Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[SLL] "Kelo v. New London = absolute and total bullshit," Edgar J. Steele

Expand Messages
  • Supreme Law Firm
    Kelo v. New London = absolute and total bullshit, Edgar J. Steele Ladies and Gentlemen: We repeat, with emphasis, our recommendation that you buy and learn
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 4, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      "Kelo v. New London = absolute and total bullshit," Edgar J. Steele
       
       
      Ladies and Gentlemen:
       
      We repeat, with emphasis, our recommendation that
      you buy and learn how safely to handle and operate
      a modern firearm, e.g. H&K USP .40 with 2 x 10-round
      magazines (at least).  This is a firearm which is
      highly recommended by and for law enforcement personnel,
      and you have the very same right to defend yourself
      as do all of those personnel.
       
      The Right of self-defense is a fundamental Right.
       
      The .40 caliber weapon recommended above is an
      excellent compromise between bullet size, and
      accuracy at a distance.
       
      My office is receiving confirmation that our recommendation
      is being heeded by many thousands of Americans, as the
      sales of private firearms have recently been reported
      to be up by an estimated 11% nationwide.
       
      Please do NOT come to me later and whine that you were
      not warned.

      REMEMBER THIS:
      "Gun Control" means hitting your target, on the first shot.

       
      Sincerely yours,
      /s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
      Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
      Federal Witness:  18 U.S.C. 1510, 1512-13, 1964(a)
      http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
      http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
      http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
      http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm
       
      All Rights Reserved without Prejudice



      http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/madashell.htm


      Judicial Relativism
      by Edgar J. Steele

      July 4, 2005

      "No person shall be...deprived of life, liberty or property, without
      due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public
      use without just compensation."
        --- U.S. Constitution, Fifth Amendment (1791)

      "[T]hat alone is a just government which impartially secures to every
      man, whatever is his own."
        --- James Madison (fourth President of U.S.), National Gazette,
      Property, (Mar. 29, 1792), reprinted in 14 Papers of James Madison
      266 (R. Rutland, et al. eds. 1983)

      "I'm as mad as Hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!"
        --- Howard Beale, played by Peter Finch in the movie Network (1976)

      mp3 audio file of this column:
      http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/audio/madashell16-16.mp3  (3.3 mb, 28
      min)  (streaming version)

      New Nickel Rants:
         6/28/05 - "Trollops in Black Robes"
      http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/rants/trollop16-16.mp3 (streaming mp3)

         6/22/05  - "Of Course, You Know, This Means War!"
      http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/rants/war16-44.mp3 (streaming mp3)

      New audio files:
         4/25/05 - Thorn/Giuliani's Wing TV Interview with Edgar J. Steele
      (mp3 audio, 2.7 mb, 24 min)

         3/30/05 -  Steele's Twenty Commandments for New Lawyers  (mp3
      audio, 1.5 mb,  14 minutes)


      Yes.  Yet another commentary on the recent Kelo decision by the US
      Supreme Court...more or less.  Actually, both more and less.

      I generally avoid writing about things that I deem to be receiving
      adequate commentary on the Internet (I gave up long ago on the
      nonstop lies of traditional media, of course).  Kelo is getting
      plenty of that...adequate commentary, that is.  And totally
      appropriate, too.  About the only observations I can't officially get
      behind are those made by a few hysterics suggesting that nine lengths
      of rope be secured for a visit to the Supreme Court chambers.

      However, I received such an overwhelming demand from list members for
      my take on the Kelo case (particularly since I chose to talk about
      the Supremes' Ten Commandment decision a few days ago) that I have
      decided to add my ranting to the cacophony, after all.

      Actually, anybody who follows my writings knows exactly how I feel
      about this case, already.  I suspect that what you really want simply
      is to hear me rant and rave about it.  Even if it gets me disbarred,
      because criticizing sitting judges is the third rail for practicing
      lawyers - especially those of us still standing and who are
      politically-incorrect.  Well, I'm not practicing law much anymore,
      anyway, because the deck gets so stacked against my clients, so I
      haven't that much to lose.  For the record, let's consider you my
      clients and this to be legal advice - not much shelter for a
      disbarment hearing, but it's something.

      I read the decision, the concurrence and the two dissents.  Nothing
      surprising - except for the mere fact of O'Connor and Thomas
      dissenting, of course.  I've grown so accustomed to judicial
      intellectual dishonesty, irrationality and outright lies (I almost
      used the word "prevarication" there, but you deserve better from
      me).  As a lawyer, I am well past my "use by" date, for the reasons
      given in my 20 Commandments for New Lawyers.  I no longer can
      tolerate judicial intellectual tripe, pretense and false
      justification, which differ from gutter logic only in the number of
      syllables used per word.

