Eminent Duh-oh!
June 23, 2005
By Douglas B. Wakeman
It is shocking to hear an American pronounce private property to be an evil when he is a beneficiary of this noble principle every second of every day of his life. Yet, I have heard American Marxists say they disapprove of private property (meaning homes, businesses, churches, etc.). They believe that government officials should grant such property to whichever petitioner will use it to best benefit the community (the usual failed, commie claptrap). I have always been half amused and half horrified. But, these are fringe kooks existing in their moronic, utopian dreamscape. It’s like watching a scary movie. You know it can’t actually hurt you.
Well, Freddy Krueger just leaped off the screen into the audience and he's wearing a black robe. Today, in an event that redefines this nation in a fundamental way, the United States Supreme Court eliminated private property, handing these Marxist wreckers exactly what they have dreamed of and what we Americans have laughed off. Surprising? No. Horrifying? Very.
The case, Kelo v. City of New London, was brought because home and business owners in New London Connecticut were being forced out by the city to make way for a private developer. The significance of this case lies in the previous threshold , based upon the 5th Amendment to The Constitution, which held that governments can only take private property for public use, such as roads and bridges, and then, only with just compensation (though the slippery slope had been greased with so-called "blight" legislation) . But, New London was forcing people out of their non-blighted homes and businesses in favor of a politically-connected, wealthy developer, on the grounds that his use of the property would bring in more tax revenue. This is the exact justification used by the Marxists for the elimination of private property. Today’s Supreme Court agrees.
You have to wonder how a hard-core Communist like Ruth Bader-Meinhoff feels about getting into bed with wealthy, bourgeoisie, running-dog, capitalist exploiters of the proletariat to disenfranchise the workers. But, expansion of government power must take precedence, after all. You have to break some eggs to make an omelet. The ends justifies the means. In her demented fervor to bring down the imperialist American oppressor, I doubt the dilemma even occurs to her poor, sick, twisted excuse for a mind.
So, what does it all mean?
Let’s say you have a liquor store and the mayor’s brother-in-law has a liquor store serving the same area. Get some boxes and a van. Send the bill to John Paul Stevens and hold your breath.
You have a private school that’s attracting students (and the federal dollars that follow them) away from the laughable, union-run government schools. The piece of property you’re on… a perfect spot for that headquarters the County Democrat Party has been dreaming of.
The mayor’s an anti-Christian bigot (read Democrat) getting lots of donations from the ACLU, Citizens United and People for the American Way, and your congregation has a little church in town. Well, a big contributor has been looking to build a gas station right around there. The Subway franchise in his Conveno-Mart will be perfect where that nasty, tax-free, religio-centric pulpit used to be.
You are hosting Boy Scout meetings in your home. Good site for a released sexual predator half-way house. Those NAMBLA and GLSEN contributions you know. So sorry!
Your newspaper is reporting on local corruption, you’re out, Mother Jones is in. Find another building dude. And then, lay low and behave.
Are you a gadfly at city council meetings, haranguing the chairman on that latest sweetheart deal? Your house needs to make way for a Planned Parenthood clinic. We’ll give you pennies on the dollar because, after all, it was never on the market, who knows what it would have brought?
You get the idea, anyone contemplating practicing that dissent the Marxists pretend to be so fond of, will quickly reconsider after a few test cases. Anyone thinking that the triumphant Marxists care for the common man will be quickly disabused of any such notion when politically-connected moneymen start moving them out of their homes and businesses. And, of course, anyone upholding or teaching Judeo-Christian, Western, American values, culture and morals will be out on the street with a tin cup. (I don't expect the Marxists to have any conflict there!)
After eliminating that inconvenient first amendment in their McCain/Feingold decision, making turd-burglary a constitutional right in Lawrence v. Texas, , and declaring their sovereignty over all human interaction in Ashcroft v. Raich, five unelected, Marxist lawyers in black robes have just ruled that their surrogates in local government have total and complete control over the disposition of all “private property” (the phrase is now meaningless in post-Kelo America).
And, while all this is happening, now that government can constitutionally seize any home, school, church or business it feels like, what are the “civil libertarians” concerned with? They’re worried about the treatment of terrorists in detention camps and that the USAPATRIOT Act will allow perusal of terrorist's reading preferences. What are the Republicans doing? Making deals with the enemy on judicial appointments. We are there folks. We are past there.
