Democrats & Liberals Archives

Not For Sale

I live in a small, quiet beachside community where everyone knows their neighbor. As I drive through the community, the sea of roadside signs that dot the landscape of every yard strikes me. What is so striking about roadside signs during election season? These are not campaign signs, they are “Not for Sale” signs.

This sleepy little town is in a fight for its very survival. It was inevitable I suppose. You see this town is smack dab in the middle of three large metropolitan areas, with direct access to a major expressway, railways, and a nearby port. All things that have made this town a magnet for would be developers.

The town has been successful fighting off developments until now. What makes this different is that a powerful developer has been planning a 500-acre transfer station in conjunction with the state, all in secret. The state has said it will use eminent domain to take land that has been in families for generations. Local officials only recently found out about the development because the developer applied for an expansion of the town's wastewater treatment plant.

The wastewater treatment plant has been running at full capacity for a few years and the city has been looking for ways to fund an expansion. The developer and the state are blackmailing the city by pledging to pay for the expansion but only if the city gives its blessing to the development. Local officials have turned the offer down flat.

With the recent ruling by the SCOTUS, allowing broad eminent domain power, the situation looks bleak. Perhaps, the most frustrating thing about this is that state and federal elected officials seem unwilling to help the people who elected them.

Instead our "do nothing congress" is worried about non-existent flag burning and writing discrimination into the Constitution. If our elected officials are so thirsty to amend the constitution, maybe they should start with eminent domain. The Fifth Amendment to the Constitution reads:

...nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

One of the cornerstones of freedom is the ability to own private property. The SCOTUS has interpreted "public use" to mean taking private property and giving it to another private entity. There are certain legitimate reasons for the use of eminent domain, but those reasons are few and far between. The Constitution needs to be amended to spell out the meaning of "public use" and restrict the use of eminent domain.

I am sure that such an amendment would be very popular with voters, much more so than non-existent flag burning and anti-marriage amendments. Of course, such an amendment would not even be considered by our leaders, as they never know when they might want to snatch your property and give it to one of their big money donors.

The only way to get such an amendment is for the voters to demand it. Unfortunately, the outrage over eminent domain is just a hushed whisper in the background.

Posted by JayJay Snow at August 31, 2006 1:30 AM
Comments
Comment #178446

— Jay Jay Snow— I agree with you, In Ohio, living
along lake Erie many people have small boat docks,
which are now being taxed an the state will
remove the dock if don’t pay. I believe many changes
are in store for all of us an most people can’t
see the trees through the forest. One World Order is
becoming a reality right under our noses. The
powers to be will make our Country an nonsovereign
Nation with out even changing the Constitution.
Can you imagine trying to take your case in Florida, to the Supreme Court an even think you
you might win.

Posted by: DAVID at August 31, 2006 3:05 AM
Comment #178449

I’m really sorry to see the topic of eminent domain assume an ANTI stand in a liberal blog site. The framers of the bill of rights showed stunning foresight by including the provision for eminent domain.

Certainly the provision puts a hard value on property, but it allows for the concession that where property is concerned, the needs of the community outweigh the needs of the individual. I’m sorry if your little town is the one standing in the way of those needs.

To be sure, eminent domain hearings should not be held in secret. It is only through such hearings that the needs of the community can truly be assessed. If this has not been the case, you have a true grievance against the officials holding the hearings, perhaps even a litigatable one.

The value of eminent domain is far too great to our society to dismiss it.

Imagine, if you will, an oil company shutting down one of it’s oil refineries because it realizes that the profit margin on the current amount of gasoline produced is signicantly less than that of a diminished supply. In today’s market, THIS is not an inconceivable event. The threat of eminent domain, as interpreted recently by SCOTUS, prevents this.

The reason the ‘outrage’ over eminent domain is just a hushed whisper in the background is because there is very little outrage. Eminent domain is rarely used. Hearings, and elections, prove it to be the will of the people.

In the case of Kelo v. New London, which SCOTUS ruled in favor of New London, many hearing were held before the city decided to acquire the property and sell it to a private concern. The overwhelming voice at those hearings was in favor of acquisition by eminent domain. While the case was being litigated, local elections were held. The case was a prominent campaign issue. The newly elected board upheld the decision to acquire the property in question.

If your cause is just, you have other venues of approach, short of constitutional amendment. That would help a few in the short run and harm many in the long run.

Posted by: Thom Houts at August 31, 2006 4:25 AM
Comment #178452

Eminent domain should not be used to turn private property over to private developers. It’s original intent was to allow municipalities to rehabilitate run-down areas into public projects, build highways, or construct other public works. It was not conceived, until recently, that it could be used to benefit private developers, and that property which was of high value and in excellent condition would become a victim.
There is more than a hushed whisper about this issue. It is very much a passionate topic of discussion all across the country. Most of us assumed that congress was going to act on this problem when they all ran to the media with their promises to do so. That is why most people sat back to wait and see what they would do. As yet, nothing has happened.
I also fail to see where “liberals” want these types of situations to occur, as the “conservatives” have stated. The sentiment against it seems to run across the boards, from what I can see.
I, for one, want to know what my local politicians feel about this issue. Everyone should ask the same questions in their areas.

Posted by: Cole at August 31, 2006 5:57 AM
Comment #178459
the needs of the community outweigh the needs of the individual

Now, where have I heard this before….

Thom, your view of community property is so against not only what the framers of the United States intended but also what provides the basics of simple individual rights that it makes someone wonder what the hidden agenda behind your supporting the actions are. Taking private property to give to big business? Why is it the liberals that are supporting this and the conservatives against? I think that the understanding that once this is an ‘accepted’ practice that it can apply to other areas is fully understood by the supporters.

As for there not being an outcry, I’m sorry but you are just wrong here. State after state has had to deal with the citizens screaming for state based laws to prevent this mockery of a practice from occuring, all of them, one by one, falling in line to outlaw it. The was a huge outcry and the results are being heard. That the author’s state has not been responsive yet does not mean that there is silent support for the destruction of one of our most important rights.

Posted by: Rhinehold at August 31, 2006 7:10 AM
Comment #178478

Jay Jay: The most appropriate, less cumbersome, & more effective course of action is to pursue an constitutional amendment to your state’s constitution.

You do not mention the state in which you reside. If you would tell us the state, I could provide you with the information necessary to begin working for such amendment.

Both the majority and dissenting opinions in the SCOTUS case you reference are problematic. Correctly, the majority opinion refers us to the states to address this very important issue.

As for the closedness of the process, you might want to look at your state’s statutes regarding open meetings, administrative procedures, and contracting procedures.

Posted by: Dr. Poshek at August 31, 2006 9:31 AM
Comment #178482

My grandfather had a house on the Cape on land that was turned into parkland and taken by emminent domain. Once the government got the house, they found they didn’t have money to upkeep their parks programs. Their solution was to rent the house out. In another case, the government sold one of the houses they had taken to arrange a swap for a different piece of land they wanted. All of this was pretty eye-opening. As you can imagine, the government did not pay my grandfather anywhere near what the land was worth.

