LOL Who does not believe in kharma now?

Joe
You might like this story though

http://reformjudaismmag.org/Articles/index.cfm?id=1012

The tyranny of the majority indeed.

"In all cases where a majority are united by a common interest or passion, the rights of the minority are in danger."

"[A] pure democracy…can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of [the majority]…and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal securities or the right of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

James Madison

On the Texas-Oklahoma border Lake Texoma covers the former sites of three small towns, an Indian village and much rich farmland that the owners did not part with willingly. As a matter of fact, my father was run off with guns more than once while appraising the lands to estimate their monetary value in order to make those purchases.

Truthfully, I've always hated the thought that those honest people were pushed off their land, although I do understand the need for the water. Lake Texoma provides water to a lot of relatively parched towns in that area.

Eminent domain needs to be exercised with very great discretion.

Hey, does anyone have a copy of the prospectus? Maybe we could send courtesy copies to the 4 who voted against Kelo.

With such rulings, who needs a Socialist party?

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Tax Revenue

How many million deaths have caused the good of the community?

The difference with Lake Texoma is that it truly serves a public function.

Our president could tell us the difference between that and the deal that the Texas Rangers got when folks were forced to sell their property for a ballpark that was turned over to the privately owned ballclub. Whatever Bush is, his libertarian streak is quite small.

True, lurker, good point - but the effect on the homeowner who sought out his/her place and put up a home on it, is the same.

And in suburban Dallas, the Cowboys are taking by eminent domain some little shops and homes to build a new stadium - leaving a facility that they won't negotiate with their former home in Irving, TX, to improve, thereby also depriving people who established businesses that counted on their presence there.

It would seem that giving dominant powers to corporate entities is not the best choice of means of protecting public interests.

Rep. Ted Poe of TX stood up in Congress today and noted that Justice Souter's home is the object of a newly instituted eminent domain effort in NH. He didn't smirk when he said it, though.

Ruth,
I agree with you. Forceably taking property from private citizens is NEVER a good thing to the victims. Eminent domain has always been the law of the land. The state shold exercise this power with care and only rarely, and NEVER for the benefit of any other private party. If the state takes property, it should be for state uses and not private ones.

I lived in Dallas for 14 years and the deal with the Rangers still rankles. It was how George W. Bush, as minority owner and supposedly a conservative, made most of his money. A gifted stadium is a sweet deal alright. Compared to this, Hillary's profit on beef futures doesn't even rate a blip. I'm not in the least surprised that the Cowboys are now feeding at the same trough.

The Dallas Cowboys too, huh... doesn't that violate the laws against separation of Church and State?

Smile when you say that. (as we say around the ol' corral).

lurker, remember they've been having losing seasons lately. Some of the excess may be going off shore ... oops, heresy.

If Clements did an IPO for a business around this (say, targeting the homes and other real-estate owned by our hundred Senators), I'd happily make a sizable investment (as large or larger than what I give to the IJ who are fighting the good fight).

(Added here because we're having technical problems with some posts):

Democratic House Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) doesn't seem to get.... well, a lot of things.