Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
PSA
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 10/7/2005 5:32:17 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/7/2005 5:49:16 PM EDT by lippo]
Here we go again!

This is the worst yet. Over paid sports figures and their greedy owners will own your home, just so they can charge you even more to watch one of their pathetic games. Home owners/Property owners in a American?

My question is...who wants to bet when the first local government official is off'd by a pissed of land owner? You know it's coming, just like a terrorist attack, it's only a matter of time before it happens.

All your balls belong to me!

www.washtimes.com/national/20051006-120902-5838r.htm


The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Landowners must yield to ballpark

By Tim Lemke
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published October 6, 2005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District will begin using eminent domain to acquire parcels of land at the site of the Washington Nationals' ballpark by the end of this month, after unsuccessful negotiations with nearly half of the landowners.
   
City officials said they expect to file court documents to take over at least some of the 21-acre site in the coming weeks and have $97 million set aside to buy the properties and help landowners relocate.
   
The city made offers to all 23 landowners on the site last month but received no response from 10.  "We think there are some that we'll have good-faith negotiations with," said Steve Green, director of development in the office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development. "There are some we haven't heard from at all."
   
Many property owners on the site said the city's offers are inadequate. Others are suing the city on the grounds that it has no right to use eminent domain to acquire land at the site, despite a Supreme Court ruling affirming the right of municipal governments to take private property for the purpose of economic development.
   
In April, the city notified property owners on the site that they would be required to move out by Dec. 31. (I.e. Your land is ours NOW! Get out!) City officials said the District is on target to have title on all of the land by that date, but they don't expect to have full possession of the site until early next year, with construction on the $535 million stadium to begin in March. That would give the construction team, led by Clark Construction Group of Bethesda, about two years to build the ballpark in time for Opening Day of 2008.
   
Officials said that timetable remains realistic. Clark built the 80,000-seat FedEx Field, home of the Washington Redskins, in less time. "Twenty-four months is not bad," Mr. Green said. "There's always the possibility of doing it in 22 or 23 months."
   
Meanwhile, the D.C. Sports and Entertainment Commission has been sparring with the new Anacostia Waterfront Corp. (AWC) on the location of ballpark parking. The AWC, which the city created to promote development along the Anacostia River waterfront, said it prefers an underground parking garage beneath 600,000 to 800,000 square feet of office and retail development.
   
The commission said that would run up too many costs and take too long to build. "We're not going to do it," said Mark Tuohey, chairman of the sports commission. "We don't care what they say. There's no money." In order for parking to be built above ground, the commission must change a zoning requirement. A hearing before the zoning board on the issue is scheduled for Oct. 17, but could delay the process further. If the commission is denied a zoning change, it would have to turn to the D.C. Council for legislative permission or take the case to an appeals court.
   
"If we lose and it goes to the court of appeals, that takes years," said commission board member Linda Greenan. "That's not a good strategy." Any discrepancy over development of the stadium site could affect ballpark financing negotiations, which have reached a sensitive stage.
   
"It could cause confusion on Wall Street, which is exactly where we don't want it right now," said John Ross, a special adviser for the city's chief financial officer and a commission board member.
   
City officials insist on below-ground parking because it would fit with plans for a retail and entertainment district near the ballpark. They are considering removing parking entirely from the cost of the stadium and paying for it separately, using tax-increment financing or other revenue streams.
   
Mr. Green said the debate over parking is not delaying completion of a lease agreement for the stadium, which Major League Baseball says must be finalized before it announces the Nationals' new owner. "There's no real holdup," Mr. Green said. "It's just a very complicated document."
   
Copyright © 2005 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.

Link Posted: 10/7/2005 5:41:38 PM EDT
Well, at lesat it's for the children  
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 5:42:34 PM EDT
If it's in the name of baseball I can handle it.

<---- Huge baseball fan.


Now if it was the NBA, I would come out shooting.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 6:03:38 PM EDT
Well,  god only knows the infinate value of a fuckload of roid swilling jackasses with 10 million dollar contracts trying to hit balls with a stick has for the republic.  There is simply no other alternative to useing the barrel of gun to obtain enough room for them.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 6:06:44 PM EDT
Seems the Libertarians are the only one putting up a stink about it.....
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 6:14:59 PM EDT
I wonder what the 'offers' are...

