Homestead mailing list

[Jai Jai <jaijai AT ddc.net>]

Hello,

I read this:
 For more information about the "Canine Flu," visit the Wildheart Ranch
online at <http://www.wildheartranch.org/,>http://www.wildheartranch.org/, 
or call Hooves, Paws and Claws at
342-1509.

Do you happen to know the area code for Hooves, Paws and Claws?

Thanks!

Jai Jai

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Are your pets spoiled?  Good.  Spoil them more.  Spoil them
for all the animals which will never, their whole lives, know a day
without hunger, a day without thirst, a day without fear, a day without pain. 
> From mmcharry AT dtnspeed.net  Fri Jul  1 01:00:33 2005
Return-Path: <mmcharry AT dtnspeed.net>
X-Original-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Delivered-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
Received: from smtp-4.speednet.com (mail.dtnspeed.net [207.252.121.15])
        by lists.ibiblio.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C96554C005
        for <homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>; Fri,  1 Jul 2005 01:00:32 -0400 
(EDT)
Received: (qmail 31302 invoked by uid 7798); 1 Jul 2005 05:00:29 -0000
Received: from mmcharry AT dtnspeed.net by smtp-4 by uid 7791 with
        qmail-scanner-1.22st (clamscan: 0.70. spamassassin: 2.63.
	Clear:RC:1(12.43.95.254):SA:0(-3.7/3.1):. 
	Processed in 1.388552 secs); 01 Jul 2005 05:00:29 -0000
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.7 required=3.1
X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: mmcharry AT dtnspeed.net via smtp-4
X-Qmail-Scanner: 1.22st (Clear:RC:1(12.43.95.254):SA:0(-3.7/3.1):. Processed
        in 1.388552 secs Process 31286)
Received: from host-12-43-95-254.waverly.il.speednet.net (HELO Mollie)
        (12.43.95.254)
        by smtp-4.speednet.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 2005 05:00:28 -0000
From: "Marie McHarry" <mmcharry AT dtnspeed.net>
To: <mmcharry AT dtnspeed.net>
Message-ID: <00bd01c57df9$ce7ca0d0$4481010a@Mollie>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.4510
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.0.20050612175237.04f1fc98 AT mail.comcast.net>
Importance: Normal
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 00:43:40 -0500
Subject: [Homestead] An article cheering the Supremes
X-BeenThere: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.6
Precedence: list
Reply-To: homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org
List-Id: <homestead.lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/homestead>
List-Post: <mailto:homestead AT lists.ibiblio.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sympa AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=HELP>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/homestead>,
        <mailto:homestead-request AT lists.ibiblio.org?subject=subscribe>
Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 05:00:33 -0000
X-Original-Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 00:00:31 -0500
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2005 05:00:33 -0000

As most of you who will read this know, I'm more than a little queasy =
about
the Supreme's ruling on eminent domain. Just to add a bit to the other =
side
of the argument, I submit this article (printed in full because TNR now =
has
most of its material available only to subscribers):

Breyer Restraint=20
by the Editors    =20
=20

The Supreme Court term that ended this week managed to infuriate both
liberals and conservatives. In particular, the Court's decisions =
upholding
some displays of the Ten Commandments but not others and allowing New
London, Connecticut, to seize private homes in an effort to promote =
economic
development were attacked by critics on both sides of the political =
spectrum
for exalting pragmatism over constitutional principle. But, in fact, =
both
sets of decisions were defensible in constitutional as well as practical
terms. They represented an admirable recognition that the Court governs =
best
when it governs least. =20

It's easy to sympathize with those who instinctively question the harsh
result in the property rights case, Kelo v. New London. A 5-4 majority
allowed the New London City Council to use eminent domain--a =
government's
right to seize property in its jurisdiction so long as it provides just
compensation--to take nine homes from their owners in order to develop
office buildings to complement a nearby pharmaceutical research facility
that the city believes will create jobs. Many citizens, understandably, =
view
this outcome as unfair. Nevertheless, defenders of judicial restraint,
particularly liberals, should applaud the Court's refusal to =
second-guess
the economic judgments of city and state legislatures. Had the Court =
come
out the other way, as libertarian supporters of the so-called =
Constitution
in Exile urged it to do, the decision would have unleashed a torrent of
judicial activism that might have called into question everything from =
local
zoning ordinances to environmental laws.=20

The appropriate response to the unfairness inherent in individual cases
involving eminent domain is political, not judicial. This week, Senator =
John
Cornyn of Texas introduced the Protection of Homes, Small Businesses, =
and
Private Property Act of 2005, which would prohibit any =
government--state,
local, or federal--that accepts federal funds for a development project =
from
using eminent domain to promote economic growth. A bill like this might =
help
to discourage eminent domain abuse--that is, condemnation of private =
homes
for private profit--without asking judges to second-guess the economic
decisions of legislators, a task for which they are notoriously
ill-equipped.=20

The Ten Commandments decisions were similarly farsighted. By a 5-4 vote, =
the
Court struck down displays of the Ten Commandments in two Kentucky
courthouses, holding that the exhibits lacked a legitimate secular =
purpose
since they had been installed to acknowledge the Bible as Kentucky's
"precedent legal code." By contrast, a different 5-4 majority upheld =
Texas's
tacky display of a huge Ten Commandments tablet outside the state =
capitol,
since it had been sponsored by Cecil B. DeMille to promote his movie The =
Ten
Commandments. The swing justice who joined both majorities was Stephen
Breyer, who noted convincingly in his concurring opinion in the Texas =
case
that religious displays can convey different messages in different =
contexts.
Breyer also recognized that striking down all public displays of the Ten
Commandments, as some extreme secularists demanded, might "create the =
very
kind of religiously based divisiveness" that the Constitution seeks to
avoid.=20

The Court's moderate performance is all the more striking when =
contrasted
with the position of the most radical dissenting justice, Clarence =
Thomas.
In the eminent domain and Ten Commandments cases, Thomas offered a =
highly
questionable interpretation of the Constitution and urged the Court to
overturn decades of its own precedents. If Thomas's view had prevailed, =
the
states would no longer be required to respect constitutional =
prohibitions on
the establishment of religion. And limits on judicial power over =
economic
regulations that have prevailed since the New Deal would be dramatically
altered.=20

In the event that Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist resigns, resisting =
a
justice in Thomas's image should be the central focus of Senate =
Democrats. A
Gallup poll released this week suggests that a narrow majority of =
Americans
believe that President Bush should choose a consensus candidate for the
Court if Democrats object to his first choice. Less than half, by =
contrast,
believe that Bush should stand by his first choice if the nominee proves =
to
be controversial. This suggests that the majority of Americans are
relatively happy with the broad direction of the Supreme Court, even =
when
they question the results in individual cases. The wise decisions this =
week
were a reminder of why the pragmatic Court has earned the public's
confidence by generally deferring to the political branches. Now it's =
time
for a more ideological Congress to rise to the occasion.=20

the Editors  =20