just desserts?

If Supreme Court Justice David Souter ends up having his property seized by eminent domain in order to build "The Lost Liberty Hotel", it will certainly be just desserts for his role in the decision to permit governmental agencies to seize private property for virtually any reason.

Is this likely to happen? I don't think so. The Supreme Court's decision does not mandate seizure of private property in circumstances like this, it only permits it. The intent of the court can only be interpreted as encouraging seizures of property owned by middle class folks with minimal political clout (poorer folks could generally already have their property seized by simply declaring it to be "blighted'). Celebrities and wealthy folks will be able to protect their property by means other than the fifth amendment clause that has been effectively removed from the Bill of Rights by the court ruling.

ending private property rights

One would think that the language of the fifth amendment regarding the taking of property "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation" would be relatively easy to interpret.

As Boortz observes:

"For hundreds of years the term 'public use' was interpreted to mean use for something like a school, library, police or fire station, power transmission lines, roads, bridges or some other facility owned and operated by government for the benefit of the general population. As politicians became more and more impressed with their own power they started to expand this definition of public use."

For some time, most jurisdictions have had the right to take property for redevelopment of "blighted area"; in other words, neighborhoods where poor people live. The redevelopment is typically done by private parties with the property ending up in private hands (different from the original owners). Thus, the novelty of the Suprement Court's recent decision is not that it permits use of goverment property seizure powers for private benefits but that it
erases the previous pretense of claiming that an area is "blighted" before it can be seized.

Apparently private property can now be seized without limit since a claim of increased tax revenue from the seizure is now the only "public use" the Court concludes is necessary. It takes little imagination to conclude that this "limitation" is no limit at all. Thus, the Supreme Court has simply erased a one-time important limitation on government authority.

In the instant case, the city of New London claims that it needs to seize (steal) private property in order to enhance the city's economic viability but why should some property owners in the city have to suffer so that a nonviable government entity should continue to exist. It would be better for the officals in New London to consider ways to surrender their charter and merge with another jurisdiction or back into the county in which it sits.

Unlike most recent laws and court decisions, the founding fathers were economical and careful with their words. It is hard to believe that the term "public use" in the fifth amendment was put there to have no real meaning.

Jeb Bush opines on the two party system

Yesterday Governor Jeb Bush called the Florida Democratic Party "pathetic" in response to the reports that the party had failed to pay Federal withholding taxes for employees on a timely basis.

Bush went on to state that "It's important that there be a vibrant two-party system so that there is a focus on ideas because the void is filled by other things and other people. And in my opinion up here in Tallahassee, it's filled too much by special interests". Wow! This is certainly a true statement and best example of the excessive power of special interests in Tallahassee is Jeb Bush's own fealty to the Schindlers of Terri Schiavo fame, most recently demostrated by requesting yet another investigation of oft debunked claims that Michael Schiavo was somehow responsible for his wife's condition.

The lack of any strong criticism of Bush's recent actions is evidence of the lack of a viable political oposition in Florida.

There is also evidence that Bush has surrounded himself with a poor set of advisors. The recent release of the Terri Schiavo autopsy results and the irrational Schinder family response have caused many of the politicans that previously supported the Schinder position to back off. While more and more folks realize that the Schinders fit the classic definition of "nut cases", Bush doesn't seem to have figured out the obvious.

Sneddon's word good for three days

Tom Sneddon has shown himself to be unable to control his longstanding animosity towards Michael Jackson. After the Monday acquittal, he stated that he would not "second guess" the jury. As of Friday, he felt compelled to hold an inteview with a reporter in which he did just that.

"Santa Barbara County District Attorney Tom Sneddon and his two lead deputies in the case said in an interview with The Associated Press that they believed the jury set too high a bar for evidence.
Jurors rejected the prosecution's entire 10-count case Monday after a 14-week trial. Some later said that Jackson probably had molested other boys but insisted the case they heard was not proven.
Sneddon, who said immediately after the verdict that he would not second-guess the jury, discussed the nature of child molesters but said he was not talking about Jackson specifically.

...

On NBC's 'The Tonight Show' Friday, Mesereau said Sneddon had a 'personal vendetta' against Jackson and 'mischaracterized the case from day one.' He said Sneddon had been searching for accusers since a previous case fell apart after the boy's family accepted a multimillion dollar settlement from Jackson.

'It was like an open casting call on Michael Jackson. The best they could come up with was this family, which we thoroughly discredited from A to Z,' Mesereau said."