Posted by: Max at August 31, 2006 10:29 AM
Comment #178484

I would find a way to let Sean Hannity know at Fox News. He is really big on personal property rights. He asks the tough questions to the right people.

Posted by: Brian B at August 31, 2006 10:33 AM
Comment #178487

Please, anyone who has one of the so-called “eminent domain” propositions on their November ballot should realize it’s not what it seems.

First of all, the signature drive in Arizona, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, and Washington State are funded by a single source…New York City-based real estate mogul Howie Rich.

Second, these propositions have nothing to do with eminent domain and everything to do with letting your neighbor (or you) do anything you feel like with “your” land and to heck with your neighbor…if their run-off ruins your investment in your land, oh, well…

Study these propositions well…Oregonians were fooled by their Measure 37…

Inform yourself BEFORE you vote or you may be quite sad and sorry afterwards.

Posted by: Lynne at August 31, 2006 10:48 AM
Comment #178493

I’m all for eminent domain. Let’s take the land owned by Big Oil and other corrupt price gougers and turn them into national parks, schools, and services to the poor. After all, the needs of the community outweigh the needs of the individual!

Oh, I must’ve forgot: eminent domain only applies to the haves taking from the have-nots.

Just another example of the class war the rich deny even exists.

Suggested read: 1984 by George Orwell.
The only prediction he got wrong was the date.

Posted by: ChristianLeft at August 31, 2006 11:13 AM
Comment #178495

This is one subject which liberals and conservatives alike can agree — eminent domain is being overused. SCOTUS was simply wrong in its Kelo v New London decision. And Thom you are wrong as well. The government propping up an oil company, as in your example, is wrong. It takes a vested interest not to see this.

Posted by: Charles Adams at August 31, 2006 11:19 AM
Comment #178504

Rhinehold:

As for there not being an outcry, I’m sorry but you are just wrong here. State after state has had to deal with the citizens screaming for state based laws to prevent this mockery of a practice from occuring, all of them, one by one, falling in line to outlaw it. The was a huge outcry and the results are being heard.

Yes, people were enraged at the Kelo resolution, but now big business has taken advantage of that outrage and forced proposition after proposition onto various states…they come off sounding like they are anti-eminent domain, but they are anything but. They are actually anti-zoning laws and people have been bitterly stung by the aftermath of voting for what they thought was one thing and being bitten in the butt by totally the opposite thing.

One would have to wonder why a NYC real estate mogul would be funding (to the tune of $900,000 in Arizona, $2.1 million in California, $337,000 in Idaho, $200,000 in Montana, $172,000 in Nevada, and $380,000 in Washington State) signature campaigns to get these non-eminent domain, anti-zoning laws on the ballot…these propositions do NOT protect people and the property. In fact these propositions do exactly the opposite.

The people are being lied to once again and big $$$ is behind it for its own advantage. Screw the people is their cry…taking advantage of one uproar to create a total advantage only for developers.

Posted by: Lynne at August 31, 2006 11:48 AM
Comment #178509

Eminent domain should not be used to turn private property over to private developers, Posted by: Cole at August 31, 2006 05:57 AM

That is exactly what has been done where I live. People were in court for years. Historic buildings were demolished. A business that had existed for 100 years was shut down, and others closed to make room for many condos, Cheeseburger in Paradise, Coldstone Creamery, Panera Bread, and Potbelly, whatever that is. The local historical society is in the home of a hardware store family, but the store was just knocked down. I had to move from a 110 year old building in the center of town, to an apartment complex on the outskirts in roadtown.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 31, 2006 12:10 PM
Comment #178510

I am really enjoying reading the howls and outrage concerning government over-reaching in the case of eminent domain by liberal postings.
Where was this same outrage when government confiscated our education system, began taxing for social reform and many other examples of a government grown to big and powerful? I read almost weekly these same liberals advocating taxing anyone wealthier than they are at higher rates. I read post after post about the need to take from those who have and give it to those who have not. Well, how does it feel when your cherished principle is gored? You ascribe all the blame to conservatives for the miniscule abuses of emminent domain. Not True? Look in a mirror and you will find someone else who is responsible for greed.

Posted by: Jim at August 31, 2006 12:10 PM
Comment #178512

These issues are only going to become more frequent. This is exactly why judicial nominations are so important. Instead of consistantly appointing people who takes a predictable hard-line stance on the side of big business, it would be much more appropriate to appoint those with a history of using their brain to understand the specific cases in front of them, and upholding the spirit of the law.

I can almost guarantee there will be a seminal ruling in the highest court in the foreseeable future that will fly in the face of the 5th amendment’s designs and give local governments the right to use the excuse of “best for the community” to serve selfish desires. When they do, it will be another nail in the coffin of George W Bush’s “compassionate conservatism”.

Then again, people are to blame as well. They know nothing about the true interests of their local elected officials and judges. They take much more interest in national news or an election in Connecticut. As a result, the local leaders listen to the one voice that is currently sceaming loudest: the developers who have seen profits recently diminish, and are desperate for the return of real estate bubbles.

Posted by: Kevin23 at August 31, 2006 12:15 PM
Comment #178515

Ive seen eminent domain work and I’ve seen how it tramples people. In Charleston, SC they recently built a new bridge over the Cooper River. The old bridge was rated the worst major span in the country, earning a 6 out of 100 on the NTSB’s scale. So they tore down two old bridges, one two lane and one four lane, and built a new eight lane bridge. In order to do so, they had to claim A LOT of land in Charleston by eminent domain. It was mostly poor black people on the wrong side of town who lost property, so it was the Liberals who were up in arms, but overall the projet had a huge impact on two communities and fixed what was a major safety issue.

The other side of the coin is what they are trying to do in New Orleans, using eminent domain to calim entire neighborhoods, and then sell that land to developers. As if these people hadn’t lost enough. There is no benefit to the community other than washing their hands of the problem. What they should do is allow people to rebuild, and those who can’t will have their properties condemned, and auctioned to the highest bidder. Funny how if you look, there’s usually a solution already in place.

Posted by: David S at August 31, 2006 12:24 PM
Comment #178519

Another scenario:

Take the subdivision here in Missouri that was targeted for eminent domain in order to build a shopping mall. Most were lower priced single family homes, but all were promised 125% of fair market value. For 18 months those who were renting in this subdivision slowly left as their leases could not be renewed. Several houses had already been on the market and had to be taken off, and sat empty for 18 months. The 25% of the remaining occupants left their homes for temporary housing, until closing.

And then, with only the briefest of apology, the developer backed out.

The property value of each home in this subdivision fell 40% overnight. Those that had their homes empty, put them up for rent or sale, but as you would expect, no one is interested in buying in that area thinking that it might occur again, and rents had to be lowered to the extent that those that were interested in renting were of the sort to use the home as a laboratory (if you know what I mean). Many of the houses are still vacant, and are being vandalized. People are finding it difficult to find financing to do repairs, and many owe much more on their mortgages than their properties will ever again be worth. This neighborhood was ruined by government and corporate greed.

