Pledge your future stay at Lost Liberty Hotel (Souter home) in Weare, NH

[JoeMemphis]

By signing this pledge, you agree to pay for lodging in the "Lost Liberty Hotel", once it is built at (address removed for this forum), Weare, NH.

It is expected that during one's week of residency in the hotel in Weare, lodgers will contribute significantly to the local economy - not just staying in the hotel, but shopping, buying gas, eating at local restaurants, etc.

This pledge is important, as it will help to demonstrate

(a) the large public demand for lodging in a hotel built on what is currently Justice Souter's property

(b) the large economic benefit to the citizens of Weare that will occur once the hotel is built.

http://www.pledgebank.com/LostLibHotel

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

This is a pretty clever move. The right, left, and everyone in between are angered by the Kelo decision. We should be cheering this on and wokring to eliminate eminent domain abuse, and not let the eminent domain debate become the sole property of the conservatives and libertarians.

[unhappycamper]

1. I live in Boston and could travel up for the ground-breaking ceremonies.

I'll take a bunch o pics & post them for ya'll.

[Bluerthanblue]

8. i live within an hours drive

of Justice Souters home, and it isn't anything grandious-

If i could post pictures, i'd save you the drive-

but i gotta ask you, and those who think this is so 'great'-

Why don't we just highjack a bunch of planes and fly them into buildings of nations we hate??? Why don't we just declare war on anyone who ticks us off, or just steal the money we need- fuck principals, - why don't we become everything we fight against and then just claim..."well THEY made me do it"

i've lived far too long i guess-

and i've entertained hope for real change- not just fighting fire with fire- where everyone, and everything burns-

[fujiyama]

10. Your equating

our disagreement on his ruling of this case, with the 9/11 hijackers?

The whole point is the irony here. Souter rules that it's constitutional for private interests to take property from people if it serves the interests of the community.

Well, that hotel sounds like it would serve the interests. I'd be more than interested in lodging there.

Spare us your self righteous lecturing.

[Bluerthanblue]

12. i'm trying to spare

you from becoming what you claim to despise-

The IRONY here, is that 'we' claim to believe what justice Souter ruled in the majority with is WRONG flat out WRONG yet, 'we' are going to use that power which we say that no one should have, to justify doing the very same thing to him???

That hotel is as needed as shoes on a fish-

and YES, there IS an equation to be made between the action you propose, and the 9/11- atrocity, and the US response to it-

WE SAID "how could they do this to us, how could they kill so many innocent people like they did, and the PLANNING that went into it"-

and then we went into a country of impoverished, marganilized, terrorized and USED by the USSR AND US for their own individual self interests, and KILLED THOUSANDS of 'innocents' pre-meditatidly- and used that momentum to go into Iraq- and do more of the same-

There is NOTHING 'self-righteous' about what i have to say-

humbling? uncomfortable? frustrating? you bet your ass- and if you for one minute think i'm not every bit as human as you- and desire to strike back when struck, then you are grossly mistaken- but look where that kind of living has gotten us-

human beings may be intelligent, but we sure are stubborn and stupid.

[JoeMemphis]

2. Kick

Just kicking it to the top again. I fear that Democrats are really wasting an opportunity on this eminent domain issue.

[goclark]

3. Love it-kick

[dbeach]

4. BEST! NEEDS MORE ATTENTION.

the fascists are conditioning the masses to give away their property to help the community...somehow they portray it as helping the whole area..such lies..


next bush will ask for your land cuz it will help his war effort..

SC sold out yrs ago

I wonder how much scalia got hidden away for a rainy day??

[JoeMemphis]

5. Maybe this could be the site for a national DU gathering in 2007?

Just a thought.

[Bluerthanblue]

6. this may seem crazy...

... and i'm personally furious at the 'decision' by Souter, but i'm every bit as furious at responses such as this-

If 'we' are AGAINST the govt having the 'right' to 'take' peoples property for economic gain- be that gain for individuals OR communities WHY the HELL would we take action which is against what we claim to hate????

How is action such as this any different (or foolish) than a group of folks who opposed abortion, opening an abortion clinic post Roe v. Wade???

Let's stop and think here people, and not 'become knee-jerks' -

or plain old jerks- just because others choose to be-

Aren't Democrats, the party with people who aren't afraid to think for themselves, and stand against oppression, even when that oppression pisses us off????