The fact is that, despite criticism by Sneddon or his media lackeys like Nancy Grace and Diane Dimond, the jury in the Jackson case did a very good job. They were thorough and careful and, while they were not all entirely convinced that Jackson had never had inappropriate contact with young boys, they fairly concluded that there was at least the required reasonable doubt present regarding the specific allegations which they were charged to consider.

The real questions now are how much taxpayer money was wasted by Sneddon in his long pursuit of Michael Jackson and how many real crimes in Santa Barbara count have either not been prosecuted or have been pled out because the prosecutor's office was focused on this pursuit of Jackson? How many Santa Barbara county residents have been victims of criminals either left on the street or put back there due to Sneddon's person priorities?

Virginia is the Roach Motel

Millions of dollars of taxpayer money have been spent on the "Virginia is for Lovers" motto. But former residents of the state associate Virginia more with the slogan for the Roach Motel; you can check in but you can't check out. More specifically, Virginia is happy to have you as a new state resident but is unwilling to let go of your wallet if you try to relocate to another state.

Schinder's say "jump", Bush asks "how high?"

From the Washington Post

"Bobby Schindler, Schiavo's brother, said Friday his family believes more questions were raised than answered by the autopsy report and that a new legal review is appropriate.

'Anything that can shed some light on the cause of Terri's collapse is going to be welcomed by our family,' he said from Bloomington, Minn., where the family is speaking at an anti-abortion convention.

But the request was immediately criticized by some lawmakers.

'Enough is enough,' said Democratic Sen. Ron Klein. 'I don't want to see it on TV any more, I don't want to hear politicians talk about it. Let her be at peace.'

Bush acknowledged in his letter that an investigation may be difficult.

'I understand that these events took place many years ago, and that you may not be able to collect all the relevant records and physical evidence. However, Mrs. Schiavo's family deserves to know anything that can be done to determine the cause and circumstances of her collapse 15 years ago,' Bush wrote. 'The unanswered questions may be unanswerable, but the attempt should be made.'"

==================================================================================

Bobby Schindler, of course, is trying to capitalize on his sister's death to generate income for him as a spokemodel for the most extreme faction of the "right to life" movement. His actions bring to mind that of Mark Klauss who turned the death of his daughter Polly into a profit center.

So, although Bush more or less admits the futility of attempting to investigate something from years ago with no ability to ascertain any additional facts, he makes clear his total fealty and obligation to the Schindler family.

If the Schindler's can show an ability to control Jeb Bush like a trained lapdog, it will increase the publicity they can generate and their resultant income from taking bizzare and fringe positions. A Bobby Schindler that makes stupid statements that no one listens to will soon be out of work; if the same stupid statements cause immediate actions by the governor of an important state, he will soon be getting large sums of money.

Note to Jeb Bush; there are 17,000,000 residents in Florida and only a few members of the Schindler family. Please start to do the job you are paid to do and quite being a puppet to special interests. You are wrong if you think it will help you be elected to higher office. Notice that your brother the President has backed away from the Schindlers; most probably due to the fact that he is beginning to realize how extreme and irrational they are.

no need to trouble the Schindlers with facts

To most people, the release of the autopsy on Terri Schiavo brings an end, albeit a sad one, to the whole issue. The positions taken by Michael Schiavo were found to be correct and the rulings made by the courts appropriate. Even Senator Bill Frist, while not apologizing for offering a contrary "diagnosis" on the Senate floor during the debate on private legislation regarding Schiavo, at least now says it was not a "diangosis" (after all, he didn't charge for it) and he accepts the scientific results.

"That severe damage is responsible for the autopsy's most startling finding: that Schiavo was blind.
The nerve cells that would process messages from Schiavo's eyes were dead, Nelson said. Her eyes could open, close and make reflexive movements, but she could not see.
It's not certain how long Schiavo was blind, but based on doctors' statements, it appears unlikely she could see anything in a 2002 videotape, often seen in news clips, in which she appeared to follow a balloon and her eyes seemed to focus on her mother."

But facts such as those quoted above are not of interest to the Schindlers. Terri's brother Michael, attempting to launch his media career as a spokemodel, states that the family still believes they were right and that Terri was not in a vegetative state and was only stopped from recovery by her husband. If scientests and doctors say she was blind, they are wrong and the Schindlers have the heavily edited videotape to prove it. After all, this is the video that connned the Bush brothers and the United States Senate!

