Is this poetic justice or what?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reformingstudent

Puritan Board Junior
Tuesday, June 28, 2005 4:01 p.m. EDT
Developer Wants Hotel on Justice Souter's Land

Could a hotel be built on the land owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter? A new ruling by the Supreme Court which was supported by Justice Souter himself itself might allow it. A private developer is seeking to use this very law to build a hotel on Souter's land.

Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.
On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.
Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."

Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.

"This is not a prank" said Clements, "The Towne of Weare has five people on the Board of Selectmen. If three of them vote to use the power of eminent domain to take this land from Mr. Souter we can begin our hotel development."

Clements' plan is to raise investment capital from wealthy pro-liberty investors and draw up architectural plans. These plans would then be used to raise investment capital for the project. Clements hopes that regular customers of the hotel might include supporters of the Institute For Justice and participants in the Free State Project among others.
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
I hope they build an expensive hotel and then trash teh place, thus bringing the property level down drastically.

[Edited on 6--30-05 by Draught Horse]
 

Poimen

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Originally posted by Draught Horse
In fact, I hope a whole army of white trash--led by myself--inhabit the place just to trash it.

:bigsmile:

[Edited on 6-29-2005 by poimen]
 

BayouHuguenot

Puritanboard Clerk
In fact, I would hang the Ten Commandments up outside and a Confederate Flag from the tallest part of the building!
 

biblelighthouse

Puritan Board Junior
Originally posted by Draught Horse
In fact, I would hang the Ten Commandments up outside and a Confederate Flag from the tallest part of the building!

3natan.gif


B00004CK54.02.LZZZZZZZ


Btw, Jacob (Draught Horse) has now grown a beard. That's him in the picture above, partaking in the revelries of the Puritainboard get-together at the Lost Liberty Hotel. :bigsmile:
 

crhoades

Puritan Board Graduate
Originally posted by WrittenFromUtopia
I'll bring my Scottish flag. They match well, with the X's and all.

What?!?!?! No 'For Christ's Crown and Covenant' Banner?:p
 

Me Died Blue

Puritan Board Post-Graduate
Originally posted by Reformingstudent
Could a hotel be built on the land owned by Supreme Court Justice David H. Souter? A new ruling by the Supreme Court which was supported by Justice Souter himself itself might allow it. A private developer is seeking to use this very law to build a hotel on Souter's land.

Justice Souter's vote in the "Kelo vs. City of New London" decision allows city governments to take land from one private owner and give it to another if the government will generate greater tax revenue or other economic benefits when the land is developed by the new owner.
On Monday June 27, Logan Darrow Clements, faxed a request to Chip Meany the code enforcement officer of the Towne of Weare, New Hampshire seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road. This is the present location of Mr. Souter's home.
Clements, CEO of Freestar Media, LLC, points out that the City of Weare will certainly gain greater tax revenue and economic benefits with a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road than allowing Mr. Souter to own the land.

The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."

Clements indicated that the hotel must be built on this particular piece of land because it is a unique site being the home of someone largely responsible for destroying property rights for all Americans.

That is beautiful. I hope it succeeds, and if it does, it will be very interesting (and telling) to see Mr. Souter's reaction.
 

VirginiaHuguenot

Puritanboard Librarian
Originally posted by Reformingstudent
The proposed development, called "The Lost Liberty Hotel" will feature the "Just Desserts Café" and include a museum, open to the public, featuring a permanent exhibit on the loss of freedom in America. Instead of a Gideon's Bible each guest will receive a free copy of Ayn Rand's novel "Atlas Shrugged."

Awesome! Except I would stick with the Gideons over Ayn Rand...:um:

The Confederate flag, St. Andrew's Cross and Covenanter Banner would all be great additions too!

:banana::banana::banana:
 

Myshkin

Puritan Board Freshman
Count me in. I'll be the one with the banner that says "As for me, I know that my redeemer lives, and at the last He will take His stand on the earth."

The supreme court wants to legislate eminent domain over the land? What a suprise it will be when the True King comes to install eminent domain over His world.

I imagine that if this hotel deal goes through, the Supreme Court will reconvene not to reverse the decision, but rather to qualify it: "we meant except for politicans and the lobby groups who fill their pockets"
 

PuritanCovenanter

Moderator
Staff member
The supreme court wants to legislate eminent domain over the land? What a suprise it will be when the True King comes to install eminent domain over His world.
AMEN!