Posted by: DOC at August 31, 2006 12:31 PM
Comment #178524

If you think eminent domain is bad, wait until you get screwed by a proposition that seems to take eminent domain away but really just makes it impossible for localities and states to do any zoning…will you like it when a pig trough goes up next to your suburban home???

Don’t believe it? Wanna read about it? Try High Country News and look at the article “Taking Liberties” in the July 24, 2006 issue…

Posted by: Lynne at August 31, 2006 12:38 PM
Comment #178533

Cole wrote:
“Eminent domain should not be used to turn private property over to private developers.”

I agree, and I think that pretty much says it all.

Lynne, excellent posts in this thread!

Posted by: Adrienne at August 31, 2006 1:08 PM
Comment #178543

JayJay:

Sometimes taking property from an individual owner and turning it over to a developer can improve the area and be a better deal for the community. Even in that situation, it is wrong.

Individual ownership is a bulwark of our society. If we allow government to intrude on our personal ownership, who can say where that might end.

I recognize the need for eminent domain. If not for eminent domain, its likely that our highway system could never have been built. And that highway system is in part responsible for our style of life in the US.

Lets not pervert the idea behind eminent domain. It’s interesting to see which members of the SCOTUS voted for and against it. Why they did so is still a mystery to me.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at August 31, 2006 2:07 PM
Comment #178550

JBOD - I actually don’t think that “we” have perverted the idea, just shed some light on existing perversions.

Of course you’re right. We should not forget the underlying motive for eminent domain as a means for civil progress. Roads, Schools, Community centers/services, are all very noble prospects.

It seems as though these have become the exception to the rule, whereas the rule is to turn the land over todevelopers for malls, pricey highrise condo/office spaces, and strip malls.

It may not be so in others, but it’s rampant in this area.

Posted by: DOC at August 31, 2006 2:40 PM
Comment #178554

It difficult (almost impossible) to get common-sense, no-brainer reforms and amendments passed when newcomers to congress are always outnumbered by irresponsible senior incubments that like things just they way they have perverted them.

But, no such common-sense, no-brainer reforms will ever be possible as long as voters keep re-electing irresponsible, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politicians, who always out-number newcomers to congress that would like to pass some badly-needed reforms, but can’t because of the incumbents that like things just they way they have perverted them for self-gain and security of their cu$hy, coveted seats of abused power.

The abuse of eminent domain laws is legal plunder. Think about who is behind it. The law has been perverted to do the very thing it was supposed to prevent.

  • Stop Repeat Offenders.

  • Don’t Re-Elect Irresponsible, Bought-and-Paid-for Incumbent Politicians !

Posted by: d.a.n at August 31, 2006 2:57 PM
Comment #178557

d.a.n - Okay. I’m not picking on you, but is there some sort of online V.O.I.D. encyclopedia that you just look up various subjects (eminent domain), and it’s all right there? Or are you writing it as you encounter different subjects. Because if you’re writing it, I have to compliment you on the fantasic job You and David are both doing.

Even if it’s not widely known by name V.O.I.D. is presenting itself in reality as an idea who’s time has apparently come.

Posted by: DOC at August 31, 2006 3:13 PM
Comment #178561

highway system is in part responsible for our style of life

More like for ruining the urban environment and creating a huge expense that has to be paid for, continually rebuilding of said highways, and especially the bridges, at the public expense. Like the strip malls, on a smaller scale, with their fees for parking lot maintenance that make the cost unaffordable for many small businesses. Even Walgreens is getting out of all those locations here.

irresponsible senior incumbents

Or inexperienced ideologue newcomers creating obstacles to doing anything that is not part of their agenda. I met my congresswoman, I like her, I agree with every one of her votes, and I will vote for her again.

Hmm, this one has not turned into another big love forum yet, Jay Jay Snow, right?

Posted by: ohrealy at August 31, 2006 3:56 PM
Comment #178585
DOC wrote: … an idea who’s time has apparently come.

Thank you. I certainly hope so. The longer we wait, the harder it will be to recover, and there is a growing likelihood the next recession won’t be easy to recover from. Not with simultaneous massive debt, rampant spending, massive borrowing, and non-stop printing presses at the Federal Reserve.

DOC wrote: … but is there some sort of online V.O.I.D. encyclopedia that you just look up various subjects
Well, not exactly; sort of. It’s not all at V.O.I.D., but VOID contains links to many of the places that have the information. There are also articles, a blog, voter education information, and we are always adding more. But, we don’t really have a well organized encyclopedia or database.

David R. Remer has an extensive amount of articles (hundreds, maybe thousands) that he has written over the years at his own disposal for research, which are available online at www.poliwatch.org and can be researched.

For myself, I use my web-site as a reference, which is not merely a Voter Education web-site, but offers common-sense solutions too (tax reform, healthcare reform, transparency, biometrics, ethics reform, etc.). Also, I have/use many hundreds of documents and captured web-sites (captured to Adobe acrobat usually), and data, and a hierarchical/organized list of web-site links on a wide variety of topics (which were created over the years to support the web-site facts). All together, it’s about 266MB of information in 1054 files and 31 folders (and growing fast all the time).

Some of the time, the research is done on the fly. That is much easier with a high-speed internet (I have a cable connection 8 Mbps Down/384Kbps Up).

Thanks again!

BTW, The Castle Coalition has a vast amount of information about tens of thousands of cases of eminent domain abuse.

Eminent domain abuse is a serious issue. This should not be happening in America. We need to stand together to stop Corporations from stealing private land (for profit; not for strictly public uses).

ohrealy wrote: Or inexperienced ideologue newcomers creating obstacles to doing anything that is not part of their agenda. I met my congresswoman, I like her, I agree with every one of her votes, and I will vote for her again.
That’s great. Who is it? What state are you in? Posted by: d.a.n at August 31, 2006 5:46 PM
Comment #178592

Who is it? What state are you in? Posted by: d.a.n at August 31, 2006 05:46 PM

Take your memory pill, as well as the other ones, d.a.n., we have already had this conversation before.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 31, 2006 6:14 PM
Comment #178600
ohreally wrote: Or inexperienced ideologue newcomers creating obstacles to doing anything that is not part of their agenda.

Then that would make that politician (now, an incumbent) irresponsible, and should not be re-elected if (s)he is truly irresponsible.

Unfortunately, voters have forgotten the one simple thing they were supposed to be doing, but they will (most likely) remember it … yes, their lesson is on the way … it is called pain and misery; it is a good teacher.

Regarding eminent domain abuses, Americans need to know that there have been over 10,000 cases of eminent domain abuse, from coast to coast, from 1998 to 2002 (i.e. the Institute for Justice documented more than 10,000 condemnations for private gain). There are more that haven’t been reported, so that 10,000 is only the tip of the iceberg.

With this much eminent domain abuse (over 10,000 cases in 4 years; an average of 6.85 cases PER DAY!), AND a number of other government abuses we are seeing, we may now being entering Stage (1) (above).

