Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Gadflyer)   Bad: Losing your property in a landmark eminent-domain decision. Worse: Having the corporation sue for "back rent" for the time you spent fighting the seizure in court   ( divider line
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

25521 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Aug 2005 at 7:40 PM (11 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»

454 Comments     (+0 »)

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

2005-08-19 01:51:34 AM  
So suddenly everyone is upset about government selling out to corporations... where were all you people during the energy bill, because you know, energy companies need tax breaks even though they're making record profits, or how about banning the importation of prescription drugs from Canada because American pharmaceutically companies don't like the competition.
2005-08-19 01:54:21 AM  
Scrotar: I can't wait for the evil gene to be identified.

That'll be the same day that the religion gene is identified.

2005-08-19 01:58:32 AM  
This usually isn't the gov taking unused private property to build a highway or something. This is the gov being the middle man for Wal-Mart and every corporation who can outlast you in court taking what they want from you unjustly. Anyone who supports emminant domain needs to sell their land to the government for less than sale value right now. After all, it is for the good of the community you jack asses.

What's private property should stay that way.
2005-08-19 02:05:06 AM  

The point remains that before an opresive gvt comes into power, rights are taken away slowly under the guise of public good.

ED as we know it goes back to '30s with Robert Moses, and depriving people of their property for the greater good is as old as America. So how much longer do we have to keep doing it until we become China? 100, 200 years?
2005-08-19 02:10:50 AM  
You commie farkers still haven't given an excuse for why all the left bending SC Justices voted for it. Anyone? It's because that's what the left believes in. The Government farking over anyone in the name of the common good. Just ask Castro or Stalin when they seized all private property in their countries for the common good.
2005-08-19 02:17:08 AM  
Now, I'm not condoning it or any violence but...if evil and corrupt CEO's and politicians started dissappearing and turning up sodomized with knives and decapitated a few days later I doubt too many citizens would be up in arms. It's still murder and should be dealt with and all that but I doubt the average citizen would lose any sleep over the issue.
2005-08-19 02:23:10 AM  
[image from too old to be available]
2005-08-19 02:33:13 AM  
mmm hmm- selling and moving right away sounds good, but they won't be able to do it w/ a legal judgement against the property.

Beerden- ED has been around forever, it's not an original idea from the Bush administration.

NLD CORPORATION is just that, a corporation, a legal entity, that's it. Flooding them w/ mail or email is probably going to leave some poor secretary up to his or her butt in extra work that no one of importance will ever see.

I am not a lawyer or accountant. I know a corporation has to list its' corp officers, but do they list their investors somewhere? Since this is a semi-public corp, would that mean the investors would be listed?

The investors are the ones to target, they are going to be reaping the profits.

I can accept ED for public use, ideally the majority of the population gains something. But in cases like this, the corporations take the land, reap the profits, and the money is ultimately put back into the hands of other private citizens in the form of higher return on investment in the corp.

That isn't even "public good", it's just redistribution of wealth.
2005-08-19 02:33:53 AM  
How the hell could the city councillors get away with this? I mean if that happened here, city hall would be burned to the ground.

Last year in my city a councillor refused to get involved in a transit strike and so someone dumped a truckload of cow shiat on his front yard. He had death threats and had to get police protection.

Eminent domain to build a Wal-Mart or whatever? There'd be rioting. This spring Wal-Mart and Home Depot applied to build stores on land THEY owned, and city still told them to fark off.
2005-08-19 02:46:28 AM  
thornhill - We're still well fed. Apathy is doing the job for us.

This might change soon, as the powers that be seem to think that they can get away with withholding food if the circus is good enough.
2005-08-19 02:56:11 AM  
carridin1 - The fact is, the government has many more gun (and better) guns than you ever could.

Hm. The fact is, Vietnam and Iraq.

During the civil war, friendly and enemy territory were delineated geographically. A class war would not be, and most of the soldiers would have lower-class backgrounds. I'll let you figure out what the implications of this would be.

The 2nd amendment has already guaranteed a plentiful supply of arms and ammunition for virtually everybody in the United States. Nothing can change this except time travel.

All class wars are avoidable. All the greedheads have to do is to settle for being only fabulously wealthy.
2005-08-19 03:11:58 AM  
if i ever heard of any of them going postal i probably wouldnt blame them... though who to go postal against would be questionable... fight the machine...
2005-08-19 03:12:13 AM  
what a terrible public relations move on the part of whatever corporation this is (did not rtfa). you'd think they'd just let the back rent slide.
2005-08-19 03:12:58 AM  
Does it make you feel less worthless when you become passionate about an issue? The supreme court made the right decision, states will make laws soon to fix this loophole, stop talking about retaking the country by force when you don't have enough energy to climb the stairs and leave the house.
2005-08-19 03:34:58 AM  
There's got to be more to this story. The linked blog is based on a news story that's over a month old now (July 14).