ALSO- (and this doesn't CHANGE the 'wrongness' of the New London, Conn. situation- The fact is, all the land around the homes in question, was purchased without 'co-ersion'- and no one was FORCED to 'sell'- Sadly for those few BRAVE and HONORABLE citizens to whom money meant less than their land, their HOMES, and their 'right to stay' where they had chosen to live- they were EVERY BIT as 'betrayed' by thier own neighbors, maybe more so, because had the others not allowed the 'renewal' plan to gain a 'foothold' (purchase property to begin with, and then come up with this 'grand scheme') i doubt very much that the 'city' would have had much 'sway'- They were the 'hold-outs' and i admire them, and support them, but not by imitating that which i despise.

maybe i'm just a stupid stubborn bleeding heart idealist, who wishes she had a political party who was 'different' than yin to their yang.

[JoeMemphis]

7. It's called protest, blowing off some steam, and ...

... making a point. I don't think anyone expects that the selectmen in Weare, NH, will vote to condemn Souter's home and give it to the developer. It is, though, making a statement about the state of peoples' outrage at this irresponsible decision.

This is a very real issue that's going on. I'd suggest that vastly more Americans care about their property not being seized by the government and turned into a SuperCenter than they do about Gitmo or the Carlyle Group right now. So far, I have to say that Republicans and Libertarians are taking ownership of the eminent domain debate while the National Dems are largely AWOL on the issue.

[Bluerthanblue]

9. Joe,

i don't mean to pick on you- and i DO understand your point-

But why imitate what we hate????

Why say things just to piss people off???? Are you going to make a case for Rove's remarks, using your above logic????

Words are powerful things- and this 'man' isn't just playing games- nor is the site- If we're going to protest, or blow off steam, then can't we do it in a way that isn't an imitation of that which we PROFESS to despise???

Blowing off steam, is exactly what got america into afganistan AND Iraq- a bunch of angry people, with no place to put their frustration- and willing to 'check their brains AND concience' at the door, for what?????-

Violence breeds violence- revenge is a never ending circle- it takes COURAGE and self control to 'be the change'-

and we don't seem to have it, my friend- not from what i'm seeing-
tit for tat (but 'we're just joking)- it isn't funny-

[bratcatinok]

19. How would you propose we go about getting the decision

overturned. The ruling has the potential to affect all of us in one way or another, most especially the poor. They don't even have to prove blight anymore, they only have to show how a new hotel, WalMart, strip shopping center, new McMansions, etc. would be beneficial in bringing in more tax income into the city coffers.

So how do we bring it home to the people that made the decision? For too long too many in the upper echelons of government have lived in ivory towers never thinking how their decisions could conceivably affect them.

Is it so terribly wrong that "we the people" show them there are consequences to the decisions they hand down?

[Bluerthanblue]

22. you know i'm

so tired of that question-
and the reasoning behind it-

My honest answer-
sometimes, REALLY this is true- it is better to DO nothing, rather than do wrong- Sometimes, the 'answer' to the problem takes alot of searching for, and alot of effort and patience.

MLKjr. could have responded to the violent hatred, with violent hatred- Gandhi could have responded to the violence with violence- he could have resorted to doing WRONG for the 'common good'- but who would have won then????

So many people shouted war, justice (aka revenge) after 9/11, and in defense of invading Iraq- as if there was no recourse other than 'doing back' what we say is wrong.

They DO have to prove blight, and everyone in this instance said blight was NOT sufficient reason.- Taxes have to be raised somewhere- ESPECIALLY with this Bozo administration- and when you cut at the top, the trickle down trickles down to our hometowns-

Look at Justice Souter- examine how 'he' rates among the other SCJ's -
i think you'll find he's the odd man out- And for being the 'pick' of Bush Sr. he has proven himself to be alot more of a 'man' than i ever would have expected- not afraid to speak his mind-

First i'd suggest you go to the sight, and read the entire account of the cases, including the syllybus, and the cases that led the court to come to the conclusion it did- i'm for ending the notion of Eminent Domain for ANY reason-

But i also don't think the govt should be able to enforce zoning laws, building codes, or allow neighborhood 'covenents'- places where you want to buy a piece of land, and the 'associasion' says you aren't allowed to have a 'clothesline' within site of the road, paint your house a certian color etc. the answer is not becoming like that which you are against, it is in showing a 'better' way- even if you don't know what that is immediately.

[bratcatinok]

24. I regret you're tired of that question.

MLK didn't condone violence in response to violence but he also didn't sit on his hands and do nothing. No one is advocating violence in this matter.

Was the Boston Tea Party wrong? Or did it make a statement?