  • Government is stealing land (with the permission of the Supreme Court),
  • starting wars based on false intelligence,
  • rampant gerrymandering (defrauding voters),
  • abused presidential pardons (like the 140 felons pardoned by Clinton),
  • politicians that are above the law,
  • election fraud,
  • voting machines and a voting system that provides no way for any voter to verify their vote (e.g. a random number that could be looked up on the internet or newspaper)
  • ,
  • unsecured borders and unenforced laws to prohibit illegal trespass of our borders and ports (neither party will enforce the law; they both have ulterior motives; the tax payers are picking up the cost of over $70 billion per year)
  • ,
  • massive fiscal irresponsibility,
  • pandering (bribing voters with their own money),
  • massive printing of new money (about $154 billion per year), resulting in ever present inflation,
  • barriers to access to ballots for third parties,
  • out-of-control property taxes (driving some from their homes),
  • government that is FOR-SALE, 83% of all federal campaign donations ($200 or more) come from a mere 0.1% of the U.S. population,
  • declining public education,
  • out-sourcing, corpocrisy, corporatism, corporate welfare, stock fraud, corporations cooking the books,
  • falling median incomes AND more workers per household, the middle-income-class shrinking and being squeezed, 1% of the U.S. population owns 40% of everything (and growing), growing poverty,
  • an unfair tax system,
  • future generations being unfairly burdened with massive debt (total federal debt currently about $22 trillion),
  • etc., etc., etc.
ohreally wrote: Take your memory pill, as well as the other ones, d.a.n., we have already had this conversation before.
I don’t recall attacking you. Your unprovoked hatefulness say more about you than anything else.

Hmmmmmm…anyway, that seems familiar. Sorry. Don’t remember who your congress person is. OK, It’s a secret. : ) Too bad watchblog is not searchable. Anyway, it may come as a shock to you, but everyone here at watchblog is not making notes and remembering everything you write. I do remember you wrote the following:

ohreally wrote:
I gave up earlier in the month after threads were flooded with long nonsensical posts by Sicilian eagle, D.A.N., and joebagodonuts. I don’t come into here to read that crap.

How revealing? Oh well, if your happy, that’s fine. We all still (at the moment any way) have the right to vote for who ever we like and that’s your right. So you believe your congress person is responsible and accountable? I don’t recall seeing too many that even come close, and certainly can’t name 20, 50, 100, or even 268 (half of 535) in congress that are responsible and accountable. So you must be one of the very lucky few?

In many cases (not necessarily refering to you), people really don’t know much about their congress persons, and have not even done the most rudimentary research, and are not even aware of the way they vote. These days, it’s not that hard. Voting records are easy to find at a number of places.

Unfortunately, 90% of elections are won by the candidate that spends the most money. Government is FOR SALE, and slumbering voters have not yet felt the consequences of their inattention. But they will, eventually. Things take a long time. And, once the damage is done, they take a long time to undo also.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 31, 2006 6:50 PM
Comment #178606

In a suburb of the city I live in tried to get a bunch of homes through emminent domain in order to build a upscale shopping area and upscale restaurants. The problem they had was the homes they were trying to get were older homes that were well kept. The home owners fought and won.

Posted by: KAP at August 31, 2006 7:00 PM
Comment #178608

KAP,
That’s sad (and alarming). Americans should not be having to fight their governments to keep what they already own. Look at who is behind these things. Governments and corporations are in-league. Corpocrisy and corporatism is out-of-control. It’s not a global village. It’s global pillage.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 31, 2006 7:06 PM
Comment #178621

Check it out …

Who is it? What state are you in? Posted by: d.a.n at August 31, 2006 05:46 PM
Take your memory pill, as well as the other ones, d.a.n., we have already had this conversation before.
Posted by: ohrealy at August 31, 2006 06:14 PM

Ohreally, what is this on your web-site ? Why are you doing that? That sort of thing can work both ways.

Posted by: d.a.n at August 31, 2006 7:23 PM
Comment #178654

Ohreally, what is this on your web-site ? Why are you doing that?

I keep track of everything I write, and you evidently do not, since you repeat the same information over and over. To answer you, my congresswoman is Jan Shakowsky, and YOU were the one who convinced me of how wonderful she was by your listing of all her votes, and I agreed with every one of them, and told her so when I met her on August 16.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 31, 2006 9:12 PM
Comment #178655

ohrealy:

I’d submit that a good many things included in our way of life are made available due in part to the highway system. The food you eat from the grocery store, the clothes you wear, the ability to visit family,etc. All these are made possible in part by the highway system.

Every coin has two sides. Its a shame that you’ve decided to look at the negative side of the highway coin. Its there. But the positive side shines much brighter and is less tarnished than your negative side, in my opinion.

If we choose to, we can look at everything negatively. We can look at the great things airplane travel has allowed, and complain about the pollution. We can look at the automobile, and complain about the roads and pollution. We can look at computers and complain about the proliferation of pornography. We can look at having children and complain about the cost. And so on and so on.

The complaints would be true. No one likes pollution, whether of the environment or the internet, and no one likes added cost. But I’ll take the advancements that these tools have brought to us, and put up with the negatives, even while looking for solutions to improve the negatives.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at August 31, 2006 9:21 PM
Comment #178661

joebagodonuts, the automobile, the roads and their maintenance and waste of space, plus the wars we fought and will fight to keep fueling our tanks and jets, are all one enormous debt-ridden waste of our nations assets.
Not to mention the heat and environmental damage this all causes.

We all had food before the highways, in fact we had too much food, and the prices were too low and had to be subsidized by the government. Our way of life was the stuff of nostalgia. People sat on porches and talked to their neighbors, etc.

The nations highways are the biggest pork barrel project in history, see I-75 through GA and FL, and the roads around Atlanta that were built after Carters time, and he was one of the good guys.

Posted by: ohrealy at August 31, 2006 9:36 PM
Comment #178698

—-d.a.n— I believe you have convinced at least a few of us to look into V.O.I.D. a bit closer,
although those living in a void can not comprehend with any degree competenance, what
you are trying to say. These posts are like
a group of people sitting around at a party, telling jokes an every one is not really listening, because they are trying to think of
a better joke to tell. I will not speculate on
how many here on this blog. vote, but I would
guess most who do vote will at least give your
post a close look thanks for all your effort, at any rate! David

Posted by: DAVID at September 1, 2006 3:46 AM
Comment #178699

—-Jay Jay Snow—What do you think of the chances
of Congress overriding the Supreme Courts decision
on Eminent Domain ?

Posted by: DAVID at September 1, 2006 4:21 AM
Comment #178709

ohrealy:

I guess your negative outlook is one that I do not share. I doubt that you’d accept the alternative lifestyle that you’d be forced into, and I doubt you really even understand it. I say that as we both type words into a computer which would not have been invented, nor would have been able to have been produced.

Would we be better off still riding horses for transportation? I don’t think so. But….if you truly believe your own words, you can make your own difference. You can live as the Amish do, or as the Mennonites do, and determine for yourself which way is better.

My bet is that when challenged to do so, you will find an easier way out that will allow you to continue complaining without having to change your lifestyle. Its always easier to blame someone for all the problems than to actually step up and solve them.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at September 1, 2006 7:43 AM
Comment #178728
ohreally wrote: I keep track of everything I write.
Interesting. I suppose that is logical for any person so smitten with themself.
ohreally wrote: … my congresswoman is Jan Shakowsky, and YOU were the one who convinced me of how wonderful she was by your listing of all her votes, and I agreed with every one of them, and told her so when I met her on August 16.

