PledgeBank United States
I’ll do it, but only if you’ll help

Pledge “LostLibHotel”

"I will pay to spend 7 nights in a hotel built on property seized from David H. Souter but only if 10 other people will do the same."

— Travis J I Corcoran, liberty lover (contact)

Deadline to sign up by: 29^th August 2005
1,418 people signed up (1408 over target)

More details
On 23 June 2005, Supreme Court justices Stevens Kennedy, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Kennedy decided, in the "Kelo et al. v. City Of New London et al." that local governments may seize property from one property holder and transfer it to a private citizen or firm, if the new use would "promote economic development".

Justices O'Connor, Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas dissented.

( http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/supct/... )

On 28 June 2005, Logan Darrow Clements of Freestar Media contacted Mr. Chip Meany, Code Enforcement Officer, of Weare, New Hampshire (where Justice Souter owns a home) and proposed that the town of Weare transfer Justice Souter's home to Mr. Darrow, so that Mr. Darrow might knock down Mr. Souter's home and build a hotel and museum to lost liberty on the site.

( http://freestarmedia.com/hotellostlibert... )

By signing this pledge, you agree to pay for lodging in the "Lost Liberty Hotel", once it is built at 34 Cilley Hill Road, 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.

Comments on this pledge

Because there are so many comments, only the most recent 50 are shown on this page.

Show all comments

• RE: Song Requests...
  
  How about "This land is your land, this land is my land?"
  Hal Scoggins, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• I think revolutionary war era music might be appropriate. I imagine there are a lot of entertainers who would be happy to perform for free at this place. BTW I think the LLH is a great idea. But if it's to raise tax revenues, I'm afraid it may be out of my price range, which is pretty much Holiday Inn. Will they have discounts for true believers? Or maybe a hostel type program where we can work off our bill? or would that be too socialist?
  carol anne, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Carol Anne--
  
  You just reminded me: the Lost Liberty Hotel will be a great source of jobs for Weare's teenagers. That will cut down on adolescent vandalism, saving the town further monies which they can invest in beautifying the town, which will further increase traffic and decrease crime, in a downward spiral of prosperity and good deeds.
  
  Souter's gotta go, for the greater good of the town.
  dymphna, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Hey, you guys are great! I never thought of doing oldies in our sets. Any more suggestions? - I'm all ears.
  
  We do libertarian content with a touch of the polite "R" word and some enviro things. We call it "social commentary without the hatred".
  
  We do 3 hours worth of stuff with the gammet going from Steve Voss (FAR right) to Anne Finney (FAR left) but it's ALL good libertarian music believe it or not. The enviro stuff is GENUINE enviro, not "use the state to do my dirty work and get my way no matter the cost" enviro.
  
  We live in the "People's Republic of Portland OR" where environmentalism REALLY IS a state sponsored religion.
  
  You think I'm kidding - move here!!!
  
  kindest regards
  Renee
  Enuf!
  Renee Daphne Kimball, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Renee D--
  
  You could do that libertarian special "I Did It My Way"
  
  ~D
  dymphna, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• >>We ought to start a thread of song requests -- 7 nights is a lot of
  time to fill.<<
  
  How about a Janice Joplin night. Can you all do those well?
  
  BWS
  Boyd Smith, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Ok, only been doing this a short time and hate to show my ignorance, but what, pray tell, is "the polite "R" word?"
  
  Would a magician be appropriate entertainment? making things disappear seems to go right along with the theme. David Copperfield makes great big things like the Statue of Liberty disappear. Wonder what he could do at LLH?
  carol anne, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• No Janis Joplin - just libertarian social commentary and environmental. Isn't that enough? I think maybe people have been going to too much karaoke LOL :-)
  
  kindest regards
  Renee
  Renee Kimball, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• HEHEHEHEHEHEH
  The songs we do "politely" reference the "R" word. It's that word regarding events in 1776, usually comes attached to the word "War" and has to do with that silly little document called the Bill of Rights. :-)
  
  kindest regards
  Renee
  Renee Kimball, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Regarding the suggestion for a magician - I LOVE IT!!!!!! How truly appropriate at the LOST Liberty Hotel. You're a genius or as near to it as I'll ever get anyway :-)
  
  kindest regards
  Renee
  Renee Kimball, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• I'd just like to note that magicians were extremely popular in the pubs back then.
  James Richards, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• you might learn something from these folks who were over a YEAR ahead of you fools-
  
  
  Passed by New Hampshire Democratic Party in May, 2004
  Editors' Note: Introducing positions into any local or state political party's platform is one effective tool for broadening awareness of important issues among politically active citizens. Here's one example from New Hampshire. Related platforms and resolutions have been passed in Washington, Oklahoma, and Maine.
  Resolution - Corporations
  
  Whereas,
  Interpretation of the US Constitution by federal judges to include corporations in the term "persons" has long enabled corporate directors, managers, agents and attorneys to act to nullify the fundamental and constitutional rights of human persons;
  
  The illegitimate judicial and legislative designation of corporations as "persons" and the bestowal of constitutional power and authority upon corporations enables corporate directors, managers, agents and attorneys to sue municipal, state and federal governments, resulting in both corporate intimidations and frequent judicial nullifications of law that are contrary to the values and desires of the people; and
  
  Said designation compels local, state and federal governments to recognize corporations as legitimate participants in the fundamental mechanisms of self-government (e.g., legislation, elections, education, regulation and administration, jurisprudence and public policy debate) and since corporations are legal aggregations of property and wealth, corporate participation in the mechanisms of self-governance overwhelms, overpowers, and essentially denies the participation of natural human beings;
  
  Public officials, hence, enable corporate managers, directors, agents and attorneys to wield the federal and state constitutions - to levy the coercive force of law - against the people of the United States, despite the fact that history, tradition and state constitutions declare the sovereign people to be the sole source of governing authority throughout the nation.
  
