tom clark
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2005
- Messages
- 609
- Location
- St. Petersburg, Florida
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom Clark
This would just be too funny to be true. From the boortz site. I bet finding investors would be nooooo problem at all! enjoy, tc
WHAT COMES AROUND GOES AROUND
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]Last week's Kelo vs. New London, Connecticut decision in which the Supreme Court decided it was just fine and dandy for the government to steal your property was supported by Justice David Souter. Four days later the CEO of a pro-liberty organization decided he wanted to build a hotel. [/font]
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]The hotel he wants to build will be at 34 Cilley Hill Road in Weare, New Hampshire. He faxed the paperwork to the town to get the ball rolling. Who lives at that address? Yup...you guessed it...United States Supreme Court Associate Justice David Hackett Souter. So is this all a joke?[/font]
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]Nope...the group who wants to take Souter's house intends to get the investors together to build the hotel. Since the hotel will surely generate many more taxpayer dollars than Souter is paying, it therefore meets the requirements of the Supreme Court majority, including Souter, in deciding that "public use" is the same thing as being in the economic interest of the public. [/font]
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]So, will Souter fight the attempt to take his house under the eminent domain provision? Surely if he practices what he preaches, he will gladly hand over his property to the local government in exchange for whatever price they decide. All for the public good, you know. [/font]
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]Oh..and the name they've decided on for the hotel? It's going to be called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" and will feature the "Just Desserts Café." Good one[/font]
WHAT COMES AROUND GOES AROUND
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]Last week's Kelo vs. New London, Connecticut decision in which the Supreme Court decided it was just fine and dandy for the government to steal your property was supported by Justice David Souter. Four days later the CEO of a pro-liberty organization decided he wanted to build a hotel. [/font]
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]The hotel he wants to build will be at 34 Cilley Hill Road in Weare, New Hampshire. He faxed the paperwork to the town to get the ball rolling. Who lives at that address? Yup...you guessed it...United States Supreme Court Associate Justice David Hackett Souter. So is this all a joke?[/font]
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]Nope...the group who wants to take Souter's house intends to get the investors together to build the hotel. Since the hotel will surely generate many more taxpayer dollars than Souter is paying, it therefore meets the requirements of the Supreme Court majority, including Souter, in deciding that "public use" is the same thing as being in the economic interest of the public. [/font]
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]So, will Souter fight the attempt to take his house under the eminent domain provision? Surely if he practices what he preaches, he will gladly hand over his property to the local government in exchange for whatever price they decide. All for the public good, you know. [/font]
[font=helvetica,arial,sans-serif]Oh..and the name they've decided on for the hotel? It's going to be called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" and will feature the "Just Desserts Café." Good one[/font]
