> http://governmentpirates.com/
> Real estate developer and property rights expert Don Corace offers a
> ground-breaking, in-depth look at eminent domain abuse and other
> government
> regulations that strangle the rights of property owners throughout
> America.
> Government Pirates is filled with shocking stories of corrupt politicians,
> activist judges, entrenched bureaucrats, greedy developers, NIMBY
> (Not-In-My
> Backyard) activists, and environmental extremists who conspire to seize
> property
> and extort money and land in return for permits. Corace provides the hard
> facts
> about individual rights and offers invaluable advice for those whose
> property
> may be in danger...

> This supreme court decision was perhaps one of the darkest hours in
> our nation's history. Private property rights is the conerstone of a
> free society, where 'fat cats' cannot gobble the individual citizen
> up. No longer are we protected.

> "tooly" bellsouth.net> wrote in
> news:NDMkk.2728$IB6.1328@bignews8.bellsouth.net:
>

>> This supreme court decision was perhaps one of the darkest hours in
>> our nation's history. Private property rights is the conerstone of a
>> free society, where 'fat cats' cannot gobble the individual citizen
>> up. No longer are we protected.

>
> I'm surprised you're surprised, and apparently dismayed, by the Kelo
> decision, tooly. The Court merely ruled that gummints could act in the
> "public interest," and define what constituted the "public interest."
>
> You're a firm believer in the "public interest," aren't you?
>

>> You're a firm believer in the "public interest," aren't you?

> "Gummints" are entities that can be corrupted like anything else, and
> the people should always be on guard and protect those 'protections'
> that save us from bad government.

>'Gummints' in the modern era for
> example, can become talking heads of the rich and powerful....those
> who might want your and my land.

> "tooly" bellsouth.net> wrote innews:Bkqlk.3498$XB4.2253@bignews9.bellsouth.net:
>

>>> You're a firm believer in the "public interest," aren't you?

>> "Gummints" are entities that can be corrupted like anything else, and
>> the people should always be on guard and protect those 'protections'
>> that save us from bad government.

>
> How do we decide which is "bad gummint" and which is "good gummint"?
>

>>'Gummints' in the modern era for
>> example, can become talking heads of the rich and powerful....those
>> who might want your and my land.

>
> Ah, yes. "Good gummint" is gummint that works for the benefit of us "good
> guys," "bad gummint" is one that works for the benefit of those "bad guys."
>
> The trouble is, each of those guys thinks of himself as the "good guy" and
> considers his own interest to be the "public interest," and any interests
> contrary to his own to be "selfish personal interests," "greed," etc. ...

> Allowing gummints to seize the property of individuals in pursuit of the
> "public interest" in creating jobs, attracting development, enlarging the
> tax base, etc., is no different from forbidding farmers to farm their land
> in pursuit of the "public interest" in preserving wetlands, protecting
> wildlife habitat, etc., forbidding a property owner to demolish an
> unprofitable building pursuant to a "public interest" in historic
> preservation, heritage protection, etc., >

>

>> Allowing gummints to seize the property of individuals in pursuit of the
>> "public interest" in creating jobs, attracting development, enlarging the
>> tax base, etc., is no different from forbidding farmers to farm their
>> land
>> in pursuit of the "public interest" in preserving wetlands, protecting
>> wildlife habitat, etc., forbidding a property owner to demolish an
>> unprofitable building pursuant to a "public interest" in historic
>> preservation, heritage protection, etc., >

>
> This is the crux of your post I think and I strongly disagree. Siezing
> land for sake of hiways, schools, parks...for public use, is unfortunate,
> but ncessary. Siezing land to hand over to other private parties is
> treasonous to our freedom. On the former, government is acting in public
> interest; on the latter, they are acting a brokers on the free market with
> undue power of that siezure. Government 'OF and BY the people' should
> have no other justification to action except to serve. Creating new tax
> revenue is not servitude, but simply a justification to it's own survival ...

> This sounds like you are against the Kelo vs New London Supreme court
> decision?
> Publius was trying to support it.

> "tooly" bellsouth.net> wrote innews:Bkqlk.3498$XB4.2253@bignews9.bellsouth.net:
>

>>> You're a firm believer in the "public interest," aren't you?

>> "Gummints" are entities that can be corrupted like anything else, and
>> the people should always be on guard and protect those 'protections'
>> that save us from bad government.

>
> How do we decide which is "bad gummint" and which is "good gummint"?
>

>>'Gummints' in the modern era for
>> example, can become talking heads of the rich and powerful....those
>> who might want your and my land.

>
> Ah, yes. "Good gummint" is gummint that works for the benefit of us "good
> guys," "bad gummint" is one that works for the benefit of those "bad guys."
>
> The trouble is, each of those guys thinks of himself as the "good guy" and
> considers his own interest to be the "public interest," and any interests
> contrary to his own to be "selfish personal interests," "greed," etc. ...