  Therefore, The New Hampshire Democratic Party declares its unwavering support that:
  
  Corporations shall not be considered "persons" protected by the Constitution of the United States or by the Constitutions of the states that so declare; and
  
  The rights of individual, natural persons shall be privileged over any and all rights that have been extended to artificial entities.
  
  The New Hampshire Democratic Party pledges its good faith and labors to make this resolution a reality.
  
  
  They didn't just sit around and bitch-
  Emma B., 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Once again, 'Emma' rears her head... and she's wrong as usual.
  
  If you tally the most pro-liberty and anti-liberty people in New Hampshire, and the NHLA (http://www.nhliberty.org) does, you'll find that the Democrats tend to cluster near the bottom of the list, being against both personal freedoms AND economic freedoms. A good chunk of RINOs are there also, but luckily the more libertarian minded Republicans tend to support both sorts of freedoms. (Yes, this contradicts the traditional Nolan chart wisdom)
  
  There are a lot of us working hard in New Hampshire already... and making progress... and Emma's not too happy about. Help make Emma even more unhappy - sign up for the FSP (http://www.freestateproject.org) today, and join us for Liberty in your Lifetime.
  Seth Cohn, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• No Seth- you have failed to show in ANY way that I am wrong-
  
  Where is the legislation, or even the attempt to legislate against the corporate take over of private land you "hard working" libery lovers claim to support? (your own liberty at the expense of anyone and everyone else)
  
  Where is your progress?? You don't have a chance of taking over NH Seth- and we're not stupid 'hicks' here either.
  Interesting article about the libertarian influence in the Winchester area of our state-
  If those of you who talk so much about individual freedom, actually embraced the 'credo' of libertarianism and not some abortion disguised as Libertarian- you might actually have a following- but from what i've seen, read, and met the sad reality is you are a motley crue at best-
  
  Which is a shame for those who actually are 'sane' and serious about making some necessiary changes.
  
  i'm not unhappy- come on ahead, you won't last long here unless you are independently wealthy. And in the mean time, you'll have to help pay our taxes.
  Emma B, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Well, Emma B shows her true colors:
  
  "you might learn something from these folks who were over a YEAR ahead of you fools-"
  
  Calling people fools is a sure sign one lives under a bridge and jumps out when people go by. So I had it figured out right the first time: The Troll runs out and yells "fool" occasionally just to let everyone know *she's* still in charge of the bridge.
  
  Meanwhile, Renee, came up with another oldie for your band: Somewhere Over the Rainbow.
  dymphna, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• my colors have been revealed since i was born Dymphna-
  
  And calling a spade a spade is speaking truth, not hiding behind screen names, and playing games-
  
  FOOL- acording to Houghton Mifflin:
  noun
  
  1. One deficient in judgment and good sense: ass, idiot, imbecile, jackass, mooncalf, moron, nincompoop, ninny, nitwit, simple, simpleton, softhead, tomfool. Informal dope, gander, goose. Slang cretin, ding-dong, dip, goof, jerk, nerd, schmo, schmuck, turkey. See ability/inability.
  2. A person who is easily deceived or victimized: butt3, dupe, gull, lamb, pushover, victim. Informal sucker. Slang fall guy, gudgeon, mark, monkey, patsy, pigeon, sap1. Chiefly British mug. See wise/foolish
  
  Lunatic (same source)
  noun
  
  A person regarded as strange, eccentric, or crazy: crackpot, crazy, eccentric. Informal crank, loon, loony. Slang cuckoo, ding-a-ling, dingbat, kook, nut, screwball, weirdie, weirdo. See wise/foolish.
  
  Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the greatest fool of all? The one who sees the 'folly' of this, or the one who participates in it and defends it, believeing herself to be the "Saint" ?
  
  The point of the post is to show there ARE constructive REAL things that can be done to stop the abuse of government DYMPHNA- rather than play the fool, and foolish games-
  
  i call you what you are, while you decieve yourself into believing you are the 'saint' who protects others from your own downfall.
  
  Your morph into "oh let me help" should have shown me how gullible i still am-
  
  i believed you were genuine. Foolish me. You don't want to change things, you just want to play-
  
  go for it, - if that is all you have to do with your life, i honestly pity you.
  Emma B, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Emma B,
  
  I consider that you have very seriously underplayed the Libertarian position.
  
  You would demean 'dymphna' because she would hold your feet to the fire.
  
  Well, see here: The current political system pretty much negates the ability of any third party candidate from actually getting into high office, by dint of the major two parties doing everything in their power to make it next to – if not actually – impossible to get on the ballot.
  
  And, that the Demo party of NH – and a few other places – has managed to hijack a Libertarian idea, and call it their own?
  
  Your New Hampshire Democrats are nothing other than theives in the night. In fact, I could call them 'intellectual rapists' and be spot-on.
  
  The problem with you, Emma, is that you want the rest of to play your all-encompassing government game, in order that nothing ever changes for the better of individual liberty.
  Status Quo.
  
  You would lambast us for not 'getting involved,' when all we =REALLY= want is to just be left alone.
  Why should we participate in your nanny state?
  Every time we turn around, there's =YET ANOTHER LAW= which has been instituted by you brand of whatever party you happen to claim membership in.
  