Oh, really? Sorry, I don’t recall you visiting with Jan Schakowsky on August 16. Unfortunately, some people have other things to do, and can not devote enough time to remembering your schedule and activities.

Jan (by the way, it is spelled with a “c”) Schakowsky:

  • Voted NO on making it a crime to harm a fetus during another crime. (Feb 2004)

  • Voted NO on federal crime to harm fetus while committing other crimes. (Apr 2001)

  • Government isn’t FOR SALE. So, what sort of influence do such perk$ buy? Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-ILL) visited exotic locations at no cost to herself. Jan Schakowsky and her husband, Robert Creamer, spent six days in January 2006 at the Four Seasons luxury resort in Punta Mita, Mexico, courtesy of the Aspen Institute (with tax-exempt funds).
    Total MEMBER TRIPS: 3 .
    Total STAFF TRIPS: 2 .
    TOTAL COST OF TRIPS $9,646.80

  • Jan Schakowsky’s husband (Robert B. Creamer) was convicted and sentenced 5-Apr-2006 (5 months in prison and 11 months house arrest) on federal charges of operating three check-kiting schemes that defrauded banks out of at least $2.3 million while he ran an Illinois public interest group? Everytime Jan mentions “scandal” and “accountability,” she’ll be sticking her husband’s foot in her mouth. While decrying a culture of corruption, she’ll have to look no further than her own doorstep. Jan said “More than anything, I am proud of who Bob is … He has been a constant crusader,” Schakowsky said after he was convicted and sentenced. Creamer was also charged in the indictment with failing to pay more than $300,000 in federal income taxes for employees of the group and for himself between 1996 and 2000. Four other counts allege he filed false income tax returns between 1996 and 1999. In August 2005, Creamer pleaded guilty to two bank fraud felonies

  • Voted NO on reducing Marriage Penalty Tax by $399B over 10 years. (Mar 2001)

  • Voted NO on permanently eliminating the marriage penalty. (Apr 2004)

  • Voted NO on eliminating the “marriage penalty” tax. (Jul 2000) (Does Jan Schakowsky have something against marraige, that makes her want to support the marraige penalty tax?)

  • U.S. Action held its founding convention near Chicago in November 1999. Reps. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) both spoke. Both were Citizen Action members who were allegedly “nurtured” into candidates by Citizen Action. The once powerful, far-left Citizen Action virtually committed suicide in 1996 when it became a key player in the Teamsters’ money-laundering scandal.

  • Voted YES on funding for alternative sentencing instead of more prisons. (Jun 2000) (this is why so many repeat offenders are on the streets)

  • Voted NO on reporting illegal aliens who receive hospital treatment. (May 2004) (Oh well, neither party wants to enforce the existing laws)

  • Favors MEDS Plan: Cover senior Rx under Medicare (yet, another vast, costly system when Social Security and Medicare are already troubled)

  • Voted YES on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges.

  • Voted NO on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror. (Nov 2001) (according to the 1st Amendment, Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; … . this is just as wrong as those that voted YES, because Congress is not supposed to make these laws.)

  • Jan Schakowky calls for universal healthcare (Aug-2006) (bad idea; the worst thing that can happen is to let government create yet another vast, bloated, mismanaged system; a better approach is to eliminate the middle-men (government and insurance companies; like it used to be)).

  • Jan SCHAKOWSKY. stated: Mr. Speaker, the Republican do-nothing Congress is unwilling to tackle the issues of importance to the American people. (Hmmmmmm … isn’t that sort of like the pot callin’ the kettle black?)

  • … more …

ohreally, So, you are really OK with all that? Perhaps you didn’t know about these things? If you do, and that’s all OK with you, then fine. That explains a lot. It’s just a little difficult to understand how anyone can support some one who decrys a “culture of corruption”, but peddles influence, accepts tax-exempt gifts, and looks the other way when her own husband is a part of the “culture of corruption. But, perhaps, some don’t really know about those things?

Posted by: d.a.n at September 1, 2006 9:53 AM
Comment #178740

ohrealy,

“We all had food before the highways, in fact we had too much food, and the prices were too low and had to be subsidized by the government. Our way of life was the stuff of nostalgia. People sat on porches and talked to their neighbors, etc.”

What Norman Rockwell didn’t show you were the women that died in childbirth who were unable to get medical attention, or the children whose teeth rotted out by the time they were 20 because there was only one dentist within 30 miles.
The 16 year old with appendicitis would be just as dead as the 50 year old man that died in his sleep of old age.

Life in the Little House on the Prairie may have been simpler, but it was much harder, and much shorter.


Posted by: DOC at September 1, 2006 11:00 AM
Comment #178768
What do you think of the chances of Congress overriding the Supreme Courts decision on Eminent Domain ?

DAVID,

I would guess it would be a negative number. The sad thing is that if the SCOTUS ruled today in favor of marriage equality the Congress would not waste a milisecond drafting up a discriminatory amendment to override the SCOTUS. It is only when they have an opprotunity to actually help the voters who elected them that they do nothing. This is big business vs. average joe, this congress is going to favor their big business donors everytime. The only way to level the field is to vote out all incumbents who work against the people. Which is a large majority of them.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at September 1, 2006 1:11 PM
Comment #178770

JBOD,

As I wrote in my post, there are ligitimate purposes for eminent domain. The highway system, and other PUBLIC improvements are ligit. Taking private property and giving it to another private owner is WRONG, no matter how you look at it. If private property is taken for a public project then the land should be required to remain public property for public use only. If a private developer cannot find a suitable piece of property with a willing seller, then they should just be S.O.L. If the development is for the good of the community and the community as a whole wants it, then the community will find a solution themselves.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at September 1, 2006 1:25 PM
Comment #178775

Jay Jay— Good call, an if the Democrats take over, hopefully they will make it so. However if
the past is any indicator, I doubt it will
happen any time soon. Regretfully!

Posted by: DAVID at September 1, 2006 1:41 PM
Comment #178783

joebagofdonuts and Doc, I have no idea how old you are, but I can assure you that civilization existed well before highways, which is what we were talking about in regards to eminent domain. Doctors and hospitals already existed, and more people probably had better access to health care in 1950 than they do now. I do not live in a rural area, but I will be watching horses racing all weekend if the weather is good.

I actually live in the town that the original script for Mayberry was based on in an earlier period, before they hired Andy Griffith and set it in North Carolina because of his accent. We had Ralph the barber instead of Floyd, and a town drunk named Gunther instead of Otis.

At the first highway crossing soming into town, across form city hall, a man was there 5 days a week for years, hollering into a megaphone for people to slow down, after his son was killed there, until the city finally got some kind of injuction against his right to free speech.

At the second highway crossing, a senior citizen who could not cross the street fast enough, got hit by a car going at high speed down the highway, lingered on for a week at the hospital and died.

