Back in 2005, Todd Epp went on this full disclosure kick regarding bloggers. I disclosed that my family has land in the path of the TransCanada pipeline. So instead of respecting my full disclosure, Todd Epp immediately assumes that my position on this issue is only in regard to my family’s land and calls me a liberal NIMBY. If you read my "entire" post, you will see that I am approaching the issue of eminent domain from a property rights standpoint for "all" American landowners. And here is Todd Epp’s view on eminent domain:
Today, the WSJ has two articles looking at the second anniversary of the Kelo case that upheld the use of eminent domain statutes to comdemn land for economic development purposes, not just for public projects like roads, schools, and the like.
While I’m not a big "property rights" uber alles nut—I think people should have superior rights to property—I also don’t think the government—any governnment—should be in the business of using the law to help crony capitalists. In Kelo, the project that the Supremes upheld was essentially state sanctioned class warfare, with the rich getting their way over the poor.
So how can Todd Epp call my pro-property rights position against eminent domain "liberal", while his position against eminent domain is based on an anti-capitalist worldview, or in other words…a communist position. Funny how Todd Epp is now supporting "big oil" getting richer at the expense of South Dakota farmers. You would think that would raise his anti-capitalist hair. And in his words, "God, I love the irony of this." And i havn't even mentioned that American land is being sought by a Canadian company yet.
Recent Comments