  You say we should participate.
  Well, get this: Why should we participate in =your= game, when all it will do is validate your egregious ideals of how to stuff it to your fellow citizens?
  
  Everytime I've turned around, all the Demopublicans say is: 'Well, you voted, and you lost! Now you have to abide by the results.'
  
  There's going to come a time in this nation, where those who have oppressed the people – who just wanted to be left alone – will get their just comeuppance.
  The statues and 'memorials' of their oppressors will come banging down upon the ground, and be melted down to make bullets.
  I hope I'm alive to witness the whole shebang.
  
  You want participation?
  Come the next revolution, I'll participate to erradicat corrupt triumvirate which has infested these lands for far too long.
  E.J. Totty, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• I'm not hiding, Emma T. I'm using my name, and Saint Dymphna, patron saint of lunatics, is quite amenable to my having been named after her.
  
  I meant my offer of help and still do. You turned it down and that's your perogative. Your negativity -- which has been cited over and over and over again on this thread by many people -- is your burden, not mine. I offered to help and you said no. Good enough. So why are you bringing it up now as some kind of character attack? Are only the perfect allowed to offer you their help? Well, heavens, woman, no wonder you feel so burdened.
  
  If fools we are, then fools we be.
  So why do you stoop to our company?
  
  See, that's what no one understands, Emma T. Why you'd keep coming around when you (a)say you're not going to, and (b)when all you do is complain about our efforts and (c)it's obvious that your complaints/insults/and holier-than-thou self-righteousness have won you no converts. Not one.
  
  Now Renee Daphne wants to sing with us and for us and notice what joy she created? People got enthusiastic and some logged on to her website to learn more about enufwaste. Look at her picture, Emmat --she's laughing. As Hafiz says, you might as well laugh all the way to God's house or cry all the way to the crazy houe. I'm with Hafiz.
  
  So the offer is still open, Emma. It's just that you're not woman enough to accept it. Hard to make room for a gift from someone you consider a fool, isn't it?
  
  Ciao, baby.
  dymphna, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• I will gladly spend 7 nights at the LLH. But this should be a chain -- build one on the other four justices' land who spat on the Bill of Rights. Then build on each mayor's or city councilman's land who initiated such eminent domain actions for private gain.
  Bad Bigdog, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Dymphna,
  Your offer of help, came after some pretty sour and tart smart ass replies to me- by you and others- Anyone is welcome here, IF they want to complain about this country, and play games- rather than doing anything of real effect and that takes more effort than signing a petition for an imaginary "hotel rawanda" The town of Weare (by the way) just passed an article limiting 'growth' and Souters home is in a 'rural-non commercial' area of town. Not only that, you completely ignore the FACTS about the Kelo decision.
  
  1.- the supreme court didn't target the Kelo's- or claim that New London was economically depressed- the state of Connecicut did.
  
  2.-The supreme court didn't say the only way the 'development' could be situated was on property that contained houses of people who had NO DESIRE to leave- or sell, the City of New London did-
  
  So, your anger, and retrebution is MISPLACED- But then, you don't want to build in Connecticut, because that isn't the state chosen for the "Free State Project"-
  
  The fact that you went from a mouthy sarcastic attacker to a suddenly 'caring compassionate person wanting to help' was like Dr.Jeckel Mr. Hyde.- and took me by complete surprise.- (yeah, i'm gullible enough to believe in the goodness of people- stupid me) i replied to your offer with appropriate and justifiable courtesy and politeness.
  
  What then followed was more of the childish bull-shit, that this site seems to revell in- which included YOU- (compassionate caring Dymphna dissapears) judgements about my sanity, my authenticity, my 'entity' interspersed with some admittedly KNOWLEDGEABLE and polite, while opposing views, from those who i believe truly DO embrace the 'vision' of the Libertarian perspective.
  
  Sadly those responses were few, and far between, but a refreshing change.
  
  If you have the humility, go back, read what i wrote from the begining on, and the responses i was met with- if you look at the 'big picture' you might learn something.
  
  This is a clique, and a 'game' for you folks- Life isn't a game for many people Dymphna- many of us don't have the luxury of playing "imagine we screw this guy for doing something we don't like, and while we're at it create alot of paper work for the town clerks, and puff ourselves up with our 'righteous indignation' in jest, hey it's fun, and make up menu's and schedules of 'games' we'll play and songs we'll sing-
  
  If you want to play games, play them with your own life- what you are doing is hating and abusing a man who has done YOU- DYMPHNA absolutely NO HARM- i would defend you against a similar group of FOOLS just as i defend justice Souter- i carry no torch for him- and wish he didn't feel compelled to uphold the precidents, and the Constitution in the manner he did- but he is far more learned in law than i,- or ANYONE here.
  
  And your time might very well be better spent worrying about the 'new' Justice who has a penchant for choosing the rights of corporations ABOVE those of individuals time and time again. He also doesn't believe that state's rights should 'trump' federal law- so you'll be screwed no matter what-
  
  Mr. Toddy, i won't bother to reply to your verbal diatribes- i don't want to enable you- and it is clear that you have as closed a mind as you do a heart.
  
  I came across the FACT that NH had seen this Kelo action coming, and with forsight and creative energy had acted PRE-EMPTIVLY against it- using the only means that will have any hope of changing anything- the Law-
  
  I've stayed away from this site- and conciously chose not to reply to posts which sought to 'bait' me- into worthless personal attacks- i even deleted the site from my bookmarks-
  
  
  My post about the Democratic proclamation against Corporate takings DID come off as angry- and for that i apologize- i came on here and read all the foolishness that masquarades as 'doing something'- and it angered me-
  and i replied inappropriately.
  