At the third highway crossing, a neighbor in my building, a sexton at the Episcopal cathedral in Chicago, was hit by two cars at high speed and killed instantly, while crossing the highway on his way to work early in the morning. They originally only published his address, and some friends thought it might have been me.

At the fourth highway crossing, on the street where I lived, a woman I did not know was killed, in addition to many other accidents between cars resulting in loss of life at just these 4 intersections of one highway.

Highways are scars on the earth, rivers of death and pollution, and totally unnecessary. We already had a network of railroads and canals connecting the whole country.

The food issue is really a joke. The produce in the stores here is mostly worthless garbage, shipped from farther and farther away, unripe and nearly frozen, and then rotting as soon as it ripens, instead of the way it was before this wonderful transportation system, fresh from local farms in season, and they in cans or bottles when not in season.

Jayjaysnow, I completely agree with you on eminent domain. If a piece of property becomes available and can be sold to a private developer to improve, that is fine. Where I live, the municipality bought 6 million dollars worth of properties, and handed it to a developer to build condos to increase the tax base. A shopping mall was built around the condos, but many of the businesses occupy the space at less than what the actual value of the real estate would be without the development around them, so they are really being subsidized at the expense of other businesses in the area, not to mention the ones that closed when the original buildings were torn down.

And d.a.n., you already gave me that information about my wonderful congresswoman months ago and I am sorry that you feel offended that I keep track of what I write.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 1, 2006 2:02 PM
Comment #178796
ohrealy wrote: I keep track of everything I write, and you evidently do not, since you repeat the same information over and over.

Well, this also may come as a shock to you, but other people read this blog besides you. Many are newcomers. Many are here for the first time. Thousands read the blog daily without even leaving comments. But, the logic of the statement above is not surprising coming from any person who believes others should remember everything they have ever written. However, in the future, we will try to remember that you have your own web-site where you have immortalized everything you write, and if we ever need to remember what you wrote, we will know where to look.

As for repetition, haven’t you noticed? Almost everyone here repeats and reveals the same philosophies over and over, including you. Even the threads repeat, over and over. My comments cover a wide range of topics and you, as a regular, may be familiar with all of them by now? What people write chages a little over time. Content changes a bit, as new events occur, and things get updated. Style changes over time, as people find new and better ways to say the same things. Sometimes, people’s viewpoints even change, as they learn more facts to lead them to see things differently.

ohrealy wrote: And d.a.n., you already gave me that information about my wonderful congresswoman months ago.
Not the same information. Some of it is new (and worse), but if that’s OK with youk then that’s fine.
ohrealy wrote: … and I am sorry that you feel offended that I keep track of what I write.
It’s not just what you write. You have excerpts of what I and other people write and it is taken out of context, and it is in many cases derogatory and makes personal attacks.

Also, the Watchblog rules state that “Republishing more than a paragraph of any WatchBlog content other than on WatchBlog, without the author’s permission is prohibited. All quotation of WatchBlog material must be accompanied by attribution, which may take the form of a hyperlink to the full article, or, the Author’s name, title of article, date of the article, and column in which the article or comments appear.”

So, I’d prefer that you remove my statements from your web-site. Especially where you are making derogatory statements toward me. I’m sure other people are not too thrilled about it either.

ohrealy wrote: … threads were flooded with long nonsensical posts by Sicilian eagle, D.A.N., and joebagodonuts. I don’t come into here to read that crap. When people respond to it, they just get more of the same.

You may not like reading joebadodonuts’ or Sicilian Eagles’ or my posts, but others might. What kind of blog would it be if the only people that visited it agreed with your approval only? And, did it ever occur to you that what you write (and have immortalized on your own web-site) is the very thing you call others writing (above)? Also, here’s an easy tip if there is ever anything that you don’t want to read (not just this blog, but on any web-page) … just scroll up or down with your mouse (i.e. click on scroll bar and move up or down). See how easy that is ? And, if you have one of those new wheel mouses, you can scroll up and down quickyly with the wheel.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 1, 2006 2:40 PM
Comment #178808

ohrealy - It sounds as though the world really accelerated around you, and you have chosen to dig your heels in and complain.

So be it.

I’ll second the advice JBOD gave, and suggest that you find your quiet corner of the world, where you can sit on the porch and talk to your neighbors.

In the meantime, we will continue to discuss realistic solutions to the issues that occur outside of Mayberry RFD.

BTW - Whenever someone starts a sentence with “I have no idea how old you are, but-“, it’s been my experience that you are about to get a fishing story.

Posted by: DOC at September 1, 2006 3:33 PM
Comment #178843

d.a.n., as far as I am concerned, your posts were always spam, now they are spam with bandwidth wasting graphics. I have no idea why you have not been banned from this site. You post off topic continually. You endlessly repeat that incumbents must be removed, whatever the topic is, and ignore all comments which contradict you. This is called trolling.

For the benefit of all those other people that you think are reading this site, incumbents are reelected because of the way their districts are drawn, and are more likely to be ousted in their own party primary than in the general election in most districts.

As for my writing in response to your posts, or the other non democrats and non liberals who continually post on this side of the forum. I believe I have a right to disagree with you, your tactics, and not want to read threads which start out on one topic, and end up being diverted to the same agendas over and over again.

Is this forum now owned by the VOID people? They sound like Lyndon Larouche people.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 1, 2006 7:36 PM
Comment #178857

ohrealy - This forum is for anyone who has an idea, commentary, complaint, solution, etc regarding politics and or sociopolitical issues. The posts by those the advocate V.O.I.D. have never changed the topic of a thread. In fact, it has been my experience that the posts are usually very skillfully written to add thier perspective to the current issue.

I had the same concern you have regarding noise in the threads, but soon realized that it was my issue, not thiers.

Regards

Posted by: DOC at September 1, 2006 8:11 PM
Comment #178864

The fact that I agree with so many liberals on this thread is an indication of how the nation truly feels about the imminent domain issue. But, you guys do realize who the majority opinion included, right? Your beloved Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer(both Clinton appointees), David Souter, John Paul Stephens,(both liberal on all other issues, as well)and Kennedy(moderate?) caved to the liberals as usual. In the meantime Justice O’Connor joined in a blood covenant with those evil Orwellian theocrats Scalia and Thomas along with their Sith Master Renquist in standing up for the little guy’s freedoms. Makes you wonder why anyone would want anything less than a staunch conservative nominated to the SCOTUS, right?

Posted by: Duane-o at September 1, 2006 8:27 PM
Comment #178872

DOC, thanks for the information that you are also promoting VOID. I had already figured that out. It sounds like another brainwashing cult, ignoring reality to serve the ends of a Lyndon Larouche style agenda.

I am done with this nonsense for the weekend, it is all horses and jockeys until Tuesday for me.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 1, 2006 9:34 PM
Comment #178875
DOC wrote: ohrealy, This forum is for anyone who has an idea, commentary, complaint, solution, etc. regarding politics and or sociopolitical issues.

DOC,
I sincerely thank you. Thank you!

Ohrealy,
You’d be wise to listen to DOC.

