“Everyone is in favor of free speech… but some people's idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone else says anything back, that is an outrage.” ― Winston Churchill
This is hard to believe. It needs independent confirmation. I’ve seen it a couple of times in the blogosphere, but with only the following reference. It seems so improbable that New London city fathers would press their scrufulous greed so far.
Still, they’ve had encouragement from SCOTUS, or as Nancy Pelosi would say, G-d. I guess that excuses a certain amount of economic smiting among the Limousine Liberal coterie..
The Fairfield County Weekly reports on continuing abuse of property owners resulting from Kelo vs. New London.
Those who believe in the adage “when it rains, it pours” might take the tale of the plaintiffs in Kelo v. New London as a cue to buy two of every animal and a load of wood from Home Depot. The U.S. Supreme Court recently found that the city’s original seizure of private property was constitutional under the principal of eminent domain, and now New London is claiming that the affected homeowners were living on city land for the duration of the lawsuit and owe back rent. It’s a new definition of chutzpah: Confiscate land and charge back rent for the years the owners fought confiscation.
