• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Thanks to the Supreme Court, Freeport TX to seize Land

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: CPA
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: KarenMarie
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Not directly, but if the House and Senate would grow a pair and move to impeach those certain five judges who wouldn't know the Constitution if it slapped them in the face, then we have a fighting chance of this country not slipping any further.

Then again, that would be seen as a political move, and we can't have that, can we?
Click to expand...

This will not happen because we do not have ANY politicians that are looking after perserving the Constitution. We have one side that cares about NOTHING but getting re-elected and the other side who cares about nothing but attacking the other side.

They all suck and it is a total free for all. We have judges who flat out say that they look to international law before our Constitution when deciding what she thinks is best for this country. If that is not a wake up call, i dont know what is.

Sometimes, I am glad that I am old enough that I will not see the total ruination of this country.
🙁
Click to expand...

On the Federal level, there's Ron Paul. State wise, PA at least, I'm sure it's the same in the other 49, we have morons who like to give a lot of lip service.

You're right, it's a huge shame. I have no idea what Reagan was thinking when he nominated Kennedy. What a huge mistake that was. At least he got it right with Scalia and to a certain extent O'Connor. Bush better not fvck this up when he most likely will get a chance to nominate a SC Justice.
Click to expand...


It won't be Bush that fs up the judges, it will be the dems who are already gearing up on pounding any Bush nominee. The millions that will be spent on the SC nominees will be similar to a presidential election.
Click to expand...


If you look, you would see that the judges likely to be replaced are not the ones who voted against the majority. Bush's choices of nominees are irrelevant to this topic.
 
Perhaps we should listen to Jefferson

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by: Ze Mad Doktor
Perhaps we should listen to Jefferson

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The South already tried that once...
 
Originally posted by: Nitemare
Originally posted by: Ze Mad Doktor
Perhaps we should listen to Jefferson

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

The South already tried that once...
Click to expand...

Yeah, Lincoln put an end to that right.
 
Oh and isn't this just a new level of government merging with industry? Whether one controls the other or vice versa it all sounds more like communism than capitolism to me. Isn't communism supposed to have lost the cold war?
 
Yeah cuz they picked the wrong issue to do it with. They were right that they had the right to break away but they were wrong about slavery. It sucks that the issue of states rights hinged on slavery. If they wanted to break away over something the northerners didn't despise there wouldn't have been a shot fired.

Anyway, this affects more than just one region of the US. This affects all 50. Does anyone really believe that a single state is gonna make an amendment saying this can't happen? The politicos will be too busy counting their contributions for the housing development they seized last week.
 
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: CPA
It won't be Bush that fs up the judges, it will be the dems who are already gearing up on pounding any Bush nominee. The millions that will be spent on the SC nominees will be similar to a presidential election.
Click to expand...

I'm going to feel bad for Bush's nominee, whenever that time comes. (S)he's gonna get railroaded. Anything, no matter how trivial, this person did in their past is going to be brought up in the proceedings. Quite sad.
Click to expand...

Remember when they tried to nominate Bork? The dems were digging thru his garbage looking for stuff that woud embarrass him. And looking to see what movies he rented and etc. And then they tried to nominate Ginsburg, but it was found out that he smoked pot in college or something so he was 'disqualified' too. That is how Kennedy got in.

hahaha!!

Seems to me that we had a President that didn't want to deal with any of this and just appointed judges without votes... anyone else remember that?
 
Originally posted by: Ze Mad Doktor
Yeah cuz they picked the wrong issue to do it with. They were right that they had the right to break away but they were wrong about slavery. It sucks that the issue of states rights hinged on slavery. If they wanted to break away over something the northerners didn't despise there wouldn't have been a shot fired.

Anyway, this affects more than just one region of the US. This affects all 50. Does anyone really believe that a single state is gonna make an amendment saying this can't happen? The politicos will be too busy counting their contributions for the housing development they seized last week.
Click to expand...

If any state is going to do it, you'd think it'd be New Hampshire, what with "Live Free or Die", but I really doubt that's going to happen.
 
Yes I would have to agree with the NH being the state most likely to do it if it did happen. However, NH has too much open land so the need to seize land is not very high. If there is no need to seize land then there is no need for an amendment banning the seizure of land.

