Friday, June 24, 2005


The Supreme Court yesterday, in it's lamdmark Kelo v New London Decision, struck a blow for progressive change. The Court ruled that goverment has the right to take private property by eminent domain, even if it is to be used by a private developer. This is a sound decision. Many of the property owners subject to a city's condenmation are longtime owners with substandard dilapidated properties. The fact is, what yuo see is what you get. These owners are not going to inprove their property, there by depriving the city or county of much needed tax revenue. This in turn drives up the taxes of other residents. This in it self should have conservative's flocking to support this landmark decision. Those justices opposed to this decicion were the «usual suspects»: Thomas, Scalia, Renquist and O Connor. Their minority opinions reflect a deep-seated malevolence towards improving our cities, likely based in racism.

38 Vignettes:

At 10:10 p.m., June 24, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous vignetted...


You are the dumbest son-of-a-bitch on the web.

Let's set aside the facts for a moment.

The government telling citizens that property that they have rightly paid for is no longer theirs, well, just because they say so, is not only juvenile, but more easily explained, is STEALING.

If you think that I am wrong, I can't help you. If you need some history, I can point you to this dude who was from Austria. He fought in a couple of wars, and managed to start one, all on his own, just because he thought that his fellow Germans needed some breathing room. Oh, I forgot, he was a Nazi, too.

Just in case you think that Nazi-ism and Socialism/Communism/'Progressivism'is somehow diametrically opposed to that supposed Fascist, Nazi stuff, Nazi is short for National Socialist Party.

So you champion the supposed 'right' of a city or municipality to, at will, take back 'blighted'property, only to give it right back to another private entity, so that the city's tax base can increase? Let me clue you into something Howie, YOU ARE A STATIST! Plain and simple. You think that power flows from the political elite, down to the large, stupid, unknowing masses.

You are not a real Communist. You can't stand that there are people who you think aren't as smart as you. You are 21 without an original thought of your own in your head.

You need to put down your Marxist reader and be forced to pick up a shovel and move earth, you sick fuck. Learn to work for a living.

Back to the facts now.

The neighborhood in question WAS NOT BLIGHTED! It was an older BLUE COLLAR NEIGHBORHOOD. It was filled with people who had lived in these houses for 50 years or more. They were NOT destitute! They are PEOPLE who want to keep what they worked to pay for, you little shit! That property is NOT there for some government twit to steal from the owners and give to someone else, JUST BECAUSE IT RAISES THE TAX BASE.

I'd like to kick your teeth down your throat you little shit.

Princeton education has not given you ANY vision of what it means to be an individual.

I hope you die a miserable death.

At 10:56 p.m., June 24, 2005, Blogger hooey vignetted...

Present a neocon with the facts and the truth and recieve a viscious ad-hominem personal attack in return.

At 11:03 p.m., June 24, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous vignetted...

howie, i don't understand your position on this issue. are you for it or against. your post was misleading. the supreme court's decision gave way for businesses like walmart, target to expand at the expense of working and middle class families. why is that a good thing?

At 2:42 a.m., June 25, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous vignetted...

Howie, I completely respected your right to have whatever opinion you choose on whatever political subject you feel you should present. However, you've lost me with this post. You really need to do your research. I'm from Ohio and I have one question for you. If an area is so dilapidated, if a family decides to fight for their home and even though they don't win the right to keep their home, how in the hell do they win a $280,000 judgment for that home??? How would a jury find to award them this amount of money for a home which is "substandard"?? I've seen the home in question. And pics of the neighborhood before it was levelled. I would've given my eye teeth to live in this neighborhood. You really truly need to do more research before you make a comment like this one.

At 2:54 a.m., June 25, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous vignetted...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

At 3:01 a.m., June 25, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous vignetted...

The above deleted comment was by me. I mistyped a link to view the pics of the homes which were designated as "blighted" so others who visit or Howie could take a look at them. These are obviously homes...not slums.

