
Rudi -
Thanks for the explanantion.
the NeoCon mentality referred to here mostly centers around the mistaken notion that all in society that is of value is to be determined by a "central committee" If any idea does not come from this source it is thrown out and derided. (Think the Bush White House and the Godfrey Mayor office)
They are almost always arrogant and dismissive of the hoi polloi that they rule over with indifference.
They are not concerned with the harm and dislocation they cause the people in the pursuit of their own agenda's.
They are very lose with the truth and they control and manipulate information to hide the real intent and consequences of their acts. (think Karl Rove and Matt Godfrey)
They always fall back on the excuse of: "it is for the greater good" Their ideas are the only ones to qualify for this exhaled description.
They resemble the tax and spend liberals of yesteryear, only they do not have a heart or compassion for the poor and dispossessed.
They are cold hearted and cruel in their arrogance.
In Ogden they are known as "Godfreyites"
New comments are not allowed.