On the subject of NH I went there for vacation a couple summers ago. I think they do a decent job of living up to their motto. No seatbelt or bike helmet laws. Can carry sidearms. However, they still caved on the 21+ drinking age so even they aren't totally for it.

The south didn't listen to the entire DoI, they just wanted to take bits and pieces that benefited their situation but didn't want the all men are created equal part. You can't just take some of it. If they took it verbatim then nobody could have argued they didn't have the right to leave.
 
Originally posted by: Ze Mad Doktor
Yes I would have to agree with the NH being the state most likely to do it if it did happen. However, NH has too much open land so the need to seize land is not very high. If there is no need to seize land then there is no need for an amendment banning the seizure of land.

On the subject of NH I went there for vacation a couple summers ago. I think they do a decent job of living up to their motto. No seatbelt or bike helmet laws. Can carry sidearms. However, they still caved on the 21+ drinking age so even they aren't totally for it.

The south didn't listen to the entire DoI, they just wanted to take bits and pieces that benefited their situation but didn't want the all men are created equal part. You can't just take some of it. If they took it verbatim then nobody could have argued they didn't have the right to leave.
Click to expand...

The Federal government blackmailed the states.
 
I hope someone reminds me to SPIT on one of those Supreme Court judges' graves when they freaking die. I keep wondering if maybe that John Titor Civil War crap wasn't crap after all. ...
 
Yup, welcome to the new America. Land of the ...*cough* free.... *cough*

Very disapointing rulling. The more things like this I see the more frightened I am to think about what rights we'll still have left in the next decade or so. This is rapidly becoming a country I have no desire to live in.
 
Originally posted by: Chadder007
I hope someone reminds me to SPIT on one of those Supreme Court judges' graves when they freaking die. I keep wondering if maybe that John Titor Civil War crap wasn't crap after all. ...
Click to expand...

I'd rather decorate their graves with other bodily fluids, but spitting on it is easiest to do. 😉😛
 
I wonder what recourse the people who had land siezed can do to the city once this redevelopment plan goes to south. I mean if the proposed "economic " growth does not happen, i think the city should give these people an apology. And 150-250 jobs created is BS. i think thousands or tens of thousands of jobs might be considered for public use, but not under 1000 jobs created.

Garbage i say.
 
Originally posted by: RedCOMET
I wonder what recourse the people who had land siezed can do to the city once this redevelopment plan goes to south. I mean if the proposed "economic " growth does not happen, i think the city should give these people an apology. And 150-250 jobs created is BS. i think thousands or tens of thousands of jobs might be considered for public use, but not under 1000 jobs created.

Garbage i say.
Click to expand...

Mass assassinations.

The definition of 'public use' in this case has one meaning, and one meaning only, and it does not even acknowledge the amount of jobs created.
 
Originally posted by: flxnimprtmscl
Yup, welcome to the new America. Land of the ...*cough* free.... *cough*

Very disapointing rulling. The more things like this I see the more frightened I am to think about what rights we'll still have left in the next decade or so. This is rapidly becoming a country I have no desire to live in.
Click to expand...


And that is a sad thing. I really feel the same way. For as much talk as the government and many Americans do about "freedom" they never do anything to back it up. In fact most of their actions are in direct opposition to freedom. It's not getting any better either. Every year they take a couple inches. Most people don't notice cuz they never take much at a time but it all adds up.

There really isn't anything anything much left of freedom now anyway. What am I free to do in this country except work and pay taxes?
 
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: Ze Mad Doktor
hehe We are all gonna end up in Guantanamo for this talk.
Click to expand...

Hooray! A vacation to Gitmo! Shame those 'detainees' have more rights than us.
Click to expand...

And some of them are probalbly better fed and clothed than half people on the streets.
 
Originally posted by: mwtgg
Originally posted by: Ze Mad Doktor
hehe We are all gonna end up in Guantanamo for this talk.
Click to expand...

Hooray! A vacation to Gitmo! Shame those 'detainees' have more rights than us.
Click to expand...

Dude, if you think being locked up potentially forever without being charged and tried is a good thing, well I suggest "Club Gitmo" would lose it's charm in a hurry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top