The Lost Liberty Hotel

[xenolith]

Free Star media release

Freestar Media, LLC want's to build a hotel on property owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter.

"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."

 

[catnap1972]

[nelson]HA HA![/nelson]

 

[cwjerome]

I hope they succeed

 

[Genx87]

This needs to be done, only way for them to understand.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Awesome! Beats endlessly whining about it, that's for sure.

 

[Tommunist]

sweet sweet irony...

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

"The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged.""

LOL

Let's see if Souter gets all ED-NIMBY on us.

 

[azazyel]

oh sooo nice!

 

[Dissipate]

This is the most hilarious and best thing I have read in awhile! Revvvv up those bulldozers!!

 

[RabidMongoose]

Sounds good to me!

 

[KidViciou$]

when i first heard the court's decision, i assumed it was the conservative judges that ruled that private property could be used for development. what the hell were the liberal judges thinking????

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: KidViciou$
when i first heard the court's decision, i assumed it was the conservative judges that ruled that private property could be used for development. what the hell were the liberal judges thinking????

That they feel that the government's rights exceed those of private citizens? This surprises you somehow?

 

[CanOWorms]

It will be interesting to see how it goes!

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: KidViciou$
when i first heard the court's decision, i assumed it was the conservative judges that ruled that private property could be used for development. what the hell were the liberal judges thinking????

Communist regimes typically own everything, why does it surprise you the liberal judges went for it?

 

[halik]

I hope they take donations - the negative ppublicity alone should generate enough $ to brib..errr convince the local govt to go thru with this.

 

[KidViciou$]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: KidViciou$
when i first heard the court's decision, i assumed it was the conservative judges that ruled that private property could be used for development. what the hell were the liberal judges thinking????

That they feel that the government's rights exceed those of private citizens? This surprises you somehow?

but this wasn't about the government developing the land, this was about private corporations developing the land!

 

[EatSpam]

Originally posted by: KidViciou$

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: KidViciou$
when i first heard the court's decision, i assumed it was the conservative judges that ruled that private property could be used for development. what the hell were the liberal judges thinking????

That they feel that the government's rights exceed those of private citizens? This surprises you somehow?

but this wasn't about the government developing the land, this was about private corporations developing the land!

Remember, in Republican land, Big Business > Private Citizens, so of course they'd vote for it.

 

[KidViciou$]

which is exactly why i thought it was the conservatives who voted on this, but to my surprise it was the liberal judges. i still don't get it

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: cwjerome
I hope they succeed

Originally posted by: Genx87
This needs to be done, only way for them to understand.

Like I've said so many times here, people don't give a rat's ass until they are directly affected.

I would book a room at the Hotel in advance before it is even finished.

 

[NeenerNeener]

Three more judges to go...

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: KidViciou$
which is exactly why i thought it was the conservatives who voted on this, but to my surprise it was the liberal judges. i still don't get it

Liberals tend not to value private property as much. I have no idea why that is really. Maybe too many of them have been influenced by the Communist Manifesto or something.

 

[Mokmo418]

Best reply on a judgement i've ever seen.
Very fast too.
i wouldn't mind staying in a hotel that has so much history even before it's opening

 

[NeenerNeener]

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno

Originally posted by: KidViciou$
which is exactly why i thought it was the conservatives who voted on this, but to my surprise it was the liberal judges. i still don't get it

Liberals tend not to value private property as much. I have no idea why that is really. Maybe too many of them have been influenced by the Communist Manifesto or something.

Since when were they all liberal judges that ruled? I thought a majority were republican appointees?

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: NeenerNeener

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno

Originally posted by: KidViciou$
which is exactly why i thought it was the conservatives who voted on this, but to my surprise it was the liberal judges. i still don't get it

Liberals tend not to value private property as much. I have no idea why that is really. Maybe too many of them have been influenced by the Communist Manifesto or something.

Since when were they all liberal judges that ruled? I thought a majority were republican appointees?

Obviously they are all republican appointees, democrats have only appointed like 2 of the 9 judges (By 2008, Repubicans will have held the Presidency 24 of the last 36 years). However, all the of the "liberal" judges, based on their track record, voted for the ruling. Obviously, the Republicans wouldn't have appointed those judges if they knew they were such jackasses.

 

[catnap1972]

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: NeenerNeener

Originally posted by: HombrePequeno

Originally posted by: KidViciou$
which is exactly why i thought it was the conservatives who voted on this, but to my surprise it was the liberal judges. i still don't get it

Liberals tend not to value private property as much. I have no idea why that is really. Maybe too many of them have been influenced by the Communist Manifesto or something.

Since when were they all liberal judges that ruled? I thought a majority were republican appointees?

Obviously they are all republican appointees, democrats have only appointed like 2 of the 9 judges (By 2008, Repubicans will have held the Presidency 24 of the last 36 years). However, all the of the "liberal" judges, based on their track record, voted for the ruling. Obviously, the Republicans wouldn't have appointed those judges if they knew they were such jackasses.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Like the Republicans give two ****s about personal property when big business stands to make a buck.

BTW, QFT