If the city is lowballing, they should have to pay a bit more...

But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 6:16:54 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/7/2005 6:18:12 PM EDT by DoNotTreadOnMe]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...

If the city is lowballing, they should have to pay a bit more...

But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...



So you would be cool with a forced gun buy back as long as your getting a fair price?
Its about Constitutional rights...
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 7:14:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DoNotTreadOnMe:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...

If the city is lowballing, they should have to pay a bit more...

But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...



So you would be cool with a forced gun buy back as long as your getting a fair price?
Its about Constitutional rights...




+1

What ever happened to "private property" and "ownership"?

The more I hear, the more I am amazed at the pure lack of respect for Rights here in America. Not very many people know what they are anymore.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 7:27:15 PM EDT
Now we know why the District/City Gov't is so desperate to maintain the ban on handguns/AWB???
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 7:29:54 PM EDT
Which is why we need heavy hitters on the Supreme Court, not seat warmers.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 7:32:25 PM EDT
Which is why we need heavy hitters on the Supreme Court, not seat warmers.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 7:33:11 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/7/2005 7:38:04 PM EDT by dsg2003gt]
"sir we are here to remove you from the premises...oh shit!!!!" ......


bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang

....silence....
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 7:36:17 PM EDT
All your homeruns are belong to us!
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 7:51:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...

If the city is lowballing, they should have to pay a bit more...

But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...



The big issue here isn't eminent domain for the good of the general public.  What the SCOTUS ruled (abhorently) is that eminent domain can be used to take property which is then in turn sold or given for use to private individuals or companies, etc. for explicit profit.  So basically if big money wants what you have, the local .gov can step in to assist them and you have no recourse.  Unbelievable!


Big money goes around the world
Big money underground
Big money got a mighty voice
Big money make no sound
Big money pull a million strings
Big money hold the prize
Big money weave a mighty web
Big money draw the flies

Sometimes pushing people around
Sometimes pulling out the rug
Sometimes pushing all the buttons
Sometimes pulling out the plug
It’s the power and the glory
It’s a war in paradise
It’s a cinderella story
On a tumble of the dice

Big money goes around the world
Big money take a cruise
Big money leave a mighty wake
Big money leave a bruise
Big money make a million dreams
Big money spin big deals
Big money make a mighty head
Big money spin big wheels

Sometimes building ivory towers
Sometimes knocking castles down
Sometimes building you a stairway --
Lock you underground
It’s that old-time religion
It’s the kingdom they would rule
It’s the fool on television
Getting paid to play the fool

Big money goes around the world
Big money give and take
Big money done a power of good
Big money make mistakes
Big money got a heavy hand
Big money take control
Big money got a mean streak
Big money got no soul...

Big Money by Rush

Link Posted: 10/7/2005 7:57:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...



i don't.

the .gov is acting just like the mafia, or any organized crime mob.
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 7:58:18 PM EDT
Wouldn't it be nice if all these developers and their investors just woke up one morning and found out they were deceased?
Link Posted: 10/7/2005 8:16:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By LoginName:
Wouldn't it be nice if all these developers and their investors just woke up one morning and found out they were deceased?




That's what will have to happen.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 7:40:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By dsg2003gt:
"sir we are here to remove you from the premises...oh shit!!!!" ......


bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang

....silence....






Must have been an MG42 or the ever evil Full Auto AK.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:17:48 AM EDT
Remember, bad philisophy in the culture is at the root of all this.  It's why morally corrupt politicians get elected who, in turn, demand irrational selection criteria for Supreme Court judges who, by their nature of meeting said criteria, pass down rulings like Kelo vs. New London, thereby enabling governments to trample individual rights with impunity.

I'd like to offer words of encouragement, but for the foreseeable future things are going to continue getting worse.  Shooting of corrupt government officials will only lead to further tightening of the tyrannical noose.

Maybe during my grandchildren's lifetimes people will remember the true meaning of the term "liberty" and the proper laissez faire philosophy on which this country was founded will once again take hold.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:36:05 AM EDT
ED is a scourge
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:42:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...

If the city is lowballing, they should have to pay a bit more...

But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...




Whos side are you on?   wait...I guess it is apparent.