  But i won't stop hope ing that you will stop playing around and DO something constructive with your energy other than fantisize.
  
  laughter is good- but foolishness (and no one in their right mind can defend this site as anything but exactly that) has a point at which it becomes pointless-
  
  Emma
  Emma B, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• hmmmm...emma, you make a good point about corporations, however, it certainly is not productive to start out by name calling. I agree that the corporate mentality and the giving of personal rights to corporations just as though they are citizens, i.e. people, is a big problem in our nation. It is fostered by the executive branch as well as the legislative branch, and now, our last hope, the judicial branch has backed it up too. Shades of the industrial revolution (oops, I used the "R" word again) when people were cogs in the machines and what was good for GM was good for America. One example is the insurance industry. Look how many bills and laws are passed benefitting the insurance industry at the detriment of the private citizen--subrogation for instance. At least it's that way in my state, can't really speak for others. But Emma, you're never going to convince people to listen to you if you start out on the attack. And Emma, why shouldn't we laugh and joke at the same time as we organize and rebel (oops, did I use the "R" word there?)or display civil disobedience? Just because one has a good time does not mean that she is not serious about her beliefs. As someone has already said, Lighten up. I will add you'll never get out of this alive, don't take everything so seriously.
  
  One of the reasons (I believe anyway) that a third party candidate can't get elected in the big race is the factionalization that I see right here. I think everyone here (including Emma) agrees that the the Kelo decision was wrong. What we may disagree with is what the best answer is and who to blame. Rhetorical question, how much does it matter who left the gate open once the horse is out? Isn't it more important to catch the horse?
  
  Instead of real discourse, what I hear when people disagree here is fighting, name calling, finger pointing. We all have our opinions about what is best. EJ just because I don't happen to agree with everything you say doesn't make me wrong, it just means that I have a different opinion. Who was it who said I may disagree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it? One thing we do still have a little of here is freedom of ideas and freedom of expression although that is being eroded every day. Is your ideal country going to consist of only those people who hold exactly the same beliefs as you? Does this sound like other places most of us would not want to live?
  
  My ideas and attitudes change because I listen to people and give serious condsideration to everything that I hear, unless of course it is totally off the wall :) I feel I am a better person, more informed because I do not just toe the party line. I have learned a lot just reading all of these posts, for example. Several years ago I was a dyed in the wool liberal. Now I don't claim any label, and I think that is true growth and progress. Labels are not only unfair they're unproductive and keep true discourse at bay.
  carol anne, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• afterthought: question to the organizers or others who may know: Why Souter? Why not one of the others? And as bad bigdog said, why not all of the bureaucrats that started this whole mess to begin with?
  carol anne, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• sorry, just can't resist one more thing about singing and joy and protest all at once, anyone else old enough to remember Arlo Guthrie? Alice's Restaurant was a great protest song and at the same time one of the funniest darn things I've ever heard. How about an Alice's Restaurant at the LLH?
  carol anne, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Emma,
  
  I am not dymphna, but couldn't help myself replying to your email to her. All past history and personal matters aside, let me address the larger picture regarding the LLH, Souter and the Kelo decision.
  
  I could really care less what the town of Weare passes, the state of Connecticut decides or the City of New London did or did not do in the context of this discussion. They are simply background which led to what the Supreme Court did by way of a split decision.
  
  Justice Souter’s house is not being targeted because he took Susan Kelo’s or Mr. Corcoran’s home or even because he is making an 87 year old woman who spent her whole life in house, move. The big picture you are so fond of referring to is the overriding reason 1300+ people took the time to sign this petition. What the Supreme Court did in this case is exactly the kind of government abuse that George Washington risked his home, his status and his life for. It is the reason George Mason wouldn’t sign the Constitution without a Bill of Rights. It is contrary to the philosophy of Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Patrick Henry and all the rest of the founding fathers.
  
  Although we feel great empathy for those misplaced by eminent domain, we are not protesting this particular taking. We are protesting the stamp of approval five of the Supreme Court justices put on governmental theft. We are protesting on an even larger scale the loss of liberty and the constitutional protections designed to protect them of which the Kelo decision is simply part of.
  
  We are sick and tired of watching people declare “free speech zones” within a country where the FIRST amendment grants us free speech.
  
  We are fed up with our SECOND amendment rights being given a “hunting and sporting” litmus test.
  
  We are disgusted by the abuse of the FOURTH amendment in the name of protecting us. It was Ben Franklin I believe that said that those who give up their freedom for a little security deserve neither.
  
  We are appalled by the lack of consistency applied to the TENTH amendment so that what is deemed states rights is dependent on the mood of the court.
  
  We can’t understand how interstate commerce should be applied to medical marijuana rulings but not eminent domain rulings.
  
  We are tired of living in the shadow of the stitch in time that saved nine, reversing years of SCOTUS rulings indicating there was no provision in the constitution allowing for public welfare; a fact supported by James Madison, the principle author of the constitution, having rejected public welfare on constitutional grounds as a member of Congress.
  
  So you see, we aren’t upset about the background details in this case, we are upset about the ramifications of this case and all the other attacks on our rights, our constitution and our liberty which are all integrally related.
  
  You can apologize for your anger all you want Emma. I won’t apologize for mine.
  