Thanks for the CNN article. I tend to be a bit skeptical.
 

VirginiaHuguenot

Puritanboard Librarian
Activists Seek to Evict Souter From Home

By KATHY McCORMACK, Associated Press Writer Sat Jan 21, 2006

CONCORD, N.H. - Angered by a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that sided with a Connecticut city that wanted to seize homes for economic development, a group of activists is trying to get one of the justices who voted for the decision evicted from his own home.

The group, led by a California man, wants Justice David Souter's home seized for the purpose of building an inn called "Lost Liberty Hotel."

They submitted enough petition signatures "” only 25 were needed "” to bring the matter before voters in March. This weekend, they're descending on Souter's hometown, the central New Hampshire town of Weare, population 8,500, to rally for support.

"This is in the tradition of the Boston Tea Party and the Pine Tree Riot," organizer Logan Darrow Clements said, referring to the riot that took place during the winter of 1771-1772, when colonists in Weare beat up officials appointed by King George III who fined them for logging white pines without approval.

"All we're trying to do is put an end to eminent domain abuse," Clements said, by having those who advocate or facilitate it "live under it, so they understand why it needs to end."

Bill Quigley, Weare deputy police chief, said if protesters show up, they're going to be told to stay across the street from a dirt road that leads to Souter's brown farmhouse, which is more than 200 years old. It isn't known if Souter will be home.

"They're obviously not going to be allowed on Justice Souter's property," he said. "There's no reason for anybody to go down that road unless they live on that road, and we know the residents that live there. The last time (Clements) showed up, they had a total of about three or four people who showed up to listen to him."

Clements, of Los Angeles, said he's never tried to contact Souter.

"The justice doesn't have any comment about it," Kathy Arberg, a Supreme Court spokeswoman, said about the protesters' cause.

The petition asks whether the town should take Souter's land for development as an inn; whether to set up a trust fund to accept donations for legal expenses; and whether to set up a second trust fund to accept donations to compensate Souter for taking his land.

The matter goes to voters on March 14.

Clements said participants planned to meet at Weare Town Hall on Saturday morning and divide into teams to go door-to-door to get more petition signatures. He also wants to distribute copies of the Supreme Court's decision, Kelo vs. City of New London, to residents.

The court said New London, Conn., could seize homeowners' property to develop a hotel, convention center, office space and condominiums next to Pfizer Inc.'s new research headquarters.

The city argued that tax revenues and new jobs from the development would benefit the public. The Pfizer complex was built, but seven homeowners challenged the rest of the development in court. The Supreme Court's ruling against them prompted many states, including New Hampshire, to examine their eminent domain laws.

State Rep. Neal Kurk, a Weare resident who is sponsoring two pieces of eminent domain legislation in New Hampshire, said he expects the group's proposal to be defeated overwhelmingly.

"Most people here see this as an act of revenge and an improper attack on the judicial system," Kurk said. "You don't go after a judge personally because you disagree with his judgments."
 

non dignus

Puritan Board Sophomore
From Associated Press
Most people here see this as an act of revenge and an improper attack on the judicial system," Kurk said. "You don't go after a judge personally because you disagree with his judgments."

And it wasn't anything 'personal' when five 'justices' conspired to steal home and hearth.

[Edited on 1-21-2006 by non dignus]
 

gwine

Puritan Board Sophomore
Perhaps turnabout is fair play, but I would urge you all, brothers and sisters in Christ, not to gloat overmuch.

The words of God as revealed to Obadiah concerning Edom:
Oba 1:10 Because of the violence done to your brother Jacob, shame shall cover you, and you shall be cut off forever.
Oba 1:11 On the day that you stood aloof, on the day that strangers carried off his wealth and foreigners entered his gates and cast lots for Jerusalem, you were like one of them.
Oba 1:12 But do not gloat over the day of your brother in the day of his misfortune; do not rejoice over the people of Judah in the day of their ruin; do not boast in the day of distress.

Thanks to Pastorway's sermons on Obadiah for piercing my heart regarding my enemies. You might say that we are not Edom, but our hearts are still wanting to do evil every day.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top