Tom Oliphant Can't See What the Big Deal Is...
Tom Oliphant, a well-known and very left-leaning columnist for the Boston Globe, illustrated quite well on PBS the other day how he can't understand what the big deal about the Kelo decision is.
Tom Oliphant, Boston Globe: "Well, what's interesting -- to me, anyway -- has been the much greater concentration on the social issues on the left side of that committee table than on the right. I mean, okay, defending the right to choose is a big deal and will be so for the next decade. I suspect it'll probably exist after another decade, though we're uncertain about what the form is. What surprised me today, given that Senators and Congressmen often will just simply reflect the heat they get from their constituents, is the vigorous nature of this opposition to a rather mundane eminent domain case from New London, Connecticut, this Kelo thing. I mean, as you know, this issue has been around for decades, especially connected with urban renewal.
It's the primary reason our sainted Brooklyn Dodgers became the Los Angeles Dodgers. But all the way down that side, the younger ones especially, who maybe aren't quite as used to the heat and the bright lights, were reflecting this. And Roberts was really pushing back, I thought. Much as he wouldn't give, he wouldn't talk to them about when life begins or when it ends, but he also was trying to explain to them, you know, almost like 'read the Kelo decision.' There was a very explicit connection there with the eminent domain involved with an urban redevelopment plan for the area as a whole.
And there wasn't anything all that special about it, really, and I think he expressed some mystification, that I felt here, and I think what Brownback, Coburn, I heard Lindsey Graham, too, I think were reflecting were younger Senators who got a lot of heat on an issue that they weren't expecting and reflected it."
See, it's all a big understanding, we're just latecomers who don't understand issues that were settled 30 or 40 years ago. We unwashed masses, those of us who cannot see how the Fifth Amendment could be used to justify the seizure of private land to give to other private figures by the government are really just backward cretins who thump our chests and make our Senators dance for us to appease our sense of outrage.
Wow, Oliphant's really got his finger on the pulse of America. And I'm sure everyone he knows voted for Kerry as well.
Let's try to explain something, Tom. In no way does anyone remotely right of center or libertarian consider this matter "settled". We see it, and rightly so, as a continuing violation, an erosion of rights by those more interested in collectivization and accumulation of power in the hands of government than in the people they represent. Brownback, Coburn, and oh Lindsey Graham too, seem to understand that just a little bit. They are new and thus not as entrenched in the facist thought of you and yours who believe you know better than the rest of society, not just educationally, but in deciding what is best. Your failure is that you continually do not refer back to the wellspring, the foundation of our law. You assume the socialism since the New Deal is all the law we have ever had or will ever have and that anything else is either from people below your concern or opinions that no longer are relevant in the modern age.
Luckily for the rest of us, we see for what it is that such opinions are more relevant now than they ever were. Swallow these tasty morsels of logic from the great James Madison himself.
As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.
Amen, brother...
Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.
And so we have...
I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.
60 years after the New Deal, 40 years after the Great Society, by George I think James is onto something here... This is what Oliphant needs to review. After you get done with 1st year government and US History, give me a call Tommie, and we'll play this game again.
Tom Oliphant, a well-known and very left-leaning columnist for the Boston Globe, illustrated quite well on PBS the other day how he can't understand what the big deal about the Kelo decision is.
Tom Oliphant, Boston Globe: "Well, what's interesting -- to me, anyway -- has been the much greater concentration on the social issues on the left side of that committee table than on the right. I mean, okay, defending the right to choose is a big deal and will be so for the next decade. I suspect it'll probably exist after another decade, though we're uncertain about what the form is. What surprised me today, given that Senators and Congressmen often will just simply reflect the heat they get from their constituents, is the vigorous nature of this opposition to a rather mundane eminent domain case from New London, Connecticut, this Kelo thing. I mean, as you know, this issue has been around for decades, especially connected with urban renewal.
It's the primary reason our sainted Brooklyn Dodgers became the Los Angeles Dodgers. But all the way down that side, the younger ones especially, who maybe aren't quite as used to the heat and the bright lights, were reflecting this. And Roberts was really pushing back, I thought. Much as he wouldn't give, he wouldn't talk to them about when life begins or when it ends, but he also was trying to explain to them, you know, almost like 'read the Kelo decision.' There was a very explicit connection there with the eminent domain involved with an urban redevelopment plan for the area as a whole.
And there wasn't anything all that special about it, really, and I think he expressed some mystification, that I felt here, and I think what Brownback, Coburn, I heard Lindsey Graham, too, I think were reflecting were younger Senators who got a lot of heat on an issue that they weren't expecting and reflected it."
See, it's all a big understanding, we're just latecomers who don't understand issues that were settled 30 or 40 years ago. We unwashed masses, those of us who cannot see how the Fifth Amendment could be used to justify the seizure of private land to give to other private figures by the government are really just backward cretins who thump our chests and make our Senators dance for us to appease our sense of outrage.
Wow, Oliphant's really got his finger on the pulse of America. And I'm sure everyone he knows voted for Kerry as well.
Let's try to explain something, Tom. In no way does anyone remotely right of center or libertarian consider this matter "settled". We see it, and rightly so, as a continuing violation, an erosion of rights by those more interested in collectivization and accumulation of power in the hands of government than in the people they represent. Brownback, Coburn, and oh Lindsey Graham too, seem to understand that just a little bit. They are new and thus not as entrenched in the facist thought of you and yours who believe you know better than the rest of society, not just educationally, but in deciding what is best. Your failure is that you continually do not refer back to the wellspring, the foundation of our law. You assume the socialism since the New Deal is all the law we have ever had or will ever have and that anything else is either from people below your concern or opinions that no longer are relevant in the modern age.
Luckily for the rest of us, we see for what it is that such opinions are more relevant now than they ever were. Swallow these tasty morsels of logic from the great James Madison himself.
As a man is said to have a right to his property, he may be equally said to have a property in his rights.
Amen, brother...
Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.
And so we have...
I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.
60 years after the New Deal, 40 years after the Great Society, by George I think James is onto something here... This is what Oliphant needs to review. After you get done with 1st year government and US History, give me a call Tommie, and we'll play this game again.
posted by Rob Beck | 12:29 PM
1 Comments:
The phrase, "Ivory Tower" comes to mind. :-)
Indiana is poised to become one of the growing number of states that will limit the use/abuse of eminent domain. Rep. David Wolkins chairs a committee studying the issue. The good news- Wolkins invited two speakers to make their case: the Reason Foundation, and the Castle Coalition (as in, your home is your castle).
Those wanting to make public comment can do so as I did about a month ago at the first meeting. The direct route is to attend the next meeting on the eminent domain issue, which will be held Wednesday, September 21 at 1pm in the House of Representatives Chamber, 3rd Floor, Statehouse. The agenda for the 9/21 meeting has been posted. Public comments will be taken, so I urge supporters to attend and to speak out.
You can also write or phone: 1-800-382-9841.
State Representative Dave Wolkins
Indiana House of Representatives
Room 401-8, Statehouse
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Don't leave it to chance. Be heard and help push the envelope all the way to the most restrictive ban on eminent domain abuse possible.
Post a Comment
<< Home