  Brian Kent Jones
  Brian K Jones, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• carole ann,
  
  The quote about defending your right to speak your mind is commonly attributed to Voltaire. If you appreciate the spirit of the Lost Liberty Hotel, I think you would enjoy reading "Candide", his book about the political and philosophical atmosphere of his time. It is one of those few books for which I recommend reading the Cliff Notes as a companion to the real thing.
  
  I used to have "Alice's Restaurant" on vinyl and I love listening to it from time to time. I can't say I really agreed with the entire message at the time, but the way he pointed out the absurdity and pretentiousness of the draft was priceless. I kinda hear a guitar strumming in the background now as read about people getting involved in their government again and pointing out when the emperor has no clothes.
  Brian K Jones, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Right on, about all of it, Brian!
  carol anne, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Poor Emma.
  
  I would no more scroll back through your verbiage than you would accept help from me. I find it equally tainted.
  
  I offered help because you complained about being poor and because I have been in the situation you describe, with young children and having the expense of counseling. Your story touched me.
  
  But you refused the help for whatever your reasons are, which is fine...
  
  Then you attack me for offering the help because I think you act like a troll on this thread. You can jump up and down yelling I'm a fool and you're not a troll, but it doesn't change anything. I'm still a fool in your eyes and you're still a troll in mine,
  ____________
  
  Here's one working definition of a troll:
  
  "The contemporary use of the term first appeared on Usenet groups in the early 1990s. It is widely thought to be a diminutive of the phrase "trolling for suckers," itself derived from the sports-fishing technique of trolling.
  
  The word likely gained currency because of its conveniently apt second meaning, drawn from the "trolls" portrayed in Scandinavian folklore and children's tales, which are often ugly, obnoxious creatures bent on wickedness and mischief."
  ______
  
  Does that fit you, Emma T? You and others can decide. You already know my opinion.
  
  And, yes, the offer of help is still open. You're in a tough position and I appreciate that. But you're still not woman enough to accept it -- and you prove this when you attack my character and trash my offer of assistance. That's all it is, an OFFER. All you needed to do was say no thanks and leave it at that.
  
  But I don't think I've ever encountered anyone less able to "leave it at that" than you, Emma. Anyone who says, as you did -- and says it more than once:
  
  "I've stayed away from this site- and conciously chose not to reply to posts which sought to 'bait' me- into worthless personal attacks- i even deleted the site from my bookmarks-"
  
  and yet finds herself here again -- did that mean old bookmark suddenly pop up and MAKE you come over?? -- needs some help. You "consciously" chose not to be here and yet here you are, still huffing. Guess your unconscious chose for you, huh?
  
  As I said, poor Emma T...
  dymphna, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• oh, and I should add that although the particulars of this case such as the Kelo family and their story are not really what this about in my opinion, I don't mean to imply that what they are going through is not important.
  
  I also do not mean to imply that everyone here agrees with my every word when I refer to "us" and "we."
  Brian K Jones, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Brian Kent Jones--
  
  You should be someone's speech writer. You are eloquent and succinct: excellent qualities in a thinker and an author.
  
  If you're not doing it professionally, I hope you consider doing so.
  dymphna, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Carole Anne:
  
  Maybe Alice's Restaurant could be the name of the hotel restaurant. That would be fun.
  
  Why Souter? In the long run, probably because he was simply the lightning rod. That happens with public figures. Have you read "The Wisdom of Crowds" or "The Tipping Point"? They both go a long way toward explaining aggregate opinion and how it can move issues along. And how it is very often "right."
  
  Jude Wanniski's book "The Way the World Works" is probably the best introduction to the subject of markets and property rights and taxes. He's a social democrat with libertarian leanings re economics. He wrote it on the high school level so we could *all* understand it.
  Dymphna, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Carol Anne-
  you bring up some very true points- And i hope you get some honest answers about your questioning of why Souter?
  
  I never did, no matter how many times i asked.
  
  And you are correct, anger never solves anything- And having fun is crucial for everyone- some people just have different 'senses of humor'.
  
  I didn't originally come to this site angry- but i cannot align myself with people who on the one hand say in effect,
  "it is wrong to rape", and then when someone they don't even know is raped,
  and a Jury finds the rapist innocent.
  Then someone from the group who was NOT raped, but fears rape says "I'm gonna rape that guy- HE was on the jury and let the rapist go, as a matter of fact, lets make it a GANG rape- who'll join me?" and all sorts of people line up like a hatefilled lynch mob.- and joke among themselves about how they'll do it. And i come into the middle of it all and say.... NO!- stop! if it is wrong to do- how can you justify doing it yourself? Only to have the viscious anger and hatred turned on me-
  
  Now, honestly, does that seem like adult, rational behaviour to you? it doesn't to me-
  i LIVE in NH- i've been in the Weare Town Offices- they don't need all this crap- I've been in several town offices- i also lost a friend who worked for the town office when an irate taxpayer went on a rampage and shot up anyone who moved in a Town Hall a few towns away from where i live, about 10 yrs ago.
  So, maybe i'm not all that innocent, or tolerant of the mess that is caused when you do crap like this- to folks that are just doing their job- Folks who don't need any more 'make work' or hassles.
  Weare isn't a city- it isn't a very big town, though it's alot bigger than mine. Believe me, it's not a joke to the Town Clerk, and to the police department, who have to pay for the media, and the 'people from away' who come to gawk, and joke, and play games.
  