      I know my next sentence will get this article barred by a great many
      ISPs, but there simply is no better description.  The U.S. Supreme
      Court's decision in Kelo v. New London, et al., is absolute and total
      bullshit.  Pornographic, even, under the old standard for
      pornography, in that it possesses "no redeeming social value."  Let
      me say it again:  BULLSHIT!!!  Make no mistake.  Shout it from the
      rooftops.  Hear it echo down the halls.  Throw open your windows,
      lean out and shout, "I'm mad as Hell and I'm not going to take this
      BULLSHIT anymore!"  (With apologies to Howard Beale.)  There simply
      is no better word, else I would use it (as with "prevaricate," above,
      you deserve the best from me, after all).

      Susette Kelo owns (soon to be "owned") an expensively-improved house
      with a prime water view.  She was joined in her suit by several other
      petitioners, among them an elderly couple who have lived in their
      home for 60 years, with the wife actually having been born there in
      1918 and never having lived anywhere else.  To say we are talking
      about unique and prized personal residences would be a gross
      understatement.  The City of New London, Connecticut, is taking their
      homes, among many others, and "selling" them to a private developer,
      who intends to construct a waterfront "urban village" which will
      include shops, condos and 90,000 square feet of private office
      space.  Note the repeated usage of the term "private."

      Justice Stevens, speaking for the majority of the court in his
      written opinion, correctly framed the issue involved:  "The question
      presented is whether the city's proposed disposition of this property
      qualifies as a "public use" within the meaning of the Takings Clause
      of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution."   (Kelo vs. City of New
      London, et al., USSC No. 04-108, 6/23/2005)

      Where's the "public use" in this taking, as required by the Fifth
      Amendment, you might ask?  "Economic development" is the court's
      response:  "Clearly, there is no basis for exempting economic
      development from our traditionally broad understanding of public
      purpose." (Kelo, Ibid)  I'm not even going to dignify usage of the
      term "clearly" in Stevens' opinion with any sort of reasoned
      discussion.  It simply is more bullshit.  "Clearly," indeed.  I'll
      tell you what is clear about this opinion, because we all can smell
      it, even way up here in the cheap seats.  Can you say, "taxes," boys
      and girls?  "Economic development" is a euphemism that bureaucrats
      employ when contemplating an increase in the current tax base.
      Money, in other words.

      It's always about money, isn't it?  Tell that to the 87-year-old lady
      and her husband living out their final years in the only home she
      ever has known.  What an incredibly, disgustingly, money-grubbing,
      thieving, murderous and shabby enterprise America has become!  This
      is not the country into which I was born.  These are not the people
      who pledged certain values to me, in exchange for which I became the
      person I am today.  This isn't your father's America.

      I simply cannot resist dropping in this quote from the Kelo decision,
      either:  "(O)ur jurisprudence has recognized that the needs of
      society have varied between different parts of the Nation, just as
      they have evolved over time in response to changed circumstances."
      In other words, the Supreme Court actually admits that it no longer
      interprets the Constitution, but merely issues fiat law in response
      to "the needs of society."  Judicial relativism.

      Like moral relativism, judicial relativism is a term I have coined to
      refer to the lack of any sort of legal compass, akin to the lack of a
      moral compass for those who preach, "If it feels good, do it."  The
      legal compass, of course, would be the Constitution...at least, it
      used to be when the US Supreme Court did its job of interpreting the
      Constitution.

      Like moral absolutism, judicial absolutism has been a casualty of the
      coup that has taken place in America during the past fifty years.
      You get an idea of the devolution of America's judiciary and
      government by considering the change of fare coming through your
      television set during the same period of time.  From "I Love Lucy" to
      MTV, which today features nudity, miscegenation, religious blasphemy,
      thinly-veiled sex acts and human excrement thrown on contestants in
      certain of its shows.  Yes, it is that bad.

      In reality, the coup started with establishment of the Federal
      Reserve System under President Wilson, who thought he was selling out
      America for the job he really wanted - President of the World - which
      he was promised by his Zionist keepers in payment for his treachery,
      in the form of taking the helm of the soon-to-be-established-but-
      short-lived League of Nations.  JFK's assassination marked the real
      beginning of the total takeover that you now see living and breathing
      throughout the halls of power in Washington, DC. and now entering
      into every level of state and local government.  (Much, much more on
      all this in my book, Defensive Racism.)

      There is an important topic barely mentioned in the Kelo opinion:
      The second of the two Fifth Amendment prerequisites to a taking of
      private property through eminent domain powers:  the payment of "just
      compensation."  The court seems to assume that all the property
      owners involved in this and other, similar cases, will get paid "just
      compensation."  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Let me
      illustrate with an example right here in North Idaho.