Searching on and for articles with "kelo" and "rent" only get one editorial letter. You would think as much of a hot-button topic as this is, some other news outlet would have picked it up. Anyone find any other news stories?
2005-08-19 04:29:50 AM  
This is how violent & bloody revolutions get started.
Great job Supreme Court... you stupid farkers.
2005-08-19 04:59:24 AM  

Yeah, well, that woman holding you in her hand in the 3rd photo of your profile is ugly.

Are you really so completely deficient in anything remotely approaching a rational, reasonable, intelligent thought that the best you can do is cast the slightest of meandering, pathetic, inconsequential aspersionions at her physical appearance (which, I assure you, is in no way lacking)?
2005-08-19 05:15:27 AM  
All those mentioning Highways... duh, that's actual public use.

The Constitution(OTUS) shouldn't even be an issue here.

There's nothing in the Constitution about not spitting on people, telephoning them at 3 in the morning, or shaving their pets. There are just some things you don't do.

Taking peoples property and giving it to someone else is just plain wrong, it's called Stealing.
2005-08-19 07:38:05 AM  
Well dam...
Just DAM
I'm so fregin mad i cant emagin how the former homeowners feel.

I wouldnt be suprised if some one whent timothy mcbay on this company.

Screw postal this is BEOND postal.
This is umm. hell what is beond postal anyway.
2005-08-19 08:07:42 AM  
A copy of the e-mail I just send to the NLDC:

A Connecticut Resident, on the Kelo Decision

As a resident of Connecticut (and one whose tax dollars are presumably helping to pay for the eviction of Suzette Kelo and Wilhelmina Dery), I am writing to express my extreme disapproval of the actions of the New London Development Corporation. I'm sure you remember the story of the insane Vietnam general who said "We had to destroy the village in order to save it;" do you not see a correlation with your idea that "We have to kick out the neighborhood residents in order to make the neighborhood a better place to live?"

And while forcing an octogenarian to leave the home she's lived in since birth is vile and despicable enough, charging such a woman over a quarter of a million dollars in back rent as punishment for fighting her eviction orders strikes me as purely spiteful.

I will be buying a house in Eastern Connecticut sometime in the next year, but I dare not do so in New London, knowing how little respect for property rights the city has. If you are bound and determined to give the Pfizer corporation some waterfront property, why not give them Ocean Beach? At least OB is the city's to give away.

If you can only save the city by evicting your law-abiding residents, consider the very real possibility that the city just isn't worth saving at all.
2005-08-19 08:18:53 AM  
What we lack now as a people are the balls to do anything about this. Give an inch, they'll take a foot. Give another inch, they'll take another foot.

How about this: instead of complaining we have a fark party on the properties of these poor people as the construction is scheduled to begin.

Of course, I won't be there because I don't care until it affects me.

//my first slashes
///not as fun as I thought
2005-08-19 08:54:42 AM  

States rights have been superceded for a long time now.

The only thing that is going to take them back at this point, is force.
2005-08-19 08:59:18 AM  
[image from too old to be available]
2005-08-19 09:01:58 AM  
xia might be on to something, Viva La Revolution!
2005-08-19 09:03:42 AM  
That's just terrible
2005-08-19 09:06:59 AM  
I really hope there are at least few pipe hittin nubianz in that neighborhood that have nothing left to loose and execute prejudice on these jews.
2005-08-19 09:49:13 AM  
Why the fark are people arguing over party lines about this? I don't care who the Supreme Court justices were selected by, they're still assholes for this decision.

Just think what the American people could do to this corporation if we tossed aside our party affiliations and just farking agreed to do something about the encroachment of our rights.

Although I suppose if the corporate media really reported on this thing, we'd end up with pundits from both sides arguing about irrelevant party politics, much like this thread. It's divide and rule, people. It's worked for centuries to keep uppity citizens down. Someone just pissed all over our fifth amendment. I do believe it's time to piss all over them, wether our piss be red or blue or purple (or a bad metaphor).
2005-08-19 10:14:41 AM  
All I know is that here in Canada (Hamilton, ON) there's a large plaza that was built about 10 years ago. The plaza has a large parking lot, except one fenced-off area. You know what that is? That's the house of the guy who refused to sell. His whole city block is a plaza, except his house.

Yep, that evil, Liberal Canada. Hell, Hamilton is even more left-wing than many parts of Canada, often voting for the NDP (left of the Liberal party).

See? Civilised countries can play nice.
2005-08-19 10:21:54 AM  
Radioactive Ass

OMFG! An honest intellectual respectful discussion from both sides of the fence. Isn't that against the rules on Fark?
Kudos to you both for being dignified in your conversation.