  For a group who promotes freedom, and liberty, this group has cause alot of hardship for innocent bystanders in the town of Weare.
  
  but thank you for your reply Carol Anne-
  
  
  Dymphna,
  if you 'offered' help because you cared- then my expressing gratitude, and appreciation while declining your offer should not be held against me- Other wise you were not 'offering' anything - you were demanding i 'accept' your help or be villified by you- and told i was in effect 'a fool' and 'a troll' and a shriveld up prune- because i declined your kind offer.- thinking (stupid me) that i had that 'right'.
  I sincerly appreciated your offer, and said as much- It IS hard to live as a single mother with no one to lean on, but my 'trust' humanity is very fragile, especially strangers bearing gifts- and i've been burned too many times to 'trust' that those who offer kindness, often want blood in return-
  
  I will admit, it IS my issue- and my battle, but your demeanor towards me, since then has only proven my fear and insecurities true.
  
  And, it's Emma B Dymphna- i spelled your name wrong and you took great offense- citing my stupidity- it was not intentional on my part. i ignored your mis-spelling of my name thinking it was a slip of the finger, but it is B, not T.
  
  As for being a troll- i am not- and never have been one. My goal is not to stir the pot- or cause trouble, or "play" with people- My goal was (and IS) to try and get people to look twice at what they are advocating in this action- it was to bring a bit of 'reality' to this 'joke'- to put the human face on it-
  
  Have i failed? Clearly- do i like being treated as i have been here? maybe in some sick corner of mu subconcious i do- but consciously, my only goal is to stop people from hurting someone, who has done NOTHING other than what he felt was his 'job'-
  AND done nothing that has not been done by the Supreme Court before. This was NOT a precident setting case- the precident had already been done SEVERAL times before, and he was one of FIVE who ruled as he did, not even writing, or commenting on the decision. Yet HE, a man who calls my state home, is your target- chosen 'randomly' it is claimed-
  
  I'll suggest to you Dymphna, that you don't want to 'go back and look' because you know what i've said has merit- But you are a 'free person'- and if you choose to refuse to 'look back' then that is your business- Just remember, that many of us don't fear looking back, even if it is a lesson we don't really relish learning- if we don't learn from the past, we'll contunue repeating the same mistakes over and over again-
  
  i wish you well- and hope you never become the whipping boy of anyone's 'cause'- or the 'scape-goat' or'sin-eater' for your cause.
  
  Emma B
  Emma BBBBBB, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Dymphna,
  
  Thank you for the kind words. I never really considered that before but considering I seem to be writing one essay after another in online forums all for free, maybe I should consider checking the color of my parachute.
  
  Without going into endless details, I thank my 9th grade English teacher, Miss Alice Krumenacher. She was a dedicated teacher who took the expression, "college prep" seriously.
  Brian K Jones, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Emma,
  
  The ultimate precedent is the U.S. Constitution. It is not an intellectually challenging document. It is written for the general public in the most concise, unambiguous language possible. Please tell me what part of it you find difficult and I will be happy to point out to you what the words mean. I will also be happy to point out how taking someone's property, paying them a fraction of what it is worth, and handing it over to another private party using "economic development" as the sole justification for this grand larceny disguised as proper governmental process violates the fifth amendment.
  
  Then, assuming we can come to the logical conclusion that the entire process is rotten to the core and violates our Bill of Rights, you can tell me how it is you count Souter as an innocent bystander. Maybe you think Souter can't quite comprehend the difficult words like "private", "public" or "just compensation." I tend to think differently.
  
  In fact, all this talk about the injustice of it all and concentrating on the matter at hand has really made me think hard. It has made me reconsider my commitment to liberty and I want to thank you Emma for giving me the inspiration to join the Free State Project instead of just being a volunteer friend of it.
  Brian K Jones, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Poor Emma.
  
  Maybe we need to sing a chorus of "Nobody Knows The Troubles I've Seen."
  
  Bye, Emma.
  
  You may have the last word. Lord knows you've earned it, girl.
  Dymphna, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Brian Jones--
  Your teacher may have inspired you, but the nascent gift was already there. I hope you have lots of opportunity to practice; you never can tell when you'll get the chance to use it.
  
  I became a free lance editor for several authors when I became too ill to work anymore. It's "work" but very engaging.
  
  Good luck with it!
  
  PS If you get the chance to go back and thank your teacher, do so...that's sooo rewarding. My 8th grade teacher inspired me -- she is a Sister of St. Joseph and now in her 80's -- and that lasted me all these years. It's the zeal for laughter and life that makes one live so long. We still stay in contact.
  Dymphna, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• It is much better to bring the court to its senses by a string of hotels than let it continue to deteriate to the point of needing to follow Federalist 28 to restore Constitutional government.
  Bryan W., 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• I've just tuned in, but couldn't leave without commenting back to a post by Emma T. (Emma B at 22:19, Thursday 21 July) I realize this is way late, however Emma DOES need to be corrected. I have become so angered - as have so many Americans - by the spread of government and how they are taking over our lives.
  Justice Souter did not vote WITHIN THE LAW OF THE CONSTITUTION! The Constitution states very clearly that any eminent domain takeovers MUST be for public use, NOT to benefit individual developers - and NOT for corporations, etc. to build higher tax-producing properties. That being the case, ACLU et al can start suing to have every CHURCH, every VFW Hall, EVERY PRIVATE SCHOOL to be demolished to make way for tax-producing properties. And don't think that this is not already on the minds of many DAMNOCRATS, and SOCIALISTs in this country.
  I strongly recommnend to Emma T. and the rest of her cronies that you get yourself a copy of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights....read through it carefully. If you are really interested in the meaning and intent of the Founders, you can also read some of the Federalist Papers. But the Constitution and Bill of Rights should be the minimum. These are easily available on the net. I downloaded both in pdf docs within a few minutes.
  litl bits, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Litl bits,
  
  You are wasting your 'key strokes' attempting to get emma to listen to reason.
  