Pull your head out of your ass
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:45:45 AM EDT
I would NEVER advocate anything illegal, but I was just thinking how terrible it would be if one of the homeowners poisoned the ground with some kind of toxic, possibly radioactive waste.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:59:02 AM EDT
I hope these people stand up for their rights and fight these thugs. I say start turning the place into a fortress and have a good old show down with the bastards. Sure they might get you eventually but somebody has to get this out to the people so laws can be changed and the gov will see that they cant just take our shit!



GOV..........................................

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 9:14:09 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 9:15:17 AM EDT by FortyFiveAutomatic]
Damn it's saddening to see how many people are actually in support of this.  Bunch of fucking hypocrites -- you bitch about how the .gov may someday confiscate your arms, but totally support a government that commandeers people's homes (as long as they pay a "fair" price), all in the name of quite possibly the most boring sport known to man???  +1k pull your heads out of your asses.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 11:05:57 AM EDT
Doing this here in Texas right now.  The new dallas cowboys stadium will be built on stolen land.

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 11:12:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...

If the city is lowballing, they should have to pay a bit more...

But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...




I could be wrong, but I believe they are paying assessed value not appraised
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 11:14:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 11:22:54 AM EDT by lippo]

Originally Posted By Tannim:
Doing this here in Texas right now.  The new dallas cowboys stadium will be built on stolen land.






Will all the sports teams stadiums be built on stolen land?

And it will lead too:

Good by 2nd Amendment...

"it's ok, they paid a fair price for all of the guns you use to once own. You know, now the public will be safer!"

Good by private property...

"it's ok, you didn't want that car anyway, I know you didn't get a lot for it, but that was a fair price. Just think, you can use mass transit now. Just like the rest of us! You know it will make the enviroment cleaner and only the people in power actually "need" cars anyway."

Good by family owned historic property...

"That's ok. It doesn't matter that, the property was in your family for 150 years, I'm sure the housing project or the shopping mall will appreciate that you all held it for them for so long."

Good by YOUR property because the government wants to please the rich people...

"That's ok, you didn't want that lake front cottage after all. You know, it will bring in more money when the rich people from down state make vacation condos there."



Anyone that thinks the abuse of ED is "OK", I hope you get what you are asking for. You all will be bending over and taking it hard. Just like everyone else that's facing this.

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 2:03:33 PM EDT
sometimes I question whether or not the country would be worth dying for anymore. I know there's more good people than bad, but the bad have the power and the majority of the good don't fight back.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:02:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Tannim:
Doing this here in Texas right now.  The new dallas cowboys stadium will be built on stolen land.




And what makes it even more fucked-up, is that most likely a major chunk of the land grab and/or infrastucture will be paid for with your tax dollars.

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:04:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By barkley-addict:
sometimes I question whether or not the country would be worth dying for anymore. I know there's more good people than bad, but the bad have the power and the majority of the good don't fight back.



No, but there's plenty of people worth killing.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:06:49 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...

If the city is lowballing, they should have to pay a bit more...

But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...


Your cool with no such thing as private ownership fuck thats just sad.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:09:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...

If the city is lowballing, they should have to pay a bit more...

But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...



Another Commie fuck outed.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:10:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By barkley-addict:
sometimes I question whether or not the country would be worth dying for anymore. I know there's more good people than bad, but the bad have the power and the majority of the good don't fight back.




Just like 1775, it's not whether you think the people in this country are worth dying for, but whether or not you are willing to take a chance and give up everything in order to run the show. Our Founding Fathers WERE willing to give it all up, just to run the show and have things the way THEY wanted.



From a movie I saw tonight, which is very appropriate right now:

Winners MAKE the law. Losers have to FOLLOW it.


Guess which category we are in right now?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:13:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By david_g17:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...



i don't.

the .gov is acting just like the mafia, or any organized crime mob.



No they're not. They're serving the common good, according to Justice Ginsberg. The city will use that tax money wisely, I am sure.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:18:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dave_A:


But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...



Unreal. Does the concept of PRIVATE PROPERTY mean anything to you?

Does everything really have a price?

How much to rape your wife or kill your kids? Not sentimentally attached to them are you?

It's for a FUCKING BASEBALL STADIUM. If a person didn't want to sell AT ANY PRICE that is his decision.

