Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (243442)	7/26/2005 12:52:26 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572510

Ted, I know what eminent domain is and what its original purpose was for. But "Trump Boondoggle" definitely fits into what the Supreme Court just decided is legal. This isn't hysteria. This is a real court decision, and it's so unpopular that various state and local legislatures are passing bills restricting themselves from extending eminent domain as far as the Supreme Court did. That's fine by me. Many states, including WA state, had already restricted the use of eminent domain only to situations where the elimination of blight was desirable. It was mainly in the southern states where eminent domain was abused. Of course, the same people screaming now about eminent domain will be screaming when a freeway can't get built but that's no sweat to me..........I don't think freeways are the way to go in any case. ted

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (243442)	11/4/2005 11:00:03 PM
From: steve harris	Respond to of 1572510

the liberals/socialists/communists/progressives lost one battle yesterday and I would bet you never heard anything about it unless you listened to Paul Harvey today.... thomas.loc.gov\|/bss/d109query.html\|