This is freaking AWESOME

[Hotrod]

Ha! I love it

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45029

[Hotrod]

"According to a statement from Clements, the proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, "featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America." Instead of a Gideon's Bible in each room, guests will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged," the statement said."

Ha! rofl

[Spider]

Ha! I love it

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45029
you realy believe this ? .......

[Hotrod]

you realy believe this ? .......

Your kidding right?

[Hotrod]

It obviously wont happen but its funny as he** rofl

[Spider]

It obviously wont happen but its funny as he** rofl
Poetic justice no question , but I happen to think it is more fantasy then reality ......

[Spider]

Your kidding right?
Just making sure ;D

[Hotrod]

Poetic justice no question , but I happen to think it is more fantasy then reality ......

Well of course it is. Of course he could have very well filed the paperwork to do it. I dont think anyone believes it will work but it sends a message to the idiot.

[Spider]

Well of course it is. Of course he could have very well filed the paperwork to do it. I dont think anyone believes it will work but it sends a message to the idiot.
Only if it has merit ....... alot more to the ruling then that .... If it had came fro m the city council where Souter lives , then he would take notice ......

[RaiderH8r]

Only if it has merit ....... alot more to the ruling then that .... If it had came fro m the city council where Souter lives , then he would take notice ......
Let's see here, the 3 more conservative justices dissented in the case, while the 4 more liberal supported the majority opinion here. Private land for public good? It came down to Kennedy and he jumped the good ship. WTF?

Although I think this little piece of irony won't be lost and it may gain steam by virtue of the fact this ruling peeved so many people. They will encourage the case and, quite possibly, begin filings on all of the majority justice's homes. That would be funny, this is already amusing.

[Spider]

Let's see here, the 3 more conservative justices dissented in the case, while the 4 more liberal supported the majority opinion here. Private land for public good? It came down to Kennedy and he jumped the good ship. WTF?

Although I think this little piece of irony won't be lost and it may gain steam by virtue of the fact this ruling peeved so many people. They will encourage the case and, quite possibly, begin filings on all of the majority justice's homes. That would be funny, this is already amusing.
there isnt 4 Liberal Judges on the Bench , a case could be made for 3 ...... and a Moderate http://cfcc.quinnell.us/info/court.htm
But then this ruling realy did blur the line between Democrats and Reps , at least in the Higher Ranks ...... I realy need some hard line cases to step up , for both Parties and clear up these lines

[Hotrod]

there isnt 4 Liberal Judges on the Bench , a case could be made for 3 ...... and a Moderate http://cfcc.quinnell.us/info/court.htm
But then this ruling realy did blur the line between Democrats and Reps , at least in the Higher Ranks ...... I realy need some hard line cases to step up , for both Parties and clear up these lines

Dont lose the fact that this is just plain funny. Thats whats really important on this thread ;D

[Spider]

Dont lose the fact that this is just plain funny. Thats whats really important on this thread ;D
;D ... it is . I wish it was happening , you would see those ****s , holding an emergency session to fix this ..........

[W*GS]

Right on, Mr. Clements!

Screw the SCOTUS in this case...

[Spider]

Right on, Mr. Clements!

Screw the SCOTUS in this case...
They got it wrong on this in my opinion , It seems now the fight has to be taken to the states ...... Even tough the law has been around a long time the SCOTUS has realy broaden the powers , and no borders ....... Scary stuff ....
I posted a link awhile back on how to take action .......http://www.castlecoalition.org/

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

there isnt 4 Liberal Judges on the Bench , a case could be made for 3 ...... and a Moderate http://cfcc.quinnell.us/info/court.htm
But then this ruling realy did blur the line between Democrats and Reps , at least in the Higher Ranks ...... I realy need some hard line cases to step up , for both Parties and clear up these lines

The Baiter also forgot to mention that, of the five justices who ruled in favor, three were appointed by republican presidents.

Of those three, one was a registered rethug and one is a moderate.

[enjolras]

Even tough the law has been around a long time the SCOTUS has realy broaden the powers , and no borders ....... Scary stuff ....

