I was reading this blog, because I like it, and the writer of it knew the poor girl who fell and died downtown a couple of days ago. His hurt at reading those stupid fucking comments on the sacbee website is reason number 1,008,674 that they should not include comments on their news stories!! And it sucks that Mike Rafter is being jumped on because the reporter called him and asked who knows what and then framed his comments to make him look insensitive.
However, I must say I approve of Breton using the phrase "lots of homeless dudes" in this article. I think that as the law stands, unfortunately eminent domain CAN be used for crap like putting in a mall, but that wasn't the original intention for it's use. I hope that someday the supreme court will set that straight. I guess it will have to be after Clarence Thomas dies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
you know, up until recently i was somewhat conflicted about the comments section simply because of the free speech aspect of it. on one hand it is indicative of our time for a web forum to exist which allows the public at large to comment on online content. in theory i suppose it makes sense but in practice it only serves to create a dialogue that is hurtful to the families that are impacted by the events in these articles. i don't see the purpose in it. it's not enlightening, nor does it encourage some greater understanding of our fellow Sacramentans through a discussion of what's happening in our community - unless we are to understand that there are a lot of narrow minded insensitive dopes out there. instead it panders to the lowest common denominator which the moderators do little to correct. i feel so sorry for the families who end up reading this crap.
Hey, leave Clarence Thomas out of this. He may be the third worst person ever, but, to his credit, he actually dissented in Kelo v New London.
--JW
huh, so he did. i guess his zealously strict interpretion of the contitution isn't all bad. i like this quote from the dissent
This deferential
shift in phraseology enables the Court to hold, against all common sense, that a costly urban-renewal project whose stated purpose is a vague promise of new jobs and increased tax revenue, but which is also suspiciously agreeable to the Pfizer Corporation, is for a “public use.”
you can take out "pfizer corp" and insert "z gallerie" and he could be talking about our city council
The Kelo decision was the liberal wing's baby. Private property is, after all, theft.
On the topic of stupid comments, I thought you'd like this: http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2203284/application-attacks-idiocy
Post a Comment