Clarence Thomas, Hedley Lamarr, and Me

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that a city can force people to give up their homes if it would result in the economic development of the community. Historically, cities could force people to move only if it serves the public good; but that definition has now been expanded. The case in question involved a group of Connecticut families and small business owners who are being forced (although given “fair compensation”) to leave their home so that they (the homes not the people) may be destroyed in order to build a mini mall and some corporate real estate buildings. Some of these people have been in these homes for more than 70 years. The city agues that the new buildings with bring in jobs and tax revenue. The people argue that the government get the f%*k outta their homes. I have to agree with the people. How can you say that economics outweighs sociology. What about the little apartment in the movie Batteries Not Included, when now the government can just throw Jessica Tandy and those little robot things in the trash. Remember Rock Ridge, from Blazing Saddled, well Hedley Lamarr can now just round up Olson, Howard, Van, Rev., Sam, Gabby, and Harriet Johnson and burn their houses down (legally). The weird thing here is that the Justices who agree with me are the arch-conservatives. I’m all for the public good (and this would be different if they were building a school, library, or even a power plant) but this goes to far. Politicians are already influenced by corporations and now all the corporate lobbyists have to do it come up with any “economic reason” and they can steal somebody’s property.

Hmmm, Richard Pryor was credited as one of the writers of Blazing Saddles. I wonder why he didn’t get the lead (certainly he was used to working with Gene Wilder).

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Free Shakespeare Tickets - Contest #3

The Constitution and Justice

Lessons from History - Democracy