BTW, if you pay close attention, I only occassional initiate the topic of VOID, but am eager to join in when others are discussing it, since it is something of great interest to me.

ohrealy wrote: d.a.n., as far as I am concerned, your posts were always spam, now they are spam with bandwidth wasting graphics.
You are entitled to your opinion (for whatever it is worth). BTW, graphics are not banned. People use them all the time. The graphic above is very small in size and offers a useful tip for those that may not know about the wheel-mouse, or how to scroll up and down past the things they don’t want to read (as you apparently may not have been aware of).
ohrealy wrote: I have no idea why you have not been banned from this site.
Is that what you would like? How revealing? Guess it’s a good thing you are running it.
ohrealy wrote: You post off topic continually.
Uhhhmmmmm … like you are doing right now? Not true. Sometimes, but not as often as some think. Often, the root of many problems boil down to the same thing. Besides, I cover many topics and bring substantial data, information, analysis, research, potential solutions, and commentary to the debates. Besides, haven’t you any concept of free speech?
ohrealy wrote: You endlessly repeat that incumbents must be removed, whatever the topic is, and ignore all comments which contradict you. This is called trolling.
So, I repeat myself. Everyone does too. And, this site has thousands of readers per day. Many are infrequent. Many are regulars. I’m just blunt and to the point, and write as though there is no such thing as regulars. But the fact is, regulars repeats themselves here everyday. That’s OK with me. It takes time to really see where people stand; what their philosophy is. They all have their own ideas that they are passionate about and want to peddle, or test, etc. That’s OK with me. Obviously, not with you.

So, what you are doing now is off topic and personal. Now you accuse me of trolling. Since when was debate trolling? Again, if anyone here is violating the rules, it is you. I, like others, care deeply about certain things, and am free to debate those things here as long as the rules are followed.

ohrealy wrote: For the benefit of all those other people that you think are reading this site, incumbents are reelected because of the way their districts are drawn, and are more likely to be ousted in their own party primary than in the general election in most districts.
It only partly has to do with gerrymandering or district boundaries. It has more to do with money, partisan politics, partisan warfare, and the vast, unfair advantages of incumbency. 83% of all federal campaign donations come from a mere 0.1% of the U.S. population. Also, access to ballots by third parties and independents is sometimes being blocked by the two main parties.
ohrealy wrote: As for my writing in response to your posts, or the other non democrats and non liberals who continually post on this side of the forum.
Is that a complete sentence ?
ohrealy wrote: I believe I have a right to disagree with you,
Of course you do. Who ever said otherwise?
ohrealy wrote: your tactics,
What tactics? Are they in violation of the rules? I’m not the one making personal attacks on others, as you did to me (completely unprovoked), and copying what others write to another web-site (out of context and without the authors permission). If you will recall, you attacked me first with snotty comments about taking memory pills and other pills. I’ve also noticed you making personal attacks, bullying others, making snotty remarks, and without any provocation.
ohrealy wrote: … and not want to read threads
No one ever said you had to read anything you don’t want to. That’s what the graphic above was all about. All you have to do is scroll up or down past the articles you don’t want to read. It’s even easier if you have a wheel mouse.
ohrealy wrote: which start out on one topic, and end up being diverted to the same agendas over and over again.
If you don’t read them, then how would you know that? Perhaps that’s the problem?
ohrealy wrote: Is this forum now owned by the VOID people?
I rarely bring up VOID unless someone else does, or asks a question. This blog is privately owned, and has nothing to do with VOID whatsoever. What are you afraid of? Anybody disagreeing with you?
ohrealy wrote: They sound like Lyndon Larouche people.
Nonsense. The only one simple thing VOID ever promoted was for voters to not re-elect irresponsible incumbent politicians; don’t just pull the party-lever; that’s what voters were all supposed to be doing all along. That’s all. No vast conspiracy theories or schemes here.

I will restate this however. You are extracting excerpts of what others write to a web-site external to watchblog, and you are not doing so with permission or with reference to the original thread, or name of the authror. What you are doing is taking it completely out of context, and including your own derogatory commments, and is in violation of watchblog “Rules of Participation”.

So, if anyone is in violation of watchblog rules, it is you. Your very own web-site states:

This blog is mostly a collection of articles and pages that I enjoyed or wanted to use as references. Any copywright infringement is unintentional, and any article can be removed at the request of the writer or copywright holder

So, if you are a man of your word, I would appreciate it if you would comply with watchblog participation rules, and remove excepts (taken out of context, with no reference links to the originating link, and without permission) of what I have written from your web-site.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 1, 2006 9:46 PM
Comment #178876
ohrealy wrote: DOC, thanks for the information that you are also promoting VOID. I had already figured that out. It sounds like another brainwashing cult, ignoring reality to serve the ends of a Lyndon Larouche style agenda. I am done with this nonsense for the weekend, it is all horses and jockeys until Tuesday for me.

ohrealy,
More name calling, eh?
Now, you calling DOC a facist like Lyndon Larouche (a facist demogogue)?
Of all the comments I’ve seen of late, it is your comments that most closely resemble the very thing you call others (e.g. Lyndon Larouche), and have no tolerance or respect for others opinions, as evidenced by your snotty comments above about DOC, joebagofdonuts, me, and Sicilian Eagle. Way to go. Seig Hiel!

Posted by: d.a.n at September 1, 2006 10:12 PM
Comment #178878

Fighting out of the blue corner, this man is a liberal blogger who regularly infringes the copyright rules of Watchblog by posting content without permission on his own website. Being the average liberal, he probably stands 5’5” tall and weighs in at 110 pounds soaking wet.. the master of left-wing disaster… OH-Reeeeaaaallyyy

Formerly fighting out of the red corner but now fighting out of the green corner. This man is an incumbent destroyer with more links than Bob Evans and his trainer DOC in his corner. He stands 6’2” and weighed in at 220 pounds until his hunger strike to protest the unfair advantages of incumbents and now weighs in at a trim 185 pounds. The incumbent’s nightmare, d.-the VOIDBOYaaaaaaaaa.nnnnnnnn.

Alright gentlemen, we want a tough, clean fight. No low blows, no elbows and no rabbit punches. When I say break, you stop punching. Any questions ohreally? d.a.n.? Allright, touch gloves and come out swingin’!

DING DING!!!!!

Posted by: Duane-o at September 1, 2006 10:24 PM
Comment #178881

Duane-o,

HA HA HA HA HA Ha Ha Ha Ha ha ha!
Funny!

How did you know that?
I am 6’2” and 220 (exactly), but wish it was closer to a trim 200. 185 might be a little too skinny (even less than after graduating from High School). Was the a lucky guess?

Wow, you have been paying close attention…yes, formerly a Republican, but now Independent.

Careful … you might end up on ohrealy’s web-site (taken out of context). : )

Bob Evans? The musician?

Very, very creative. Good one!

Posted by: d.a.n at September 1, 2006 11:13 PM
Comment #178882

DUANE-O

HOLDING!!!!!!!! New Ref!!!! New Ref!!!!!!

Sandra D. !?!?!?!?! (gasps and dies)

Nah!….not so much!

d.a.n has never taken a word of direction from me. In fact, in the very few times that we’ve blogged in dual discourse, I have been the greater for it. The man knows what he’s doing. He certainly doesn’t require my talents.

