Liberty & Power: Group Blog

Aeon J. Skoble

First Raich, now This (Kelo)

More bad news: there's no such thing as private property, according to the Supremes.

UPDATE: This NYT editorial is nonsense. After noting the objections made O'Connor's dissent, the NYT tells her to relax, there's nothing to worry about. Oh great, the Times is sure no abuses will result from this, that makes me feel so much better. Then to add insult to injury, the editorial concludes that hey, it's not really a big deal anyway, because the "few small property owners" will be "fully compensated." Nice of the Times to make explicit its view that these people are small, but as to their being fully compensated, um, no. They didn't want to sell in the first place, so does the compensation package include their anguish and inconvenience, as well as a true market value for their homes (as opposed to 5-year old government appraisals)? Didn't think so. Not to be rude, but this seems analogous to raping someone, calculating the going rate for a prostitute, giving the victim that amount of money, and then claiming she was justly compensated. Sorry for going blue, but the more I think about this the madder I get, and it doesn't help that the left praises this ruling because, as the NYT puts it, "it's a setback to the 'property rights' movement." Note the scare quotes! Commies.


Posted on Thursday, June 23, 2005 at 12:13 PM 

Post a Comment

What rules govern discussion boards?

If you have not already done so, you must Sign Up before you can post.








When you are finished with the comments for this entry, close the window to return to the blog.

Home Newsletter Submissions Advertising Donations Archives Internships About Us FAQs Contact Us All Articles

 

 

 

Place Your Link Here!

Wordpress Theme   Credit Consolidation   Discount Perfume   WoW Gold   Portugal Property