What powers did they broaden exactly? They simply said that judges, who can not be held accountable and are not members of the community in question, are not the proper authorities to determine what is for the public good.

They decided that elected officials, people who can ACTUALLY BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE for their decisions, are in the business of making those decisions. The definition of public good remains unchanged (since 1956), and it gives no one the power to step outside of that.

Its so confusing. If you are against 'judicial activism' and for 'states rights' this decision was for you.

[RaiderH8r]

The Baiter also forgot to mention that, of the five justices who ruled in favor, three were appointed by republican presidents.

Of those three, one was a registered rethug and one is a moderate.
Who appointed them has no bearing on their current or past judicial rulings. The fact is that among those in the legal world the breakdown is as I've provided. Big friggin deal who nominated them, it's their actions that determine the breakdown not who made the nomination.

[Spider]

What powers did they broaden exactly? They simply said that judges, who can not be held accountable and are not members of the community in question, are not the proper authorities to determine what is for the public good.
The Court ruling now allows city and county government to acquire land for the use of private companies and enterprises, whereas before the land could only be taken from residents for public use. Before, the term “public use” justified the vacating of properties for the construction of such things as roads, schools and airports and excluded any action involving private enterprise.

They decided that elected officials, people who can ACTUALLY BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE for their decisions, are in the business of making those decisions. The definition of public good remains unchanged (since 1956), and it gives no one the power to step outside of that.
This I agree with . they should have left it at that .....

Its so confusing. If you are against 'judicial activism' and for 'states rights' this decision was for you.
I fall in the middle here ........

[Atlas]

That is great!!!

[enjolras]

Who appointed them has no bearing on their current or past judicial rulings. The fact is that among those in the legal world the breakdown is as I've provided. Big friggin deal who nominated them, it's their actions that determine the breakdown not who made the nomination.

Since this was an EXTREMELY conservative decision.. does that make the 4 that voted in favor conservatives now?

[RaiderH8r]

Since this was an EXTREMELY conservative decision.. does that make the 4 that voted in favor conservatives now?
Just offering what is considered by the legal community for public consumption. Make of it what you will, but I don't think one decision on one issue would be enough to make the leap.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Since this was an EXTREMELY conservative decision.. does that make the 4 that voted in favor conservatives now?

According to the B8ster's logic, yes. :D

[Hotrod]

http://www.boston.com/news/local/new_hampshire/articles/2005/06/29/proposal_replace_souters_home_with_lost_liberty_ho tel/

Its actually happening. Atleast the guy is getting due process from the local government. ;D

[El Guapo]

Its already happening here in dallas.. they're making people move so they can build the new cowboys stadium..

[Hotrod]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45062

They are pushing for this. I doubt very much it will happen but its a thing of beauty to see the American people stand up and be heard.

Now hes talking about making it a hotel chain that may investigate other propertys (of the others who voted for this rofl) :thumbsup:

[Hotrod]

Im not that well versed on the SC operations. If the peoples voices get loud enough do the 'rules' allow the SC to review/reverse their decission???

[Hotrod]

I guess the bigger question is would they have the balls to step up to the plate and say hey we f'ed up ??? I doubt it.

[Spider]

Im not that well versed on the SC operations. If the peoples voices get loud enough do the 'rules' allow the SC to review/reverse their decission???
I dont think so , thats why you have 9 .... Judges are not to be political , but servents of the law . the Idea is a good one , we just have to wonder about the Judges we have now ..........
i would be in favor of taking the # of Judges up to 11

[Hotrod]

I dont think so , thats why you have 9 .... Judges are not to be political , but servents of the law . the Idea is a good one , we just have to wonder about the Judges we have now ..........
i would be in favor of taking the # of Judges up to 11

Ok again I dont have a great knowledge of the SC but why not term limits. Atleast then they can be held accountable for their decissions.