      Several years ago, a local Sandpoint hotel embarked upon a major
      expansion that was to take up the better part of a square city block
      and spill across a street into part of the adjoining block for its
      rooms, restaurant, bars, meeting rooms, etc.  Everybody in its way
      sold out at premium prices except for one guy who owned a run-down
      tavern.  Nothing worked.  Nothing would make him sell, not even an
      attempted court lawsuit.  It was his dream.  His little piece of
      heaven and no amount of money would provide him "just compensation."
      That's the problem with real estate.  Every single piece is unique,
      some with values far beyond monetary to their owners.  In some cases
      it is like trying to put a price on a child...or love...or
      vengeance.  Can't be done.

      Connie's hotel built around the Tervan, with its walls towering over
      the little structure, right on the property lines and, to this day,
      on Sandpoint's main street, you can see Connie's Hotel, a monolith
      except for one little pocket, right in the middle on one street
      fronting the hotel:  The Tervan.  (Seems some guy years ago meant to
      put up the word "Tavern" on the reader board but made a mistake which
      became endearing to some regulars.)  During the onslaught by Connie's
      lawyers, the guy added to his sign the legend, "Hell, no, we won't
      go!"  People loved it.  You can still get a beer in the Tervan.
      Gotta wonder how much longer, though, because that parcel would
      produce a great deal more in the form of property taxes as a part of
      Connie's Hotel.

      Today, Connie's could initiate an eminent domain action and not have
      to pay a premium, even.  In fact, I predict that, eventually, the
      Kelo decision will result in property being taken from people for
      pennies on the dollar.  Let your imagination run wild with how that
      might happen, as it is a topic for another day, but - mark my words
      well - it will happen.

      So Kelo is fatally defective for ignoring the whole issue of "just
      compensation," inevitably tied to the inherently unique, one-of-a-
      kind nature of each and every single piece of real estate in
      America.  Ask any real estate agent, "What's a piece of property
      worth?"  Always, the answer will be, "Whatever somebody is willing to
      pay for it."  There's the rub.  When it's taken from you, nobody is
      bargaining to buy it, so its value never can be ascertained with
      anything approaching certainty.  What if all the local appraisers are
      beholden to the developer?  Or local government?  Or....

      A particularly entertaining counterpoint to this past week's Kelo
      decision was the announcement by a fellow in California, Logan Darrow
      Clements, that he is applying to take a New Hampshire farm away from
      one of the Supreme Court justices who signed the majority opinion,
      David Souter, by eminent domain and convert it into a hotel.  In a
      letter to the local town fathers, Mr. Clements said:  "The
      justification for such an eminent domain action is that our hotel
      will better serve the public interest as it will bring in economic
      development and higher tax revenue to Weare."  Now, there is an
      eminent domain action that I can get behind!

      America has a great many problems which are, in reality, merely
      symptoms of a far more fundamental problem:  the people who presume
      to run America today.

      The ability to acquire power trumps the ability to exercise power
      either thoughtfully or fairly.  In other words, the people in power
      always are the very people who never should have been given power in
      the first place.  Think on this for a moment and you will see how it
      must be so.  In fact, how it never could be any other way except at
      the very beginning of any nation.

      Why?  Because those willing to do anything, all other things being
      equal, always will beat out those hampered by morals and ethics.
      That is the real reason why we get the kind of Presidents and
      Congresscritters and Judges that we have, year in and year out.

      Never in a million years would I want to be a judge.  I think that
      there must be something fundamentally wrong with anybody who actually
      wants to sit there and say to other people, "You live" or "You die."
      Really, now, what's the difference between that and being a serial
      killer?  A serial killer makes that decision about everybody with
      whom he comes into contact.

      Remember in Third or Fourth Grade, when the teacher suddenly
      announced, "Okay, children, now we are going to vote on class
      officers.  Who would like to be Class President?"  Remember the
      little fat kid who sat on the right, up in the front row?  The really
      annoying kid who sucked up to the teacher all the time and didn't
      like you?  His hand shot up so fast that you figured he might have
      dislocated his shoulder.  Today, that little fat kid is a judge.

      All of America's judges should be taken out and....well, let's just
      say they should be turned out of their jobs.

      Next, we should assemble all the country's lawyers and ask who wants
      to be a judge.  We could do it in the Poconos in August, since so
      many lawyers already will be there.  All those who raise their hands
      should also be taken out and....turned out of their jobs.  The rest
      simply should be disbarred, myself included.

      Very few lawyers will be needed if we eliminate 99% of the laws that
      nobody can understand or stay on the right side of, anyway, and those
      lawyers should be forced to serve part time as judges at no pay.
      That will speed things up, I guarantee you.  Since juries will be
      deciding all matters of fact and law, just as they should be doing
      anyway, but are kept from doing by a corrupt and unfair system, the
      judge is just a referee and needs only to know the rules of procedure.