And that is what is wrong with the ED ruling. And people who think like you are why it passed.

Situation is sad enough when it is truly for needed PUBLIC USE as defined by the FF.

It is criminal when for private use for something as fucked as a FUCKING BASEBALL STADIUM.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:21:25 PM EDT
These fuckers knew exactly what they were doing, they are putting this in SE. When I saw Anacostia, I wondered, a quick search found a SE address.

I dont know a lot about SE. I know its rich in old history, and noplace to play around in.


Sadly, these people will not fight for this, and will lose at the point of the the .gov sword.





The Union is lost.

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:36:10 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 6:37:18 PM EDT by TrashHeap]

Originally Posted By lippo:
Here we go again!

This is the worst yet. Over paid sports figures and their greedy owners will own your home, just so they can charge you even more to watch one of their pathetic games. Home owners/Property owners in a American?

My question is...who wants to bet when the first local government official is off'd by a pissed of land owner? You know it's coming, just like a terrorist attack, it's only a matter of time before it happens.

All your balls belong to me!

www.washtimes.com/national/20051006-120902-5838r.htm


The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Landowners must yield to ballpark

By Tim Lemke
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published October 6, 2005

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The District will begin using eminent domain to acquire parcels of land at the site of the Washington Nationals' ballpark by the end of this month, after unsuccessful negotiations with nearly half of the landowners.
   
City officials said they expect to file court documents to take over at least some of the 21-acre site in the coming weeks and have $97 million set aside to buy the properties and help landowners relocate.
   
The city made offers to all 23 landowners on the site last month but received no response from 10.  "We think there are some that we'll have good-faith negotiations with," said Steve Green, director of development in the office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development. "There are some we haven't heard from at all."
   
Many property owners on the site said the city's offers are inadequate. Others are suing the city on the grounds that it has no right to use eminent domain to acquire land at the site, despite a Supreme Court ruling affirming the right of municipal governments to take private property for the purpose of economic development.
   
In April, the city notified property owners on the site that they would be required to move out by Dec. 31. (I.e. Your land is ours NOW! Get out!) City officials said the District is on target to have title on all of the land by that date, but they don't expect to have full possession of the site until early next year, with construction on the $535 million stadium to begin in March. That would give the construction team, led by Clark Construction Group of Bethesda, about two years to build the ballpark in time for Opening Day of 2008.
   
Officials said that timetable remains realistic. Clark built the 80,000-seat FedEx Field, home of the Washington Redskins, in less time. "Twenty-four months is not bad," Mr. Green said. "There's always the possibility of doing it in 22 or 23 months."
   
Meanwhile, the D.C. Sports and Entertainment Commission has been sparring with the new Anacostia Waterfront Corp. (AWC) on the location of ballpark parking. The AWC, which the city created to promote development along the Anacostia River waterfront, said it prefers an underground parking garage beneath 600,000 to 800,000 square feet of office and retail development.
   
The commission said that would run up too many costs and take too long to build. "We're not going to do it," said Mark Tuohey, chairman of the sports commission. "We don't care what they say. There's no money." In order for parking to be built above ground, the commission must change a zoning requirement. A hearing before the zoning board on the issue is scheduled for Oct. 17, but could delay the process further. If the commission is denied a zoning change, it would have to turn to the D.C. Council for legislative permission or take the case to an appeals court.
   
"If we lose and it goes to the court of appeals, that takes years," said commission board member Linda Greenan. "That's not a good strategy." Any discrepancy over development of the stadium site could affect ballpark financing negotiations, which have reached a sensitive stage.
   
"It could cause confusion on Wall Street, which is exactly where we don't want it right now," said John Ross, a special adviser for the city's chief financial officer and a commission board member.
   
City officials insist on below-ground parking because it would fit with plans for a retail and entertainment district near the ballpark. They are considering removing parking entirely from the cost of the stadium and paying for it separately, using tax-increment financing or other revenue streams.    
Mr. Green said the debate over parking is not delaying completion of a lease agreement for the stadium, which Major League Baseball says must be finalized before it announces the Nationals' new owner. "There's no real holdup," Mr. Green said. "It's just a very complicated document."
   
Copyright © 2005 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved.