At 4:34 a.m., June 25, 2005, Blogger Drago Milovechek vignetted...

Message to the person's above please to not treatehn Howie with death ok He Is on;y younga and little It Is a small world you know maybe one day your out walking tap tap on you're shoulder then whack whack whack HELLO!! Drag0 was here LOL!!!

At 8:14 a.m., June 25, 2005, Blogger hooey vignetted...

Anonymous vignetted...
howie, i don't understand your position on this issue. are you for it or against. your post was misleading. the supreme court's decision gave way for businesses like walmart, target to expand at the expense of working and middle class families. why is that a good thing?

It is a good thing because:

1. Privte property is a relic of the past and should be phased out.

2. Government has the powr to do good by constructing much-needed housing.

3. By bringing in WalMart and Target we bring jobs to an economicly disadvantaged area; also the better ratables help stableize and lower the taxes for the city as a whle.

At 8:18 a.m., June 25, 2005, Blogger hooey vignetted...

Further, Many inner-city residents must travel long distances just to shpo for food and clohting. This can revitalize those areas by bringng in much-needed businesses. Isn't that wgat you conservatives are for? Accept the decision as a good thing.

At 12:08 p.m., June 25, 2005, Blogger Saintperle vignetted...

And here I would have thought you were opposed to the Bush Doctrine, i.e., "Let's steal everything we can from the individuals in this country and give it to our pals -- the builders and developers, the oil junkies, etc."

Didn't occur to you that the NUMBER ONE BUILDER/DEVELOPER to take that condemned property and build riverside attractions, office buildings, etc is good old BROWN & ROOT, HALLIBURTON, and their cronies.What a fucking coincidence, eh?

Sorry, but the place one lives outweighs some paid-off mayor/board of supervisors' "let's attract tourists" deal. Like tourists give a shit about the city any more than they cherish their rental cars. Tough shit to the aesthetes if the lack of paint offends them. If the building is up to code, then the locals approach it at their own risk.

Look at the record of how many "urban renewals" designed to bring in business have left NEW rotting buildings.

My home is inviolate, and it doesn't go down for some polyester shopping center speculator unless he's willing to run the crossfire between my house and my neighbors'.

It's not the issue of eminent domain -- it's the issue of using that to enrich some Halliburton-esque developer who's paid off the city inspectors and officials.

Local politics are ALWAYS subject to economic pressure. But destroying the lives of the residents of a city to make the city successful is pure tyranny. The residents ARE the city, and I wil not give up my home so assholes from Iowa can come drive by and say, "Oh, how charming, shall we stop for a foot-long hotdog and a ride on the tilt-a-world?"

I live in the SF Bay Area and have seen enough tourists to satisfy me for many many lifetimes.

Fuck the sellouts on the Supreme Court ... I used to think conservative meant respect for property rights -- but they've abstracted it... in short:


At 12:14 p.m., June 25, 2005, Blogger Saintperle vignetted...

addendum -- people living in inner-city areas have traditionally generated their own sub-economy which may not invite outsiders in to peer at them as if they were zoo animals.

You even notice how hostile tourist place employees are? Has to do with the destruction of one's own home for the benefit of the contractors and the visitors.

Increase your number of history courses and check out what happens when such things are done -- and then you might not wonder why this society is so fragmented with different economic and cultural classes at each others' throats.

Remember -- Bush et al tried to condemn multi-million dollar homes in Texas to build their Ranger Stadium, and 20 years of court cases forced thme to finally pay the people they steamrollered.

Sorry, but you are dead worng on the human rights issue here.

At 4:28 p.m., June 25, 2005, Anonymous anonymous vignetted...

Howie is parody...poor parody, but he is parody.

At 9:09 p.m., June 25, 2005, Blogger hooey vignetted...

Saintperle I thought you were a progressive! So I guess you stand with Thomas, Rehnquist, Stalia and O Connor. I am very suprised.