As far as Jeb Bush is concerned, he has decided to launch another investigation into the circumstances surrounding Schiavo's original medical problem 15 years ago. I'm sure this will be another productive use of the state's resources. Although Jeb Bush presumably represents millions of Florida residents, it appears that when the Schinders want something, no matter how stupid, they get it and they get it right away! To the Schinder's, Bush is no more than a puppet whose strings are all to easy for them to pull.

To most people, the release of the autopsy on Terri Schiavo brings an end, albeit a sad one, to the whole issue. The positions taken by Michael Schiavo were found to be correct and the rulings made by the courts appropriate. Even Senator Bill Frist, while not apologizing for offering an contrary "diagnosis" on the Senate floor during the debate on private legislation regarding Schiavo, at least now says it was not a "diangosis" (he didn't charge for it) and he accepts the scientific results.

"That severe damage is responsible for the autopsy's most startling finding: that Schiavo was blind.
The nerve cells that would process messages from Schiavo's eyes were dead, Nelson said. Her eyes could open, close and make reflexive movements, but she could not see.
It's not certain how long Schiavo was blind, but based on doctors' statements, it appears unlikely she could see anything in a 2002 videotape, often seen in news clips, in which she appeared to follow a balloon and her eyes seemed to focus on her mother."

But facts such as those quoted above are not of interest to the Schindlers. Terri's brother Michael, attempting to launch his media career as a spokemodel, states that the family still believes they were right and that Terri was not in a vegetative state and was only stopped from recovery by her husband. If scientists and doctors say she was blind, they are wrong and the Schindlers have the heavily edited videotape to prove it. After all, this is the same video that connned the Bush brothers and the United States Senate!

As far as Jeb Bush is concerned, he has decided to launch another investigation into the circumstances surrounding Schiavo's original medical problem 15 years ago. I'm sure this will be another productive use of the state's resources. Although Jeb Bush presumably represents millions of Florida residents, it appears that when the Schinders want something, no matter how stupid, they get it and right away!

Schiavo case -- end of the line?

"An autopsy on Terri Schiavo backed her husband's contention that she was in a persistent vegetative state, finding that she had massive and irreversible brain damage and was blind, the medical examiner's office said Wednesday. It also found no evidence that she was strangled or otherwise abused."

So, with a high degree of fanfare that must surely disappoint Governor Bush, the medical examiner has essentially determined that Michael Schiavo (and the entire state and federal court system) were correct regarding his wife's condition and her parents and the meddling legislative and executive branches of both state and federal governments were wrong.

Will this be the end of the tale? Perhaps not. The Schindlers, perhaps expecting this result had already complained about not being able to have an autopsy conducting by their own "experts". They did not accept the diagnostic results showing that their daughter's brain was half gone so why would they be more convinced by physical evidence? After all, the Pope was on their side but, of course, he is now dead.

Perhaps the Schindlers will appologize to Michael Schiavo for all of the bogus allegations. Perhaps Governor Bush will appogize to the citizens of Florida for wasting tax dollars. Perhaps Senator Bill Frist will apologize for claiming he could make an expert medical diagnosis from a selected Internet video segment of a woman seeming to follow motion now that we know that the woman was blind.

Perhaps all of this will come to pass. Probably on the day that pigs begin to fly and Tom Sneddon appologizes to Michael Jackson and the citizens of Santa Barbara county.

Michael Jackson gets justice!

While Tom Sneeden holds his head in his hands due to his failure to successfully persecute Michael Jackson, his biggest media "cheerleader" Diane Dimond still has plenty to say.

"HE WALKED out of court a free man, not guilty on all counts. But Michael Jackson is so much more than free.

He now has carte blanche to live his life any way he wants, with whomever he wants, because who would ever try to prosecute Michael Jackson now?

Twice now, once in 1993 and again in 2003, authorities tried to make a case against the former King of Pop and failed."

The fact is that it is unlikely that Sneeden would have ever brought such a weak case against someone that he did not have a personal jihad against. What Dimond characterizes as a case based on folks working "double overtime for over a year" was acutally a bag of garbage as, despite all of the taxpayer money spent, absolutly no physical evidence was ever obtained and the state was unable to produce any credible witnesses against Jackson. And Dimond has almost as much hate for Jackson as Sneeden, despite the fact that he has been her meal ticket for some period of time.

The jury got it right. Is Jackson's behavior off the curve? Absolutely. The jurors (at least some of them) seemed to also believe that it strains credibility that he has not been involved in some sort of illicit behavior with at least some of the boys that have shared his bed. But the case was about whether the state had made a credible case regarding the specific allegations that were brought and, in that arena, the state's case was so weak that it was obvious to outside observers that it deserved to fail.