/sick of "it's the [left/right]'s fault" bs
//fix it or stop biatching
2005-08-19 10:24:47 AM  
PotVsKtl, is right. All this "blame the left, the right voted against it" crap is off target.

The justices that voted "yes" didn't vote that the homeowners should lose their homes - they voted that "yes" the state and local officials should control how eminent domain is used.

The justices that voted "no" were voting to take the control away from the states and let the Feds control eminent domain.

Since the right wing controls both the Executive and Legislative branch of the government now - letting them have control over eminent domain issues scares the hell out of me.

Our outrage and complaints about this case needs to be aimed at the NEW JERSEY officials that are allowing their citizens to be forced out of them homes - NOT at the SCOTUS.

In fact, each of should be worried about our own state's policy about this. Don't waste time protesting to the folks in New Jersey if you don't live there. You need to contact your local governemt and make sure they understand your position on this - to protect your own property.

If oranjello's comment is true, than Hoo-ray for Alabama for taking the SCOTUS decision and doing the right thing with it.
2005-08-19 10:28:56 AM  
Sorry, it's the Connecticut official we should be angry at, not New Jersey. My bad.

/don't hate on New Jersy
2005-08-19 10:49:04 AM  
2005-08-19 10:24:47 AM LiberalZombie

PotVsKtl, is right. All this "blame the left, the right voted against it" crap is off target.

The justices that voted "yes" didn't vote that the homeowners should lose their homes - they voted that "yes" the state and local officials should control how eminent domain is used.

The justices that voted "no" were voting to take the control away from the states and let the Feds control eminent domain.

I don't see Democrats introducing legislation to protect citizens from government land grabs. I only see Republicans pushing this legislation after the Kelo ruling.

To understand why eminent domain is so important to the neo-communist Democrats, familiarize yourself with the first plank of Karl Marx's "Communist Manifesto" ( aka: "The Democrat Bible").

2005-08-19 11:09:11 AM  
Libertarians crack me up, they claim they represent the party of freedom, when in reality their ideology would only lead to corporatism.
2005-08-19 11:19:27 AM  
Seems to me the issue here is that the Supreme Court decided to redefine the term "Public Use". It wasn't so much that they upheld the states rights to use eminent domain, that they gave them broader power in exercising it, beyond the wording of the consitution.

To understand why eminent domain is so important to the neo-communist Democrats, familiarize yourself with the first plank of Karl Marx's "Communist Manifesto" ( aka: "The Democrat Bible").

If this were the case, then the democrats would be pushing for the dissolution of marriage and family, which isn't on their agenda last time I checked. In fact, they seem to want to strengthen those ties by allowing more people to get married, whereas the republicans have taken the opposite stance. So please can we stop with the total bullshiat? I'm not particularly fond of communism, mostly because of it's blind obedience to the state, and it's renouncement of social and emotional ties to others, but everything has it's good and it's bad points. Socialized healthcare is one of those things that the more I see people in need of it, the more I believe that some kind of dual-system might be the most appropriate.

Case in point, close friends father had major heart surgery last year. He now owes $1XX,000 for that surgery, because his insurance only paid for 2/3 of it. He needed it to live. He didn't take away an organ from someone else in need of a donor. It was just straight out surgery, and no one else (probably) ended up being sacrificed for him to go through it. Still, you can always make the argument that if you can't pay, then too bad. I don't agree with it, but I see the point. Except, this is a man who:

A) Works at a medical university
B) Does cancer research that has led to significant breakthroughs in treatments and possible cures.

If anyone should have ready access to the medical care they need, someone who is working to save other people, at the university that is partnered with the hospital that performed his surgery, it should be someone like him.
2005-08-19 11:55:18 AM  
I hope they're not surprised when their new development gets burned to the ground multiple times.
2005-08-19 12:21:41 PM  
Noam Chimpsky:

I don't see Democrats introducing legislation to protect citizens from government land grabs. I only see Republicans pushing this legislation after the Kelo ruling.

You can live without a house. You can't live without life. Property is not the most important principle or right in a free society.
2005-08-19 12:22:54 PM  
buwolverine: A. My ass always knows what the fark is going on.

That's good. You give your momma less to worry about.

B. I already know nobody will care what happens to me. See A.

I do. What happens to you, ultimately happens to me. If I allow you to be abused by the system, I weaken myself. Plus, I believe in ideas.

C. But you can damn well bet it won't be a Libertarian militia uprising that does me in. And no I don't assume that the extreme of the Libertarian party presides over it, I don't assume the Libertarian party is organized enough for anybody to have any sway over it. You can't have that many divergent view points and expect to have a coherent political party, or coherent viewpoints. If they're smart they'll (all) shut-up about militias and campaign on the idea of less government intrusion in private life.

I agree. But this is how things begin. There is always a radical fringe that inspires people to action, and thought.