At 9:12 p.m., June 25, 2005, Blogger hooey vignetted...

anonymous vignetted...
Howie is parody...poor parody, but he is parody.


Read my educational vignettes. You might leanr something.

At 4:33 a.m., June 26, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous vignetted...

Ummm, question. Did you even look at the pics of the homes which were demolished here in Ohio or was it that you didn't want to come right out and say they deserved to be torn down because the doors were fallin off their hinges? You get stuck on innercity and the cause being racism, but I was hoping you might come up with some ingenuous reason for these homes being torn down that would change my mind. Guess I was mistaken. Too bad.

Miss Hobby

At 3:51 p.m., June 26, 2005, Blogger Saintperle vignetted...

NO -- I don't stand with Rehnfield and Scaley Tony and the rest -- that's a cheap retort worthy of a high-school smartass (or a moronic president -- "If you disagree with me, you're with my enemies.")
I stand for having spent 60+ years learning to notice the level of small-town corruption of local boards of supervisors, county officials, state officials, et al and I do not trust them to "do what's right" for a city if doing what's right involves throwing citizens out of their homes to "increase the tax base." Do you have any idea HOW LITTLE it costs to bribe a city or county official? I guess that's a form of egalitarianism, but.. I think you idealize the sort of people who are in and who play with local and state politics. Let me put it this way -- if a band of thieving craven shickenshit punks can run the white house and the senate and the house of reps, how much LESS noble are the locals with their cliques and payoffs? How high-minded and public-spirited is the Commissioner of Sewers in any town in New Jersey. You're at Princeton and that means you're close enough to Trenton and Camden and Philly to see, right there, what small-time greed and corruption can do to the noblest of ideals. But the fallacy in this particular thing is to think of a city as a "tax base" rather than a place where people live and work. And if they're all unemployed, well then, THEY can create an economic entity in their neighborhood and get the respect as human beings they deserve.

Also, perhaps you didn't really analyze the background of the case -- the REASON the town was on the skids was because the PREVIOUS great decisions made by the local govt were short-sighted and greedy and landed them in the mess in the first place.

So not on this issue ...

Sooner than that, I say we kill the bastards and render their flesh into sausage and sell it from sidewalk carts to the tourists who would flock from all over to taste "Long Pig Foot-Longs."

There is a difference between levelling the playing field and insuring a decent standard of life for all -- including housing and health care -- and someone selling your home and your home town to private interests so that strangers can come in a gawk at where people USED TO live. I thought YOU were a HUMANIST.

Look around you. Only bad politicians refuse to EVER admit they were wrong.

At 6:53 p.m., June 26, 2005, Blogger B&N vignetted...


When you start making complete, coherent arguments that are based on facts and stay with a theme, instead of drifting into pointless, and unrelated screeds, I might begin to take you seriously. Specifically, your assertion that somehow the dissenting judges made their decision, "based in racism," shows your petty obsession with attempting to stereotype those who disagree with you.

Oh, and by the way, though O'Conner was appointed by Reagan, she is hardly a 'neocon', or whatever you want to call her.


At 7:07 p.m., June 26, 2005, Blogger B&N vignetted...


I take it that you think someone 'threatened' Howie.

Who cares?

I give a shit that you are suppose to be some kind of tough guy who is a ranked kick-boxer.

Let poor little Howie defend his own mouth.


At 2:57 a.m., June 27, 2005, Blogger Drago Milovechek vignetted...

Howie you want I should fix them I can fix them

At 4:51 a.m., June 27, 2005, Blogger merkley??? vignetted...

i thought you were progressive.

progressives love the seizure of property by the people for the people right?

At 7:13 a.m., June 27, 2005, Blogger Drago Milovechek vignetted...

PLZ Everybody who are posting here. Can you PLZ be Civil we are are all Lady's and Gentleman ok

At 8:00 a.m., June 27, 2005, Blogger Fleur-de-leis vignetted...

hi howie! thankx for dropping by my blog. cya later, ciao!