I have no problem with zoning laws because I lived in Houston for many years and saw what happened to the neighborhoods who had no home owner's association. One house would be well kept and right next door would be a business such as an auto repair shop with cars that were being used for parts.

Building codes as long as they're reasonable are perfectly ok with me. The problem comes when codes become outlandish to where you have to have a permit to change out your toilet or to install a home theater yourself.

I agree to a certain extent with you about restrictive home owners associations. The problem is there are always going to be idiots out there who don't think about anyone but themselves. I don't necessarily want to live in a subdivision where nothing keeps my neighbor from having a cow or other livestock in his backyard. I don't want my neighbor opening a bar next door either.

I still would like to hear a viable way to protest the recent decision that would actually get their attention. What's being proposed isn't violent, it's making the statement that Souter isn't immune from the ramifications of his vote just as we, the common person aren't immune.

[Bluerthanblue]

25. the Boston

Tea party did NOT target one person- as a matter of fact, if you want to use this illustration, let's not forget, that the "Patriots" (some of whom were my ancestors) quite dishonestly disguised themselves as "Indians" or "Savages"-
Ironic, isn't it, that we dressed as those we stole land from, made treaties with, and lied to through our teeth, and we use this as an illustration in support of destroying or demonstrating the wrongness of legislation that would allow STATES to take peoples land away from them-

MLK indeed 'didn't do nothing' He used his life to fight evil with good- to fight wrongs, by doing what was and IS 'right'- He didn't do wrong simply to 'illustrate' his point- or the 'unfairness' of what he fought against- and HE among very few others, changed society in ways that will never be forgotten-

Imitating the 'wrong' is not 'right'- it doesn't make any point that matters, except to give creedence to those who say we are among those who have NO 'standards'- who will use any means at our disposal, even those we say are WRONG to 'get our way'-

You may say i'm a dreamer- but i KNOW i'm not the only one- and if i end up like most dreamers, at least i'll die knowing i lived true to my talk-

[Catshrink]

11. This issue scares the hell out of me.

I own a very modest home in a very modest neighborhood where homes sell for $50-80K. Our homes are in decent shape, just a bit old. We are surrounded by developments where houses sell for $250-350k and up and by several retail malls/outlets.

I fear the worst. Razing our neighborhood would allow developers to build more upscale homes/condos or retail. Where would I live? There is no way I can afford a $250K home on a teacher's salary.

The kicker? Mesa, AZ has no scruples about condeming private property for the "greater good." 60 Minutes highlighted the city's seizure of Bailey's Brake Shop so they the city could sell it to a private company to put up a nicer looking hardware store.

I'm waiting for the other shoe to drop.

[Bluerthanblue]

13. and

did Arizona just start doing this since the SC decision???-

i can't understand how the munincipal leaders can sleep at night- But you know, the real 'culprit' here is this administration AND the congress and senate-

Can you contact your state reps, and ask that THEY make a law against the state's mis-use of eminent domain? i've watched as Bush pushes through his 'tax cuts' HA- and people start complaining about no 'new' taxes- the burdens fall back to the state, then to the counties, then to the towns- and all the while, we're wasting trillions killing people-

there IS a 'recourse' above the SC isn't there? an act of Congress????
THAT is where we all might do well to put our energies-

i wish you the best-..... i hate what is happening to this nation.

[Catshrink]

14. Actually

the seizure of Bailey's Brake Shop has been going on for 2-3 years. Bailey's won an injunction at some point in the legal process but I'm not sure what the status is. It just shows Mesa's willingness to whore for a buck or two -- or in this case, something that looks nicer.

[JoeMemphis]

16. It'd be nice for our Dem leaders to start doing something about it ...

<<"there IS a 'recourse' above the SC isn't there? an act of Congress????THAT is where we all might do well to put our energies-">>

I think the best course of action would be to get the states and local communities involved in restricting eminent domain. It'd also be nice if Democratic leaders would step up to the plate and condemn eminent domain abuse (even if they do have to step on the toes of some local Democrats, as is the case in New London).

[Bluerthanblue]

18. i can agree and support

you 100% on this perspective Joe-

But excercizing a 'wrong' (even if it HAS been declared LEGAL) to 'right' that declaration is something i'm not about to do- especially when that 'wrong' was NOT written specifically by Souter,- and he alone is targeted-

It's the 'freestate' issue that is driving this-
Don't tell me Stevens, Ginsburg, Thomas, and Breyer don't have properties that could just as easily have been targeted- Why Souter? and Why do what we all agree is wrong?????

