Heh.
From the article:
***
WASHINGTON (AP) — Lawmakers are trying to blunt a Supreme Court decision that says local governments can seize people’s homes to make way for shopping malls and other private development.
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay said Thursday the high court had made ‘’a horrible decision'’ and he hoped it would cause a backlash.
***
Wow, Tom DeLay! For real? Ya fucking think, you assclown?
Hey, here’s a thought: let’s get more conservatives on the Supreme Court! What a great fucking idea!
Man, I have to stop reading the news for a while this evening or I’m going to wind up killing someone. Time to make some dinner.
Congress Working on Property - Seizure Bills - New York Times
Requires registration: Bug Me Not
Tighten that gas cap! Americans loose 147 million gallons of gas a year because of evaporation!
You know that the onmly reason anyone is going “whoops”is that since that ruling a private developer has proposed seizing Justice Souter’s land to beuild a hotel on it
http://www.boingboing.net/2005/06/28/group_proposes_to_bu.html
Oh, totally! I read that early this morning while I was supposed to be working (
) and I laughed out loud at it. That developer is a genius. It would serve that stupid bastard Souter right if his damned farmhouse was snatched out from underneath him.
Nobody in America owns their own property anymore.
What the fuck, man?
I will say this, though…when I looked at the picture of Justice Souter’s farmnhouse I got really homesick.
All the green, you know. They don’t really have that lush, verdant kind of landscape here at all, at least in SoCal. So now I’m extra mad. 
Thanks for the linkie!
**MWAH***
Another thought too: While I think that this is an appalling decision by the Supreme Court, I still don’t think that the government should be able to overturn their decisions.
This decision should never have been made in the first place, but allowing Congress a process whereby they can “overrule” the decisions of the Supreme Court is too mind-bendingly dangerous…especially in light of the current administration…to ever be allowed to happen.
They need to remain the highest legal authority in the land, even though they are, right now, in the pocket of the corporate interests and the upper eschelon of the White House. Allowing the government to be able to overturn the Supreme Court’s rulings is a terribly slippery slope and there is no way any good could ever come of it.
One thing I’ll say is that this will definitely be challenged if it ever occurs. Someone somewhere is going to have their home(s) taken for no good reason, and they are going to have enough money and enough rage to sue the balls off everyone in sight, and this will be over. The folks that started this whole thing are still fighting even though they lost…theyre hoping that because of the withholding of federal funds, the project that threatned and is now able to take their property will fail anyway because there won’t be enough money to get it done.
Allowing the government to have a process where they can supersede the Supreme Court will be forever, because no president would ever want to relinquish that kind of power. It can’t happen.
I do, however, wholeheartedly endorse the refusal of the government to allow federal monies to be applied to a decision. It might hurt us as well as help us, but the way I see it, the government doesnt have to give federal funds if they dont agree with any decision…unless that was part of the ruling in the first place. They aren’t going against the ruling; they are refusing to be a party to it. I see that as good leadership.
What a mess.
I agree totally. The whole point of the SCOTUS is to put a big and allegedly nonpartisan check on the rest of the government. Unfortuantely, with SDO’C out, and god knows who Bush is going to put in (and you know at least one if not two more justices wil be out before he leaves office. I;m guessing Ashcroft and Gonzalez…), I’m so so sacared right now…