At 3:58 p.m., June 27, 2005, Blogger The Whisperer vignetted...

Hi Howie. You never answered my question. Are you a virgin?
Blow-up dolls don't count.
Neither do either of your hands.

At 4:43 p.m., June 27, 2005, Anonymous RWing Nut vignetted...

To attempt to blame this abomidable decision on conservatives is absurd. In case you didn't notice there haven't been any new justices appointed to the SCOTUS in the last 11 years. The most recent appointee was under the Clintonista regime. Conservative talk radio and pundits are vociferously opposed to the idea that the state has the authority to take private property and award it to another private concern so the government can make more tax revenues. This ruling directly contradicts the Constitution.

In a perverse way I am glad that the high court came to this conclusion because it will raise public awareness of how out of control and nonresponsive SCOTUS has become. Hopefully it will accelerate the trend to appoint judges who will interprept the law as written and give Congress the backbone to rein in the judiciary.

At 4:57 p.m., June 27, 2005, Blogger hooey vignetted...

I do'nt blame consrevatives for this decision, and it is not abomimable. I give the progressive wing of the court credit where it is due for standing up for progressive change. So-called «private» property is an archaic concerp which must eventualy be phased out.

At 5:58 p.m., June 27, 2005, Blogger B&N vignetted...


Where did you get this bizarre concept that private property is arcane?



At 7:00 p.m., June 27, 2005, Anonymous Hankmeister vignetted...

This is a wonderful ruling for progressyves everywhere. There is more power given to the State which can arbitrarily declare a neighborhood blighted, then pay fair market value and then have developers increase the value of the property so the local governing authorities can skim off more taxes! Ain't liberal socialism wonderful?

All these anachronistic bourgeiosie notions of private property need to be challenged and dispensed with here in Amerika since this would generate a greater good that society as a whole can experience for ages to come.

Thank Gaia for the five progressyves in black robes on the Supreme Court who bravely sided with The People instead of just the little people. Maybe those five heroic justices can add a hood accessory to their black robes in upcoming decisions. I think it would help further identify them with such progressyve ideas!

All Praise to the State...once we take it back from the fascist neo-kkkons.

At 7:45 p.m., June 27, 2005, Anonymous RWing Nut vignetted...

"With Thursday's Supreme Court decision, Freeport officials instructed attorneys to begin preparing legal documents to seize three pieces of waterfront property along the Old Brazos River from two seafood companies for construction of an $8 million private boat marina. . . . The tracts of land would be used for a planned 800- to 900-slip marina to be built by Freeport Marina, a group that that includes Dallas developer Hiram Walker Royall. He would buy the property from the city and receive a $6 million loan from the city to develop the project."

The best of both brave new socialist worlds; the city strong-arms the property owner for the benefit of the developer and then loans $6 million in taxpayer funds to build the new PRIVATE marina.

Is this what you had in mind Howie? The forced transfer of property from one individual to profit another at the whim of the government.

BTW I wonder how much tax revenue Princton produces. It might be to the City's advantage, tax revenue -wise to "assist" a development consortium with converting the campus into a resort for discerning (wealthy) patrons. For the greater good of course.

Oh and Howie, since private property is an out moded concept, give me the headband you are wearing in the photo on your blog.

At 8:30 p.m., June 27, 2005, Blogger hooey vignetted...

«The City has carefully formulated an economic development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community including — but by no means limited to — new jobs and increased tax revenue.»

...Supreme Court Justice J.P.Stevens

At 9:29 p.m., June 27, 2005, Blogger B&N vignetted...


I suppose your last comment was suppose to answer the question that I posed to you.

Here's another. Do you actually believe that tripe from John Paul Stevens?

Large government has a long history in this world of screwing up everything that it touches. I would prefer to live with less, as opposed to more, regardless of the intentions of the 'economic development plan.' Government should be viewed with suspicion, those in power are not as benevolent as you think.