Quite honestly, the fact that V.O.I.D. and its contributors, never persuade or direct a person to vote a certain way is in my opinion, very admirable, and really f^&*ing rare. They have a potential solution that is viable to every denomination.

All they want is to give people an option.

As for the 110 Dem. (shhhhhhh! He’s asleeeep by now!)

Take an equal piece of paper and color half red and half blue.

Fold it in half again, where there is a crease in the middle of each half of the blue and red. And fold once more.

8 sections, 4 blue, 4 red. Blue is 1,2,3,4 - and Red is 5,6,7,8.

I am on the crease between three and four. Ones and Eights irritate the snot out of me.

Posted by: DOC at September 1, 2006 11:21 PM
Comment #178889

DOC,
Thank you very much.

On the crease between 3 and 4 ?
Ahhhh … like this ?

Yeah, I know what you mean.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 2, 2006 12:43 AM
Comment #178910

d.a.n., having a life, my response to you is this:

Race 1 nothing? I will probably bet on Lantz on Victory Sweep

Race 2 razo jr on Lucha

Race 3 razo jr on tour daura

Race 4 chris emigh on Manitowish
Razo jr on bold sterling

Race 5 emigh on American man
Razo jr on dynalympic
Do you want Douglas on Delafield?

Race 6 emigh on beta capo
Douglas on storming marine?
Razo jr on It’s a danzig

Race 7 Emigh on Joe W
Razo jr on BravNable

Race 8 Emigh on whichever horse he rides

Race 9 Do you want Douglas on Flight Ready?

and

On another day c’mon c’mon
With these ropes I tied can we do no wrong
Now we grieve cause now is gone
Things were good when we were young

With my teeth locked down I can see the blood
Of a thousand men who have come and gone
Now we grieve cause now is gone
Things were good when we were young

Is it safe to say? (c’mon c’mon)
Was it right to leave? (c’mon c’mon)
Will I ever learn? (c’mon c’mon)
(c’mon c’mon c’mon c’mon)

As I make my way c’mon c’mon
These better nights that seem too long
Now we grieve cause now is gone
Things were good when we were young

With my teeth locked down I can see the blood
Of a thousand men who have come and gone
Now we grieve cause now is gone
Things were good when we were young

Is it safe to say? (c’mon c’mon)
Was it right to leave? (c’mon c’mon)
Will I never learn? (c’mon c’mon)
(c’mon c’mon c’mon c’mon)

Is it safe to say? (c’mon c’mon)
Was it right to leave? (c’mon c’mon)
Will I never learn? (c’mon c’mon)
(c’mon c’mon c’mon c’mon)

And know this day these deepened wounds don’t heal so fast
Can’t hear me croon of a million lies that speak no truth
Of a time gone by that now is through


about as relevant to the topic as your continual nonsensical posts.

Oh and I will gladly remove your name from all my posts in response to you in my blog, to which you have also posted in the past. I can not decide what to replace your name with, but it will certainly be something creative.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 2, 2006 11:02 AM
Comment #178925
ohrealy wrote on his web-site: posts to watchblog lyndon larouche troll site paranoid jackass, having a life, my response to you is this (substituted for the above: d.a.n., having a life, my response to you is this: ): Race 1 nothing? I will probably bet on Lantz on Victory Sweep Race 2 razo jr on Lucha Race 3 razo jr on tour daura …

How revealing. Please continue the demonstration of proving you are what you call others.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 2, 2006 12:55 PM
Comment #178927

ohrealy,

watchblog has nothing to do with VOID. All parties and organizations (Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Green Party, Libertarians, VOID, etc.) are able (and do) advertise on this blog and other sites. That is how these sites afford to stay online.

You do a great disservice to this excellent blog-site by calling it a “Lyndon Larouche Troll Site”, and such comments merely demonstrate an underlying intolerance, ignorance, intolerance, and arrogance.

As for trolling, making hateful personal attacks on others, and posting nonsense, you need only to look in the mirror to see the most guilty of the accusations you hurl at others, as evidenced by your very own statements above.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 2, 2006 1:14 PM
Comment #178929
ohrealy wrote: Oh and I will gladly remove your name from all my posts in response to you in my blog, to which you have also posted in the past. I can not decide what to replace your name with, but it will certainly be something creative.

That is in violation of the watchblog “Rules of Participation” and may also violate other copyright laws. Your site still has excerpts of things others have written, and removing the name is even more in-violation of watchblog “Rules of Participation”. Please remove all of my writings from your web-site.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 2, 2006 1:24 PM
Comment #178933

Ohrealy, you are also in violation of blogspot.com Terms Of Service

Posted by: d.a.n at September 2, 2006 2:17 PM
Comment #178938

Ladies and gentlemen, referee Duane-o has called a stop to this contest at two minutes, thirty five seconds of the second round for the winner by way of knockout despite enduring headbutts and having his ear bitten off by a very dirty opponent and STILL INCUMBENT DESTROYING CHAMPION OF THE WORLD D.THEVOIDBOYAAAAAA.NNNNN.

d.a.n.
That really was a lucky guess on your dimensions! Or maybe I just used my own size since I’m also a disgruntled Republican who has now jumped ship. You and I are exactly the same size, my friend. Two years ago I was in extreme training and was at 190 lbs. Then I met the woman who would become my wife and went up to 205. Then she got pregnant and I went up to 220!! I thought SHE was supposed to get fat!

Anyway, ohreally is exhibiting behavior we often see from extremists who don’t have the chops to back up their arguments. Name calling and just general immaturity. Keep up the excellent work with VOID, I think you got something serous going on there!!

Posted by: Duane-o at September 2, 2006 3:35 PM
Comment #178942

Duane-o,

I truly appreciate your creative humor and encouraging comments. Thanks!

… and I went up to 220 !! I thought SHE was supposed to get fat!

Ha Ha! Yep … know what ya mean. Same thing here after gettin’ married. Seems like marriage has a way of doin’ that. 190 lbs is pretty darn trim. But still, 220 lb on a 6’2” frame is not anywhere close to what anyone would call fat, but would personally like to shed about 15 lbs, which isn’t too hard with a little more time on the elliptical.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 2, 2006 5:03 PM
Comment #178943
My grandfather had a house on the Cape on land that was turned into parkland and taken by emminent domain. Once the government got the house, they found they didn’t have money to upkeep their parks programs. Their solution was to rent the house out. In another case, the government sold one of the houses they had taken to arrange a swap for a different piece of land they wanted. All of this was pretty eye-opening. As you can imagine, the government did not pay my grandfather anywhere near what the land was worth.

Wow, Max. That’s infuriating. Until a few years ago, I did not realize how out-of-control eminent domain abuse had become. Now, looking at all the cases (tens of thousand between just between 1998 and 2002 at the Castle Coalition), and the Supreme Court’s decision to pave the way for more of it, it’s clear that government and corporations, in-league, are plundering the citizens of this nation. We must all stand up to it, or we may find ourselves to be the next victim.

Posted by: d.a.n at September 2, 2006 5:20 PM
Post a comment