This case is at least as much about prosecutorial abuse as it is about anything else. Sneeden had an evident dislike for Jackson for years and the bizzare British documentary that discussed Jackson sharing his bed with boys was apparently the last straw for him. Seeing that evidently convinced him to bring a case no matter how sloppy or how weak. It is good that he has lost his bogus case and it is too bad that so many "journalists" have been unable to control their own personal dislike for Jackson's lifestyle to fairly report what has happened here.

an overly-luxurious lifestyle made him do it

While we are used to hearing criminal activity blamed on such things as a poor upbringing, lack of education, or even consumption of Twinkies., Russell Crowe has blamed his assault of a New York hotel clerk on the effects of a lifestyle that was so luxuriant that Mr. Crowe was unable to control himself.

"Crowe had flown from New York to Manchester and back in less than a day to catch his friend Tszyu's world title fight. Once back in New York he went to a bar for a few drinks.
Crowe then tried to call Danielle (his wife) in Sydney just after 4am New York time but could not reach her from his $3905 a night hotel room. Frustrated, he is alleged to have gone down to the hotel lobby and, after a heated exchange, hurled the phone in the direction of Mr Estrada. "

It is unclear why Mr. Estrada was the target of the attack; the story doesn't suggest that Mr. Estrada had anything to do with Crowe's inability to make his phone call.

Should one expect to be able to immediately and successfully plane a phone call from a $3,905 hotel room and, if not, is a physical attack on a random employee of the establishment in order? That is a question most of us will never be in a position to answer. Perhaps a jury of "his peers" will have to answer it for Mr. Crowe although it is likely that some sort of deal with be struck. In that regard, it would probably be better for Mr. Crowe if he had less or nothing to say about the incident.

first the wrist slap then the reward

Last week a Washington state court's meted out a mild slap on the wrist to two individuals who were caught voting twice in last November's election. The consequences for this rarest of prosecuted crimes was a fine of the same magnitude as a speeding ticket.

This week, another state court in Washington rewarded all of the felons, double-voters and other illegal voters in Washington state (who risked the imposition of minor fines) by confirming their selection of Christine Gregoire as governor. Since the margin of separation between the two candidates was only 1/13 of the number of illegal votes and statistical analysis showed the illegal votes were strongly for Gregoire, it is clear that the illegal voters selected the governor.

Gregorie has already abandoned a number of pre-election campaign promised but, given the type of folks who elected her, why not?

Jeb Bush lies in the Schiavo case

The facts are finally starting to dribble out regarding Governor Jeb Bush's outrageous actions in the Terri Schiavo case. Documents whose release by the Department against Children and Families (DCF) was forced by court order further document the dishonesty of Bush's motives in the case.

"As the day approached in which Terri Schiavo's feeding tube was to be removed, Gov. Jeb Bush claimed there were new and compelling allegations of abuse or neglect that the state Department of Children and Families had to investigate.
That effort led to a dramatic showdown between the governor and the Pinellas-Pasco circuit judge who ordered Schiavo's feeding tube removed on March 18. Bush and DCF continued to seek its reinsertion, claiming the 30 or so new complaints had to be probed.
But documents released by DCF Friday reveal few fresh allegations that Schiavo was abused or neglected. Investigators wrote that there were 'no indicators' of abuse in any of the cases."

As expected, DCF is still defending its actions.

"Asked what in the complaints prompted the state's action to intervene, DCF spokeswoman Zoraya Suarez said in a statement:

'We are required by law to pursue all allegations of abuse and neglect thoroughly and expeditiously. DCF received new allegations, as well as several alleged similar complaints, which we were obligated to investigate. However, the department was prevented from having additional diagnostic tests performed to better assess Ms. Schiavo's level of functioning and responsiveness.'"

note to Jeb Bush -- please don't run for president

The St. Petersburg Times has reported that former President George Bush has suggested that his son Jeb consider running for President. Thankfully, so far Jeb has said no.

"Gov. Bush, who has repeatedly said he won't run for president in 2008, was asked Wednesday about his father's remarks. 'Oh, Lord,' he said, laughing. Shaking his head, he added: 'I love my dad.'
Asked if he would run, he simply shook his head no."

The fact is that, despite some good works, Governor Bush has shown a remarkable insensitivity to the rights of individual Floridians. In recent months, Bush deployed the Gestapolike Department against Children and Families (DCF) against Terri Schiavo to deny her the right to death with dignity and, more outrageously, against a minor in an attempt to deny her her right to an abortion after a pregnancy caused by a rape.