Sure, it all sounds good, but the facts of the Kelo case have convinced me that the local government was trying to line their own pockets at the expense of several homeowners.

I will continue to watch for more eminent domain abuse cases throughout the country. It is my guess that more of this kind of thing will happen. At first it will be just a few properties. It will pick up steam as a few more municipalities 'condemn' someone's property for having weeds that are more that knee high on them. Turn around and sell the deed on the courthouse steps for cash. Easy money.

Until someone gets it. It will happen.

Personally, Howie, I think you have been too deep with your Marx reading. I am sure that is in his little red book somewhere, saying something about taking away property and individual wealth will allow people to stop competing against one another and so more meaningful work can be done...blah, blah, blah.

Is that about right?

Fine. You do it. I don't care.

Leave me out.

Hey, another question. If competition is so demeaning and unimportant Howie, why, in a earlier post, did you boast of having a 3.8 GPA? I would have thought that grades would be meaningless to you?


At 11:35 p.m., June 27, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous vignetted...

Following the question in the previous blog should be the question....why are you even worried about obtaining a career to support yourself? Why advance your education? Why have somethin to brag about on paper? Is that all you hope to OWN when you eventually maybe graduate? A framed piece of paper? Do you PLAN on having a family? Do you plan on leaving them anything in the future? Or are you just on the planet to take up space?

At 4:50 p.m., June 28, 2005, Blogger Honest Abe vignetted...

"The specter of condemnation hangs over all property. Nothing is to prevent the State from replacing any Motel 6 with a Ritz-Carlton, any home with a shopping mall, or any farm with a factory."

...Justice Sandra Day O'Connor

At 8:03 p.m., June 28, 2005, Blogger Rootietoot vignetted...

I think Howie's a puppet of some sort. In his picture he resembles a marionette. Thus I conclude that his opinions are facetious, and he offers them up simply to stir the pot. Anyone that gets riled up about what he says is letting a chunk of carved and painted hickory determine their frame of mind.

At 11:50 a.m., June 29, 2005, Blogger Foo vignetted...

Yo howie,

first, tnx for your always enlightning comments, some I agree, some I don't. as good as it gets.
second, tnx for taking me into your link list.
third, just posted sumthin about dubyas speech yesterday and can't remember a quote I read of him from the time before he was prez. can you maybe help me?

stay in touch, stay fresh and free.

the foo

At 5:06 p.m., June 30, 2005, Blogger The Whisperer vignetted...

Howie, have you ever seen a grown woman naked? Your mother doesn't count, nor does your big sister as seen through a secret hole you drilled through the bathroom door. In print doesn't count either, whether it's Playboy, Hustler, the Internet or even National Geographic. No, I'm talking about a real woman, bare-ass naked just for you. Any of your Ivy League college girls? Or are you too much of a geek for them? Because I want you Howie. I want you to fuck my brains out Howie. My hot red cunt is dripping wet for you Howie. My nipples are burning Howie. FUCK ME!!

At 3:26 p.m., July 01, 2005, Blogger jomama vignetted...

So the gummint can kick just any ol'
dude off his property for the sake
of more taxes.

Revolution coming.

Is your powder dry?

At 4:43 p.m., July 08, 2005, Anonymous george vignetted...

How can you put up with this shit.

It's a rednech DOS attack!!

Ireland's written constitution has for years been interpreted as favouring private property over social or community interest, but this is changing and the "common good" is carrying more weight of late.

I gueas rhis is where you're coming from on this one, or am I giving you too much credt here?

At 2:52 p.m., July 28, 2005, Anonymous freethinker vignetted...

without reading any of the comments, let me just state... Howie, you are a total dumbass, communism didnt work in Russia, China, Cuba or any of the other countries that it has been tried on. China's economy didn't start growing until they "allowed" some capitalism. Hmmm. seems like a college educated fellow, such as yourself, would be able to see the correlation!


Post a Comment

<< Home