Pelosi doesn't come cheap. ButI guess she's like Boxer; she must offer big mark-downs for donors who actually LIVE in the state...

Good catch! I guess it would be too much to ask for the guy to also be a plastic surgeon. Sometimes I'm too greedy.

This practice is nothing new, in california its entrenched policy. The best practitioner was Mayor Frank Shaw from the 1930s who used eminent domain, the LAPD and the cover the LA Times editioral board to silence his political critics.

Its worth noting, that he was also the first mayor in US history to be impeached from office.

The practice of silencing your opposition by threatening their business is what politics is all about. Now under cover of very bad law, the Supreme court has handed a sldegehammer to the Gallaghers of political power.

and we are the watermelons.

Well done, Martini-Boy.

Why is it that the MSM cannot do such work?

It's a little unfair to jump to the conclusion that guy gives 1000 bucks, rep. becomes his pawn. No doubt that's his viewpoint, but it's perfectly possible that the rep.'s just stupid or something.

Which side of the emminent domain decision was O'connor on?

"Which side of the emminent domain decision was O'connor on?"

She wrote the dissenting opinion that could be summed up with her first paragraph.

"Over two centuries ago, just after the Bill of Rights was ratified, Justice Chase wrote:
“An ACT of the Legislature (for I cannot call it a law) contrary to the great first principles of the social compact, cannot be considered a rightful exercise of legislative authority . . . . A few instances will suffice to explain what I mean. . . . [A] law that takes property from A. and gives it to B: It is against all reason and justice, for a people to entrust a Legislature with SUCH powers; and, therefore, it cannot be presumed that they have done it.” Calder v. Bull, 3 Dall. 386, 388 (1798) (emphasis deleted).

Today the Court abandons this long-held, basic limitation on government power."

Goddammit.

Mossberg offers some fine correctives for this sort of thing.

But by Krom it's a shame to have it come to this, innit?

Correction: kudos to Collier, the actual blogger and guy who wrote this, not the trust fund baby. Kelo, in addition to being an indefensible decision, will create situations in which good citizens of this country and law enforcement personnel will die violently.

Good sleuthing Will!
God forbid anyone in the MSM would get off their lazy duff and try Googling, or even think to do it.

You're right, she was bought and bought cheap. But then, she is cheap. And stupid too. I just hope that this decision is either overturned and soon, or congress successfully passes the motions to curtail federal funds to states and cities that transfer seized property to private hands.

I don't get it. I really don't.

Pelosi's remarks were so stupid I'm still fighting back the urge to vomit. I knew she was a moron, but this is beyond anything I would have expected.

So now the suggestion is that she's not so stupid? That she is only posing as an idiot for a measley grand? Really? And she's on the take for a grand? Really?

Shit, I don't know what to think (except, of course, that she MUST go).

Either situation defies belief, and both rank in the top five boneheaded political moves of all time (don't ask me to list the top five--I haven't thought that through yet).

It is and has been well known in NoCal that Nancy is on the take. But she is forgoven because she has been consistent and savage in her Attacks on the Bill of Rights. BTW Ammendment #5 is part of the Bill of Rights she hates so much.

Hey it sounds like "good old girl" politics to me and innocent people have to suffer. C'est la vie !!

Hey it sounds like "good old girl" politics to me and innocent people have to suffer. C'est la vie !!

Mark - I also don't see the tie between Pelosi and the Oakland City Council, which, by the way, had to have made ts eminent domain decision quite some time before the Kelo ruling.

I'm still in the "she's a moron" camp.

Who knew they came so cheap?

Pay attention to Chicago politicos.

My husband and I have said for years we wouldn't go down for that little money. Go big or don't go at all.

William — "It's a little unfair to jump to the conclusion that guy gives 1000 bucks, rep. becomes his pawn."

Well, Pelosi has been known to make change if you don't have anything smaller.

Will, I'm surprised the name "Ratner" didn't trigger your alarm bells.

This merely scratches the surface of the Ratner clan, which amazingly also produced Michael Ratner, the president of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a hard-left group that specializes in defending terrorists and that seeks continually to hamper GWB's prosecution of the war.

I leave it as an exercise to the reader to ponder the contradictions inherent in the Ratner clan's activities.

It's not that she's cheap, it's just that she's so old that $1000 seems like a lot of money.

Is Ratner related to the Ratner on Fox News Weekends? She once plugged, on air, a project for Giants Stadium before it was awarded and it turned out Forest City was one of the prime bidders.

Pelosi's a moron, as evidenced by being bought so cheaply.

Shhhh. Stop talking so loudly. You won't be able to hear the voice of God handing down decisions from on high, or First Street and North Capitol, as we locals call the Holy of Holies.

And to think, some people think the term "San Francisco Liberal" is high praise...

Pelosi is a San Francisco rep and the story you describe is in Oakland, CA. A developer trying to get the local Oakland gov to work on its behalf isn't going to get a lot done by contributing to Pelosi. I'm certain if you check you'll see he greased the local pols to the same tune. If it's exclusive to Pelosi I'll eat my hat.

Ah, so Pelosi and her fellow party members are all corrupt... I can see where you might take comfort in that...

This would be the same Forest City Ratners that are using eminent domain to clear space in Brooklyn for a Basketball Arena for the NJ Nets?

The same Forest City Ratners who have a history around here (ex., Fulton Street Mall in Brooklyn) of taking huge public subsidies to "revitalize" blighted areas, which then serve mostly government tenants because nobody else will rent them? The government, of course, has to become a major tenant because it needs to hide the extent of the losses after investing so many tax dollars into the project.

Those Forest City Ratners?

yes, the very same Ratners.