[JoeMemphis]

28. The "Free State" Issue is neither here nor there ...

I honestly don't care that we're aligning ourselves with conservatives and "free state" libertarians on this. We all share the same view on this issue, and I worry that our national Dems are concerned more about Gitmo than property seizures for business interests.

Again, I view this is as simply making a point. Souter effectively consented for his property to be taken in this manner, so I have no problem with it. Regardless of whether I'm standing with the "Free Staters" or not, I want to stand with someone, anyone who will stand up against this irresponsible and dangerous decision.

I have yet to see Dean, Reid, or Pelosi raise hell over this decision. We're supposed to be standing up for the average person, right?

[Bluerthanblue]

29. We are NOT in

disagreement with each other on the issue of eminent domain Joe-
And i would have no problem agreeing with GWBush himself, on an issue if we happened to 'share' a 'common' belief-

My problem with this 'joke'- 'campaign'- what ever you want to call it, is that # 1, if i sincerly believe doing something is WRONG- then i should not DO that very thing for any reason- if it's wrong, then it's wrong period- Not, "do as i say, not as i do" i'm a mom, and i've learned the hard way that we can 'talk' all we like, our kids, and we humans, look at actions, not at what we 'say' we will do.

# 2. i DO resent that Souter was 'singled out' and targeted by this man,- if this tactic was to be 'used' to make a point, then that point should be made to ALL those who voted in the 'majority' AND to those in connecticut who began the 'action' to begin with-

The reality tho, Joe, and i've become much more informed on this whole issue since this decision- Is that this practice has been going on, and represents the policies used by states for over 30 years.
It does NOT indicate a 'change' in the 'rules'-

It is not the 'court' or the federal government that said "take thier land"- it is the local government, and beyond that the STATE government. There ARE several states which have in place, legislation saying specifically that property CANNOT be taken by 'private' individuals even IF it would ultimately benifit the community. Connecicut is not one of them- NH is working on legislation that would make it illegal- where does YOUR state stand? And as i understand it, this may be one of the few decisions that Congress will over-rule the supreme court on.

There IS a point to be made, that states rights trump federal jusisdiction- There is also a point to be made that it is FAR more than out 'property' that we have been deprived of, not only by this ruling, but as a result of the ruling of the SCOTUS in 2000, which brought us all into the hell we're in.

Look closely at the man behind the petition- look at where he 'stands' on issues- look at his 'agenda'- and be sure you want to be an advertizement for him- you may be VERY surprised- He's NOT a 'libertarian' after all- and he's NOT for standing up for the 'average person'- he's an advocate for a group of people who for lack of any better way to describe it a 'survival of the fittest' society-

Eminent Domain (in my opinion) should be outlawed by ALL states, for ANY reason.- That may seem extreem, but i've yet to see a case where it was used that truly benifited society in any real way-

sorry for the abundance of words- i hope my thoughts are lucid somewhere in this mess-

(and the people who sold out, around the Kelso's, as well as the local government of New London Connecticut, should be the target of the rage that this issue generates.- THEY ultimately had the power to stop this dead, and chose not to- to thier OWN NEIGHBORS-!)

[fujiyama]

15. One possibility

is if the developer wanted their subdivision set up and wanted to tear your house down, they could offer you one of their own homes or condos. I know of one situation where this happened.

Of course, this may not help for sentimental reasons.

[Catshrink]

17. No sentiment here...

just the need for affordable housing.

[Bluerthanblue]

21. i think that the

actual 'market value' of Justic Souters house may be far higher than the 100,000 mentioned in the article- especially with the influx this state has seen in the last few years-

i HATE it- If your home is surrounded by very pricey homes, then you can make a good case for getting a REALLY good price for it, if you are not partial to it- or need to stay in that specific area- So many homes are being bought up here, decent (actually really FINE homes) and bulldozed to build homes for huge homes, to house 'people from away' and all thier possessions.

i'll be fortunate if i can find a mobile home for under 100,000 in order to get my youngest son into a school district that can suit his needs if this housing bubble doesn't burst soon- (2yrs.from now) and there is no way he'll ever make it in the district i live in at present.-

[crispini]

20. I think the petition is making a great point.

I am infuriated by the decision, and I'd love to see this get plenty of publicity. Also I'd really like to see a movement in each state to draft legislation that will stop this kind of abuse.

[PleadTheFirst]

23. Signed - love it!

n/t

[rustedace]

26. That is great

Everyone should sign.

[JoeMemphis]

27. I agree -- this is very important

kick