D. I take three orange pills a day, the red ones do nothing for the headaches.


Senator Bill Nelson (dem) is holding a press conference tommorow? (just saw this on the news I will have to check his website) at 11am in Orlando specifically to address Kelo, its impact on Florida, and what his plans are concerning it. Bill Nelson is also one of the Senators working with Sen. Mel Martinez (Rep.) to author a bill that limits the impact of Kelo.
2005-08-19 12:31:26 PM  
If anything does happen, we need to be sure that everyone in New London has read this site:

Jury Nullification...learn it, love it, live it.
2005-08-19 12:34:06 PM  
2005-08-19 12:36:51 PM  
The residents should 'salt the earth'. Get a few barrels of PCBs and bulldoze them into the dirt. Any fines levied by the EPA will pale in comparison to what they're already paying and won't matter when they file for personal bankrupcy. That way the development company will be on the hook for millions of dollars of environmental cleanup cost.
2005-08-19 01:37:32 PM  
America is dead. Welcome to Corporitica.
2005-08-19 02:41:10 PM  
New London Development Group -

165 State Street, Suite 313 -- New London, CT 06320
Phone: (860) 447-8011 -- Fax: (860) 447-3833

Dave Goebel - Chief Operating Officr - d­avemg­[nospam-﹫-backwards]cdln*or­g

Jenny Wronowski - Chief Finncial (sic) Officer - mailto:jw­ron­owski­[nospam-﹫-backwards]c­dln*o­r­g

John Brooks - Development Manager - jbro­o­ks[nospam-﹫-backwards]cdl­n­*o­rg
2005-08-19 02:57:26 PM  
All we need is for one person to die protecting their home from the U.S government.
2005-08-19 03:04:54 PM  
What's it going to take for an armed militia to march on Washington?

The sad thing is, most Americans are so damn apathetic to their own rights that they don't even care, as long as their house isn't the one getting uprooted.
2005-08-19 04:40:25 PM  
"If I allow you to be abused by the system, I weaken myself."

I hate to break it to you this way, but in a small part of Indiana, I am the system. And I rather enjoy certain elements of self abuse:)

"There is always a radical fringe that inspires people to action, and thought."

Yeah, but the succesful ones are always peaceful. The Whiskey Rebellion was put down, the Civil Rights movement won. Or at least came closer to winning. I have no problem with inspiring people to action and thought, I just don't like it being done by militias, that isn't inspiration, it cohercion. Anytime somebody feels the need to use a gun to make their point it isn't about having their ideas heard, its about power.
2005-08-19 05:02:36 PM  
buwolverine: Yeah, but the succesful ones are always peaceful. The Whiskey Rebellion was put down, the Civil Rights movement won.

Actually the Civil Rights movement was a combination of peaceful and violent movements. Each group had their own philosophy. It can be argued that one without the other would have caused the movement to fail immediately.
2005-08-19 05:34:26 PM  
"It can be argued that one without the other would have caused the movement to fail immediately."

I guess I would argue that the the anger the militants faction of the civil rights movement created within the Kennedy and Johnson administrations acutally slowed the process. They gave fuel to Hoover's fire to supress civil rights, and pretty well pissed off RFK for putting him in a bad position with Hoover.

If the only images of the Civil Rights movement had been peaceful demonstrations and violent white reaction to them it would have made the movement completely sympathetic to middle America who really didn't understand conditions in the deep south. And when the Black Panthers came on the scene if just scared the crap out of them, and gave the Conservatives faithful converts to the "Southern Strategy."
I think the moment the Southern Strategy gained traction the Civil Rights movement started to grind to a halt, peaceful and otherwise. Even today its still stymied, they just replace African-American with whatever minority that middle America is supposed to be afraid, gays, muslims, anti-Christian.
2005-08-19 07:58:35 PM  
Cynders: Why the fark are people arguing over party lines about this?

For exactly the same reason we argue over party lines for everything, including stuff that clearly has nothing to do with political parties, like Guantanamo abuses, the war in Iraq, the drug war, or the patriot act. We can't fix it, but we've fooled ourselves into believing we have some control over it.

It doesn't really matter *which* party you've fooled yourself into trusting, of course. You'll always find plenty of evidence the other guy's party doing the wrong thing, and plenty of evidence of your party talking about doing the right things.
2005-08-19 08:54:12 PM  
Horrible things happen to people everyday. People don't get into an uproar unless it involves property though.

Maybe when cars are partly biological, and can get HIV or ebola, having a humain outlook in life will become mainstream. Or, maybe we should just bring back buying and selling of human beings without a basis of skin pigmentation.
2005-08-19 09:57:28 PM  
2005-08-19 08:54:12 PM genericdefect

Horrible things happen to people everyday

real good excuse there.

Displayed 50 of 454 comments

Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | » | Newest | Show all

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter

Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.

In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.