      Howard Beale's full rant deserves a listen at this point:  "You've
      got to say, 'I'm a HUMAN BEING, Goddamnit! My life has VALUE!' So I
      want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your
      chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window. Open it,
      and stick your head out, and yell, 'I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT
      GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!'  I want you to get up right now, sit up,
      go to your windows, open them and stick your head out and yell - 'I'm
      as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore!'  Things have
      got to change.  But first, you've gotta get mad!...  You've got to
      say, 'I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!'
      Then we'll figure out what to do about the depression and the
      inflation and the oil crisis.  But first get up out of your chairs,
      open the window, stick your head out, and yell, and say it: I'M AS
      MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!"

      Now, I want to open my window and this is what I want to hear as soon
      as you are all finished reading or listening to this article:  (Click
      for sound file)

      Let's close with a joke.  How do you know when a judge is well hung?
      (Answer:  When he stops breathing.)  Now, that's a joke, don't
      forget, Mr. Chertoff.  I don't want you trumping up charges against
      me of conspiracy to commit murder of a Federal judge just because
      this joke is a good deal more specific than that claptrap with which
      you managed to send Matt Hale away for forty years, simply because he
      failed strenuously enough to object to the suggestion by one of your
      FBI agents that a judge be plugged.

      New America.  An idea whose time has come.

      _________________________________________

      Let's try something different this week, also by popular demand.  A
      few of your emails, both good and bad.  Let's see how it goes and
      maybe we'll make it a regular addition to the columns...

      Re: Trollops in Black Robes

      JVR writes:  Gee, I looked at my copy of the Constitution and I
      couldn't find the words "excessive entanglement."  Perhaps you
      meant "excessive exuberance?"
      You are absolutely right. I deleted a paragraph to tighten up the
      rant, but it just happened to be the transition from the
      Establishment Clause to the early meaning of "excessive
      entanglement," which has been the measure of "no law respecting an
      establishment of religion" since virtually the beginning of America.
      The "shall be no establishment" phrase  from the First Amendment is
      what really meant no Church of America.  I screwed up, though my
      argument still is sound. - ed

      Sviad writes:  I think perhaps you have confused modern, secular Jews
      with their older siblings.  Many of the problems in this country and
      the world today that you, and those who hold similar views write and
      speak of extensively are due to a lust for power and money on the
      part of all races in the world, not just Jews.  The reason there are
      so many secular Jewish corporate leaders is that Jews are unusually
      intelligent and posses an innate talent for creating wealth and
      managing businesses, not because they are the devil incarnate...the
      culprit behind all of these things is greed and little else.

      John writes:  As we that know the law business know, the law is what
      the judge says it is; today it is one thing, and tomorrow it is
      another thing!  Inconsistency and whim seem to rule! It is all
      nothing but human opinions...

      Natway writes:  I am an atheist...don't need a connection with a
      higher being and don't care if one does or does not exist.  My
      surprise is your continued use of the word justices when referring to
      the whores...
      Well...I certainly intended no offense to atheists when I said that's
      what today's judges are.  Nor did I mean to insult prostitutes.  Both
      groups deserve better.  -ed

      Bill writes:  (Concerning America) The lifeboats are sinking and the
      ship is sunk...

      Jim writes:  We in Australia are suffering much the same, except that
      we do not even have an Australian Constitution, so we don't expect
      any moral behaviour from the "so called government."

      Alan writes:  Love your Rants. The latest one was particularly good.
      I did notice one tiny error, however.  It's not Secular Humanism - As
      you well know, it's Secular Jewmanism - Worship of the Jew.

      Scott writes:  Thanks very much, Ed, for saying what needed to be
      said.  I would have been a tad rougher, though.  Of course, the last
      vestiges of my patience are gone...
      I'm getting a lot of email like this - it's a very different change
      from even just a year ago.  There is a distinct change in the air
      throughout America. - ed

      Thanks to all who read or listen to my ranting and raving.  Rest
      assured that I read all your emails, both positive and negative.  You
      have no idea how much your support buoys me up over the negatives,
      each and every day.  I get over a thousand emails a day now, so
      please forgive me if I don't respond or include you in summaries like
      this.  I'll try to have the courage to include some of both types in
      the future (though the good outweighs the bad by a ratio of about a
      thousand to one).



      -ed
      Copyright ©2005, Edgar J. Steele

      Forward as you wish.  Permission is granted to circulate

      among private individuals and groups, post on all Internet

      sites and publish in full in all not-for-profit publications.

      Contact author for all other rights, which are reserved.



      On-Line link to this article in HTML format:
      http://www.conspiracypenpal.com/columns/madashell.htm

       
       

       


      Yahoo! Sports
      Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.