Of all the myths of the left, the most exasperating and pervasive (perpetuated by its media propaganda machine and trumpeted by blowhards like Ted Kennedy) is the fantasy that conservatives are rich, cruel, plutocrats who get their kicks evicting widows and orphans on Christmas Eve, whilst liberals - salt-of-the-earth-types, don't you know -- are champions of the powerless and downtrodden.
The Supreme Court decision last week in Kelo v. City of New London should lay to rest that lie for all time.
Kelo was a classic confrontation between the little guy and powerful, moneyed interests.
The high court's five doctrinaire leftists decided to let New London, Connecticut demolish a middle-class neighborhood - small businesses (some in the same family for generations) and private dwellings (one lived in by a married couple in their '80s, for over 50 years) - to make way for a riverside development, including a hotel, health club and office complex.
In keeping with its penchant for rewriting the Constitution to suit its whims, the court's Stalinist majority (Stevens, Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter and Kennedy) expanded the 5th. Amendment's power of eminent domain -- which allows government to take private holdings for "public use" (schools, roads and the like) for "just compensation" - into the stratosphere.
New London argued that "public use" should be more broadly interpreted as public benefit. In other words, because the use planned by a developer will hypothetically provide more tax revenue and new jobs, it should be allowed to bulldoze a neighborhood -- and all the memories, hopes and dreams contained therein.
Say the magic words -- revenue enhancement -- and a liberal's eyes begin to gleam; saliva forms at the corners of his mouth. Whatever feeds government's insatiable appetite for revenue (while simultaneously throwing a few scraps to the left's corporate cronies), must be constitutional!
Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (who often mistakes the Constitution for her conscience) got it right this time - as did those heartless conservatives, Rehnquist, Scalia and Thomas. In a scathing dissent, O'Connor noted that the ruling was Robin Hood in reverse (take from mom and pop businesses and elderly homeowners, to bestow on corporate giant Pfizer, future occupant of the office space).
O'Connor: "Any property may now be taken for the benefit of a private party, but the fallout from this decision will not be random. The beneficiaries will likely to be those citizens with disproportionate influence and power in the political process, including large corporations and development firms."
This latest judicial obscenity is courtesy of those who passionately proclaim their tender regard for what they condescendingly call working families. Stevens et. al., are the face of the monstrosity liberalism has become. If Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and Taliban Dick Durban had their way, all nine justices would be intellectual clones of Souter and Ginsberg.....
Read the whole thing.
No comments:
Post a Comment