 | | The Supremes sing another sour note
|
|
The state can favour one (presumably well connected) private individual over another, to the point of using eminent domain to take what rightfully belongs to one person and give it to another: (URL) enough, this time it was the "liberal" side that (...) (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: The Supremes sing another sour note
|
|
(...) What's so strange about that? :-) You are correct; brutal decision! JOHN (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Supremes sing another sour note
|
|
(...) Well isn't it the "liberals" who are supposed to be "down" on "big bad corps"?? from the article: "The court's decision drew a scathing dissent from Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who argued the decision favors rich corporations." Hence the (...) (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Supremes sing another sour note
|
|
(...) The "liberal" side is always sour:-D JOHN (19 years ago, 24-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Souter Farm target of hotel proposal?
|
|
(URL) case this link goes stale, apparently someone has made a proposal that Justice David Souter's(1) farm in NH be condemned under eminent domain and used to site a hotel. It's pretty clear the proposal is a protest but I found it interesting (...) (19 years ago, 29-Jun-05, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