  Her mind is made up, and it's 'cast in stone.'
  And, while I would agree with some of her assertions, I see the rest as as a waste of time.
  
  Suter is from N.H., and it's up to the residents of that state to make a point – by using his land in that state to drive that point home: If it's just okay to steal land from anyone for tax purposes, then the very first person in New Hamphire whose land is to be taken for that purpose should be the one person who signed-off on the idea.
  
  Suter signed-off on the majority opinion, and so therefore – and therefor – should suffer the first insult of that opinion.
  
  May the SOB find himself homeless– forever.
  E.J. Totty, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• I agree. If I could afford it, I would pledge to stay there for 7 days myself! I do have family in NH (grew up there) and if and when Lost Liberty Hotel is built, I would certainly visit.....and family would definitely go to the Just Desserts Cafe!
  Crow anyone?
  litl bits, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• I want to send some money. Do you take amex? if not what do I make a check out to?
  bob dockerty, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Emma wrote - "my only goal is to stop people from hurting someone, who has done NOTHING other than what he felt was his 'job'-
  AND done nothing that has not been done by the Supreme Court before. This was NOT a precident setting case- the precident had already been done SEVERAL times before"
  
  I realize I come to this battle late in the game. Heck, it has been a month since anyone posted. I went back to the beginning because I wanted to see what set this whole battle off. Emma, I started out fascinated by some of the things you had to say. Your eloquent writing and apparent intelligence & knowledge make a strong argument for your case. Shoot, my high school graduate-carpenter father and high school graduate bookkeeper mother don't match the education in your late fathers pinky finger. And for what I am about to say I will undoubtedly be verbally flogged by you and your supporters here, of which luckily there are not many.
  
  Emma, your facts seem to be correct, at least those of which I have some knowledge. It is your "feelings" that are disturbing. Above I grabbed some of the last things you wrote. To be honest there were many other things you wrote that I wanted to comment on. It was like watching a train wreck unfold in slow motion as I read your responses to "their" responses to your responses..... In the end though I think your comments above truly highlight the folly of your argument. You kept saying that two wrongs don't make a right. That was arguably the underlying theme of your whole message and yet in the end you blew it by bringing up precedent. I know that this was not the first time. But of all that I read, in the context you said it you opened my eyes to the error of your argument for protecting Souter and his cohorts. According to you all he did was what he "felt" was right according to things that the courts had done before..."Precedent". First, you acknowledged many times that judges aren't supposed to feel, though maybe not in those words. Politicians feel, judges interpret the law. The LAW, not precedent. You will also admit that you acknowledged that the "precedent" in this case is wrong. You said many times that eminent domain laws were bad law. Therefore precedent is "bad law". "Two wrongs don't make a right". What happens when WE THE PEOPLE get our politicians to enact laws that the Supreme Court finds to be "Unconstitutional" according to their "feelings". They overturn it. What happens in states where the poeple vote......THE PEOPLE VOTE to enact a law and the Supreme Court deletes the law as "Unconstitutional" according to their "feelings". It is exactly what will end up happening in the case of gay marriage. People in states all over the country have and/or will enact laws banning gay marriage and my bet is they will be stricken by a left leaning activist court system, all the way to the top. You keep talking about "fight it another way" or some such drivel. Last I checked there is nothing after the Supreme Court, and last I checked they have no problem striking down laws that they don't "feel" fit their reading of the Constitution.
  
  
  Of all the things you said from the first NOTHING stuck to me like your use of the word "nothing" in the lines I copied above. No, Souter did not act alone. I am no fool, though I am obviously younger, less educated, and less worldly than you, and even some of the poeple on this list that I agree with for that matter, but I am not stupid enough to believe that he did "nothing" wrong. When I read what you wrote above I wanted to THROW UP! God, what a disgusting point of view. Don't protect that dirty politician/judge, any more that the others. It doesn't matter if the hotel is right or wrong. The protectors of our rights....OUR RIGHTS have become the thieves. It is not the law that they protect but lawlessness that they practice. When those judges upheld precedent, changed the meaning, voted their "feelings" they did the very thing you are convicting these people of doing, they commited "two wrongs"...or ten....or 100....or however many it took to get to this point. "Well, my predecessors did it so it must be right". That was his "feeling", the one he used to STEAL those peoples homes for another private citizen. Emma, I hope someone finds some economic use for your property, I fear they might find one for mine some day. Emma, I FEAR they might take my property to give to someone else. I have never feared living in my country. And I never, NEVER thought it would be the court system as the root of that fear.
  