[Spider]

Ok again I dont have a great knowledge of the SC but why not term limits. Atleast then they can be held accountable for their decissions.
to get to the SC , you have to be the best of the best of the best ........
it takes along time to study the Constituition , all in all what we argue over is the interpitation of the judges , they either take a liberal point of view , or a conservititive point of view , but as far as I know they realy havent screwed up ........ SCOTUS and this latest ruling about Private property , is a murkey issue at least from my point of view. Eniment Domain has always been around , and largley a states issue , the SCOTUS said , it is still a states issue , but they tweak the giudelines for Eniment Domain to be applied, and that is where I have trouble , I dont like an opened end law , too much can be attempted under it .

[Hotrod]

to get to the SC , you have to be the best of the best of the best ........
it takes along time to study the Constituition , all in all what we argue over is the interpitation of the judges , they either take a liberal point of view , or a conservititive point of view , but as far as I know they realy havent screwed up ........ SCOTUS and this latest ruling about Private property , is a murkey issue at least from my point of view. Eniment Domain has always been around , and largley a states issue , the SCOTUS said , it is still a states issue , but they tweak the giudelines for Eniment Domain to be applied, and that is where I have trouble , I dont like an opened end law , too much can be attempted under it .

Exactly its a complete f-up to make it possible to take land for commercial purpose.

So are you telling me that the SC can do whatever they damn well please and there are really no way to hold them accountable for their actions??? Talk about scary. Once they have the job is there not anyway for them to lose it??? Like Ive said in the past and maybe Im wrong but the SC is becoming more powerful then the other 2 branchs IMO

[Spider]

Exactly its a complete f-up to make it possible to take land for commercial purpose.

So are you telling me that the SC can do whatever they damn well please and there are really no way to hold them accountable for their actions??? Talk about scary. Once they have the job is there not anyway for them to lose it??? Like Ive said in the past and maybe Im wrong but the SC is becoming more powerful then the other 2 branchs IMO
well not quite , but this iswhy we have to pay attention to who we vote for president and congress , The President and Congress puts these Judges in place...This is why voting Party line is bad .......
to me our system works the best when Republicans control Congress and Democrats control the presidency .......
But now on to the SC . it is my understanding that the Judges pretty much have free riegn as long as it applies to the constitution , a Judge can be impeached though , if they sway away from the Constitution , or makes a ruling that is clearly out of bounds of our Constitution , for Example 5 Judges on the SCOTUS decide well time to ban firearms , and they rule that way .Slam they can be impeached ........

[Spider]

This is why I never tell anyone to vote Democrat or Republican or 3 rdparty , all I ask is they educate themselfs on an Issue ........
for example this last election , we had alot on our Plate , Iraq , Terrorism , Economy , Gas prices , tax , God , Gays and Guns and the chances of appointing a Judge to SCOTUS .....there was alot to digest , normaly we dont have so many issues . But how a Canidate approaches issues will give you a good Idea of the Judges he would pick ......... We have alot of responsibilty with our vote .............

[Hotrod]

well not quite , but this iswhy we have to pay attention to who we vote for president and congress , The President and Congress puts these Judges in place...This is why voting Party line is bad .......
to me our system works the best when Republicans control Congress and Democrats control the presidency .......
But now on to the SC . it is my understanding that the Judges pretty much have free riegn as long as it applies to the constitution , a Judge can be impeached though , if they sway away from the Constitution , or makes a ruling that is clearly out of bounds of our Constitution , for Example 5 Judges on the SCOTUS decide well time to ban firearms , and they rule that way .Slam they can be impeached ........

So they can be impeached hmm I wonder if we can get any interns to do a patriotic service ;D

[Spider]

So they can be impeached hmm I wonder if we can get any interns to do a patriotic service ;D
LOL ..... eww munching on Sandra Day O'Connor
or Ruth Bader Ginsburg shouting Spank me Daddy ........ ewwwwwww

[Hotrod]

LOL ..... eww munching on Sandra Day O'Connor
or Ruth Bader Ginsburg shouting Spank me Daddy ........ ewwwwwww

Someones gotta take one for the team rofl Just not me ;D

[Spider]

Someones gotta take one for the team rofl Just not me ;D
Me niether .. hey lets get the Dave ......... ;D