On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Steve Schear wrote:
> At 10:19 PM 6/23/2005, you wrote:
> >On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Jay Listo wrote:
> >
> > > Well, once the Supreme Court starts coming up with stuff like this, you
> > > know you've been Bush-whacked.
> >
> >Maybe you should take another look at who voted how.
> At 10:19 PM 6/23/2005, you wrote:
> >On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Jay Listo wrote:
> >
> >> Well, once the Supreme Court starts coming up with stuff like this, you
> >> know you've been Bush-whacked.
> >
> >Maybe you should take another look at who voted how. The Bushies
> >dissented on this opinion. G
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, A.Melon wrote:
> > >Maybe you should take another look at who voted how. The Bushies
> > >dissented on this opinion. Go figure.
> >
> > Not surprising at all. The Bush camp's court agenda is spearheaded by
> > members of the Federalist Society which wants to roll back many
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Tyler Durden wrote:
> How do you take out a bulldozer?
Anti-tank mine?
Yeah, but this steps crosses a line, I think. Before, your home could be
taken for a public project. Now, the supreme court has ruled that your home
can be taken for a "public project" that consists entirely of private
development, in the name of the "public good", which is supposed to equal
hi
Quoting Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> How do you take out a bulldozer? (Remember, bulldozer operators can easily
> be replaced.)
RPG7 should do it. They're known to be able to take out a Bradley.
--
Roy M. Silvernail is [EMAIL PROTECTED], and you're not
"It's just this little chromium swi
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005, Jay Listo wrote:
> Well, once the Supreme Court starts coming up with stuff like this, you
> know you've been Bush-whacked.
Maybe you should take another look at who voted how. The Bushies
dissented on this opinion. Go figure.
--
Yours,
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Tyler Durden wrote:
> What this equates to is, whoever had more money than you can take away your
> home. Previously, it was just the occasional men-with-guns that could do
> this, but now they effectively have proxies everywhere.
It just makes formal (and official) what has
From: "A.Melon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The principle of using the takings clause to transfer private property
to private parties has already been approved by the Supremes. This is
but another variation.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=467&invol=229
Interesting that
This is very bad news. A lot of people will loose
their homes to private 'economic developers'. It
certainly means no right to have a permenant home.
When suburbs start developing, the people are going to
be evicted over and over. How long will this continue?
If they cant do any good for individu
Well, once the Supreme Court starts coming up with stuff like this, you
know you've been Bush-whacked.
J.A. Terranson wrote:
On Thu, 23 Jun 2005, Tyler Durden wrote:
What this equates to is, whoever had more money than you can take away your
home. Previously, it was just the occasional me
From: Jay Listo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Well, once the Supreme Court starts coming up with stuff like this, you
know you've been Bush-whacked.
Yes, because so many of the current justices have been appointed by Bush...
..oh, wait
(You might want to look at which justices joined this opinion
> >From: "A.Melon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> >The principle of using the takings clause to transfer private property
> >to private parties has already been approved by the Supremes. This is
> >but another variation.
> >http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=467&invol=229
>
>
Tyler Durden wrote:
Holy crap. Some shitty little township can now bulldoze your house
because someone wants to convert the space into a Waffle House.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8331097/
Where's Tim May when you need him? Where's the RAGE?
How do you take out a bulldozer? (Remember, bulldoze
> Yeah, but this steps crosses a line, I think. Before, your home could be
> taken for a public project. Now, the supreme court has ruled that your home
> can be taken for a "public project" that consists entirely of private
> development, in the name of the "public good", which is supposed to e
> How do you take out a bulldozer? (Remember, bulldozer operators can
> easily be replaced.)
thermite through the engine block, frag bomb in the engine compartment,
torch any remaining hoses, slice the tires, puncture the brake lines.
you don't need someone to tell you this. takings clause abuse ha
Holy crap. Some shitty little township can now bulldoze your house because
someone wants to convert the space into a Waffle House.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8331097/
Where's Tim May when you need him? Where's the RAGE?
How do you take out a bulldozer? (Remember, bulldozer operators can easil
17 matches
Mail list logo