  Emma, don't bother correcting my grammatical or spelling errors. It is 12:30am and I am tired. And unlike you Emma, this will be my last posting, I promise, even though it is only my first. I am afraid I have seen about all I care to and you don't have anything to offer but condemnation to those who would "DO" something other than write letters and march and call people. Cause we all know how effective that has been recently.
  Jason R, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Jason R. you are absolutely right. Good comment.
  Bryan W., 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Jason R. - Please don't stop posting. You have been quite eloquent in combatting Emma's erratic thinking....I would say reasoning, but I can't see real reason in her comments.
  You are absolutely right! Because it was done before doesn't make it right! The Supremes - indeed all judges - are SUPPOSED to make their decisions based on CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - not on feelings. They can take precedent into account, though they (precedents) should be used only as a FACTOR - NOT a deciding one!) I can only suggest to Emma, and others who may share her views, that she re-read the Constitu-tion and some of the supporting Federalist Papers, which give us a good idea of WHY the Founders worded the Constitution the way they did. This country was founded in order that those who came here would NOT be under the thumb of government as they had been in England (and elsewhere in the "old country"). Private property was sacrosanct in their view. But our Activist judges today see the Constitution in a whole new light. Our Constitution actually forbids de-cisions based upon International Law, but present-day judges could care less. There are some who are actually working on completely re-writing the Constitution. I believe it was John Adams, but feel free to correct me - who said to the effect that no Democracy lasts forever - they always end up committing suicide. THAT is what is happening today in this country!
  Americans had better wake up and start protesting a lot louder if they wish to remain under Democratic rule. There are many who want no more American sovereignty - they see this Utopian "world community", in which the "elite" class will rule - and then the rest of us paeons will serve. I know how far-fetched that sounds, folks. But that is the ultimate goal of many, many loonie liberals (and even some RINOS) They are all right now jockeying for position in that ruling elite class.
  And we, the paeons, go about our merry way -
  Let's see who has the last laugh here!
  Litl Bits, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Bryan W,
  
  You're right on that score!
  Jason R definitely put the truth to the matter.
  
  And, Litl Bits:
  Concerning your comments above:
  It's not so much a matter of 'activist' jurists, as it is more the matter of trying to read something into a simple sentence that simply isn't there.
  
  Now, that might be a description of 'activist,' but not in my book.
  Actually, I call them as I see them: Intellectually dishonest, and they fall on all four sides of the political 'ring,' Left, Libertarian, Right, and Totalitarian.
  
  Actually, our problem – yours and mine, has more to do with the amount of power allotted by the USC to the federal government, and by extention – to state government.
  
  If government had not been given the power of ED, likely none of what we suffer would have ever come about, and that includes every external war ever waged by the US Gov., and those wars fought against the Indian Nations.
  
  But, then? Our government is patterned after what was then in existence: The British Empire.
  
  Our only =realistic= hope here, is to attempt change by the amendment process to remove those powers from =all= government. Only then will the people get the fairest deal – or no deal at all if they so desire that.
  
  The upside is that it =can= be accomplished; the downside is the matter of convincing a whole lot of people that the change is necessary to protect private property.
  E.J. Totty, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• On the face of it, Mr. Clements' campaign flies in the face of libertarian principle or go against the golden rule....'two wrongs don't make a right', and all that sort of thing. However, this is not just about the Kelo decision. For many years, politicians - be they judges, district attorneys, special prosecutors, councilmen, mayors, senators, ad nauseum - have been insulated or immune from the very laws the rest of us have to live by. They pass these laws without any regard to the ill effects for those without deep pockets. Well, it's time to bring those politicians down in the trenches with everyday people - make them experience the ramifications of their decisions. The laws that we ordinary mortals have to live by should apply to everyone else. Pure and simple. Many should be concerned as to the direction this country is headed in. One wonders if we just shouldn't put away the American flag and raise the hammer and sickle in its place. What is even more frustrating is the number of people who don't seem to care. The same folks who would think nothing of waiting in line all night to get tickets for a rock concert or special event are the same folks who don't vote, engage in letter-writing campaigns or any activity to make their voices heard on important matters.
  Regardless of any hidden agendas on Mr. Clements' part, I say more power to the people who will brave the tough January winter to help him gather the needed signatures to take Souter's land. The Supreme Court has lost its bearings and its credibility as defender of the Constitution's original intent. It's time for the American people to act. We need a second American Revolution, and this time, the enemy, sad to say, is not England.
  Estelle Edwards, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• I wish I had made it in by the deadline to sign up for a week at Lost Liberty hotel. If it opens I will do my best to have a stay in it anyway. I strongly believe that this is a necessary move to make it clear that americans won't stand for having our liberties taken away any more now than in our past. I am a disabled veteran and fought to preserve our rights not see them lost!!!!!
  Christine Jones, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Months later I return to see that Emma is still picking arguements with everyone on the board. Seems like the Cointelpro guys just can't leave it alone when they see original thinking going on. Gotta get a mole in there somewhere :)))
  maggie K, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• hey, Ohio is trying to do the same thing in Norwood as in the Kelo case-- taking a private property for a developer. Anyone game to try it there if the Ohio supremes rule in favor of big money?
  carol anne, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• If that is happening in Ohio, you need to take action to change your laws. In California, we have 4 potential ballot initiatives aimed at reforming eminent domain abuse. Hopefully, only one will make it onto the ballot; not none and not more than one. I don't know what kind of provisions Ohio has for ballot initiatives.
  
  Good Luck
  Brian Jones, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!
• Actually, a bill is before the Ohio legislature as we speak to limit the eminent domain powers so that this will not happen. But the Ohio Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week on the Norwood case so by the time the legislature gets done with it, it may be too late for this case. What's really appalling is that the city says it is a declining neighborhood because of the poor infrastructure! Can you believe that? They won't fix the roads and sewers AND they can take the property because of that. I don't live in the area, just heard about it from some friends recently then heard a news report on a cinci radio channel (Norwood is a city surrounded by Cincinnati).
  carol anne, 2 years ago. Abusive? Report it!