Yep, They'll steal your land and make the tax payers , suffer as well.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:39:12 PM EDT
The eminent domain decision is the worst thing to happen to this country since the New Deal.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:42:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By go3:

Originally Posted By Dave_A:
I wonder what the 'offers' are...

If the city is lowballing, they should have to pay a bit more...

But if it's just sentimental homeowners who are turning down a good offer because they just don't want to move... Too bad...

This reminds me of the folks who have been fucking over every attempt to expand the freeway back where I used to live.. WAAHH I grew up here (never mind that my real-estate value is super-low because I'm next to a major freeway, never mind a fair offer)...

Personally, I have no problem with eminent domain, so long as the .gov has to pay fair market price...



Another Commie fuck outed.



Another one of Dave_A's gems:


The above scenario is the EXACT reason why I say I'd have no trouble using lethal force, should I find myself on the 'Army' side of these oft-posted citizen-v-govt scenarios... In basically every case, the 'citizen' side is some reactionary numbskull who refuses to listen to common sense & reason, no matter what the cost of his little personal Alamo-stand....



From here.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:45:47 PM EDT
every person in America is now a renter, no matter what, you don't own your house.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:50:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By unkempt1:
every person in America is now a renter, no matter what, you don't own your house.



When they made people have to pay property taxes, that's when they started your house as a rental unit. Don't pay your property taxes and the government owns it. FREE and CLEAR.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:51:37 PM EDT
but this is worse than you all think - and there will be a boiling point I am sure, as we keep hearing stories like this


First they use ED (erectile dysfunction?) to obtain land for private business use under the guise of economic development is for the public good bullshit.  (Case in point - Texas Motor Speedway)  Then they use ED to expand the roadway sytem surrounding the newly developed commercial enterprise.  Then the surrounding areas are changed from residential to commercial.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 6:57:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 6:57:50 PM EDT by barkley-addict]
"Just like 1775, it's not whether you think the people in this country are worth dying for, but whether or not you are willing to take a chance and give up everything in order to run the show. Our Founding Fathers WERE willing to give it all up, just to run the show and have things the way THEY wanted."

But it's not 1775, it's '05 and the country has become a country run by the wealthy and powerful, and government shows signs of simply ingoring the people and the constitution. It's becoming a government of the people, not by the people.
I wouldn't have any problem dying to fight and change that, but I'm not certain dying to further the wealthy and powerful would be worth it. I'm as patriotic as anyone and God willing I hope to serve in iraq or afghan yet, but regardless these are the disagreeable thoughts I have sometimes.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 7:00:07 PM EDT
It just keeps getting worst.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 7:13:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By barkley-addict:
"Just like 1775, it's not whether you think the people in this country are worth dying for, but whether or not you are willing to take a chance and give up everything in order to run the show. Our Founding Fathers WERE willing to give it all up, just to run the show and have things the way THEY wanted."

But it's not 1775, it's '05 and the country has become a country run by the wealthy and powerful, and government shows signs of simply ingoring the people and the constitution. It's becoming a government of the people, not by the people.
I wouldn't have any problem dying to fight and change that, but I'm not certain dying to further the wealthy and powerful would be worth it. I'm as patriotic as anyone and God willing I hope to serve in iraq or afghan yet, but regardless these are the disagreeable thoughts I have sometimes.




If you don't think today is just like the late 1700's, I have news for you...it's the SAME. History HAS repeated itself, once again. Today, you DO work for the rich and powerful. Your small amount of money fuels the stock market that the rich gain more money in. Your sweat of your brow makes money for the rich corporate heads that get 15 million dollar bonuses while they lay off 20,000 Americans, so they can get the goods that you buy from China, where it is cheaper to make. If you work for General Motors, have your mortgage through GMAC, have your credit card account though GM Mastercard, have your home, auto and life insurance though GM and pay your taxes to people that just abuse the amounts that they are suppose to be responsible for, aren't you a paid slave? GM and the government get richer, while you toil away in their plant, only to have 75% of your pay go back to GM and the government. Isn't something wrong with this picture?