Here is a frightening through -- Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton.

making the punishment encourage the crime

In Washington state, the Democratic candidate was "elected" governor only after a second recount managed to result in finding enough additional votes to change the result of the initial tally and first recount. And "finding" votes was literally one of the things done in King County, as democratic a stronghold in Washington state as Cook County is in Illinois.

But Republicans have taken the election to court and activists have been doing the kind of review of the voting that the election officials apparently have not bothered with. The reviews have identified items such as illegal voting by felons, votes cast by deceased individuals, etc. Illegally voting in Washington state can result in jail time so one might hope that the increased scrutiny and availability of serious sanctions might discourage that kind of activity in the future. But the penalties imposted in the two cases that have been brought so far for multiple voting are so minor that they will most probably serve to increase the incidence of this kind of infraction.

"Doris McFarland, 83, and Robert Holmgren, 59, each admitted in King County District Court that they forged the signatures of and cast ballots for their recently deceased spouses.

Each will have to pay $490 in fines and court fees but they won't spend any time in jail. Multiple voting is a gross misdemeanor that can carry up to a year in jail and a $5,000 fine."

So, in Washington state, you might get a more serious consequence from speeding that from voting fraudulently in an election.

Michael Jackson -- not guilty

It is always difficult to form an educated conclusion about a criminal case without being on the jury and hearing all of the evidence instead of only those portions that are of interest to the media. The overcoverage of the Michael Jackson molestation case combined with the amazing weakness of the government's case, however, makes it possible to come to a reasonable conclusion regarding that case and that is that Mr. Jackson should be found not guilty on all counts.

In a criminal case, the prosecution bears the burden of proof, "beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard that is used. In a case such as this with no direct physical evidence whatsoever, the credibility of witnesses is critical. In the Jackson case, the accuser and his family have been shown to be professional grifters and con artists. It is hard to believe that a responsible prosecutor would proceed on a case based on this category of witness. But this prosecutor is Tom Sneeden who has, for many years, had a personal vendetta against Michael Jackson. And, as prosecutor, he has a substantial amount of discretion to bring a criminal case, even in circumstances like this where is case is so weak. It is hard to believe this case would have been brought against anyone who was not some sort of personal enemy of the prosecutor. Perhaps Sneeden's animosity towards Jackson is so great that he is willing to risk the remains of whatever sort of reputation he still has in the hopes that he can "get his man". Sneeden seems to share towards Jackson the same kind of burning hatred that Dan Rather has towards George W. Bush and it has arguably affected his judgment.

It goes without saying that an adult man sharing his bed with young boys is not conventional behavior. Yet that act alone is not against the law in Santa Barbara county (where Jackson lives) and Jackson should not be presumed to be guilty of something that is illegal simply because he does things that, while not against the law, are quite unconventional.

cashing in on watergate

The news that "Deep Throat" has been identified has re-energized the old hate-Nixon crowd -- a group that surely thinks fondly of the days when the Democratic party had an almost complete lock on power in Washington (except when they ran candidates for President who were unelectable). Deep Throat, now identified as Mark Felt, was their hero, the man who brought down Nixon.

In the glare of reality, Mark Felt does not seem to be quite so much the hero. His initial motivations appear to have stemmed more from the fact that he was unhappy at being passed over for promotion as anything else. Now that it is safe for him to come out, the statute of limitations for any criminal conduct associated with the leaks being long passed, it appears that Mr. Felt (and his family) would like at least a piece of the huge amount of money that was made over the years by the franchise spawned by the whole "Deep Throat" operation.

In From the New York Times

"On Wednesday, word came that the family of Mr. Felt, the ailing, 91-year-old former No. 2 official of the F.B.I., had sought payment in vain for his story after failing to reach a collaborative agreement with Mr. Woodward - not only from Vanity Fair, but also from People magazine and HarperCollins Books. They are apparently still determined to claim their share of the story that helped make Mr. Woodward a famous millionaire. "

It is not clear to me why Woodward would not be willing to find some way to pass along a bit of money to Felt and his family. The value of Felt to Woodward would have to be measured in the 10s of millions of dollars if not more (and the value to the Washington Post operation would be many times more). Without Felt there would have been no Deep Throat franchise and without that franchise where would Bob Woodward be? But while Woodward had apparently made plans to make one final windfall from Deep Throat (upon Felt's death), he has perhaps forgotten that without Felt he would not have had the opportunity to write and promote all of his other works.