And, if you don't think money is the only thing that talks in DC and in any governmental setting, I have news for you. Why do you think the only organizations that have any say are the ones with the money? Money runs our government, just like money is what ran the country before we were America. The rich and powerful have always been at the helm and that has NOT changed one bit. Even our Founding Fathers became the rich and powerful, either before the Revolution or after it. Good old George Washington billed the Continental Congress for $100,000 for his services in the Revolutionary war. He became a very rich man off of the war. Just like Bush's buddies are raking in the dough over the wars we are now currently in. Times have not changed my friend, only the faces and the names. The rich run things, alway have and always will. The only question is...how much of your blood and sweat are you willing to give before you say, "that's enough! I have no more to give."?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 7:22:24 PM EDT
"The rich run things, alway have and always will. The only question is...how much of your blood and sweat are you willing to give before you say, "that's enough! I have no more to give."?"

I know the founding fathers had $s and power, but were they corrupt? In my opinion no. That is the difference, regardless of what you conclude about 1775, they obviously thought differently about what america should be than those in the present, who don't seem to care as long as they have theirs.
I don't really care how much wealth and power people in charge have as long as they uphold the ideals of the constitution. But that's not happening, would you say people are just as free as they were in 1775?
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:02:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By barkley-addict:
"The rich run things, alway have and always will. The only question is...how much of your blood and sweat are you willing to give before you say, "that's enough! I have no more to give."?"

I know the founding fathers had $s and power, but were they corrupt? In my opinion no. That is the difference, regardless of what you conclude about 1775, they obviously thought differently about what america should be than those in the present, who don't seem to care as long as they have theirs.
I don't really care how much wealth and power people in charge have as long as they uphold the ideals of the constitution. But that's not happening, would you say people are just as free as they were in 1775?




Some no, some yes. Right after the Revolution, most blacks were still slaves. So yes, they have more freedom as a group than they did then. Women? They weren't free back then like they are today. White men? No, they are not as free as they were back then. Most of them anyway, there was still a lot of Indentured Servitude going on back then. Once they worked off their indentured debt, they were granted their freedom.


One half to two thirds of all immigrants to Colonial America arrived as indentured servants. At times, as many as 75% of the population of some colonies were under terms of indenture. Even on the frontier, according to the 1790 U.S. Census, 6% of the Kentucky population was indentured.



I don't believe our Founding Fathers were corrupt, like a lot of politicians are today. But they weren't perfect, nor were times as "upstanding" as many people want to believe. Our Founding Fathers wrote our Constitution and Bill of Rights based on the fact, they were writting it for "free" men in our Country. I like to believe that they wrote the words the way they did, so our Country "would" become a more "perfect" Nation. But I don't see that it has ever headed that way. Corruption, money and "elite" levels of society run the country, and always have. Words and deeds are two different things. This Country has been run by "actions" that have not been as noble as people think. Every Presidency has had it's "political" backroom deals and level of corruption. Whether that level of corruption has been very low or very high, there has been some level of it, starting from the very beginning. Personally, I am not as naive to believe that this Country can ever get passed being run by the power hungry, the corrupt or by the people looking to gain off the backs off of the rest of the Country, however, I would like to see it get to a point where the checks and balances outway any true corruption or abuse of our Rights. If that were the case, you would have NEVER seen acts like Waco, or the passage of the Patriot Act. Or any of the other cover ups that have tried to hide abuse committed by elected officials.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 8:26:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By lippo:

Originally Posted By unkempt1:
every person in America is now a renter, no matter what, you don't own your house.



When they made people have to pay property taxes, that's when they started your house as a rental unit. Don't pay your property taxes and the government owns it. FREE and CLEAR.



Agreed.

not much different than this outright theft we have here "Landowners must yield to ballpark"

Link Posted: 10/8/2005 10:25:23 PM EDT

Originally Posted By unkempt1:
every person in America is now a renter, no matter what, you don't own your house.



Unless you are lucky enough to live in one of the few states with specific STATE LAWS that prohibit ED for private use.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 10:32:20 PM EDT
What's wrong with the park they got now? Why do they gotta keep building new stadiums. The damn things are concrete and steel, they don't wear out.
Link Posted: 10/8/2005 10:38:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 10/8/2005 10:39:00 PM EDT by Who_Me]
Everyone sing along now:

"This land is your land, this land is my land
From California, to the New York Island
From the redwood forest, to the gulf stream waters
This land was made for you and me..."





Isn't socialism great?


Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top