The characterization of both this issue and of the "groups" involved is not quite accurate (but close). At root of the issue is the "right" of the government (only theoretically representing the interests of the population as a whole) to sieze privately-held property in order to hand it over to ANOTHER GROUP; IOW, the property is not in any way being used for a public interest, but will be used to further the iterests of a private group with much more access to influence and power in the political process.

It is a triumph of the upper economic class over the masses in another round of the never-ending class war.

"Conservative" judges/officials don't really try to retain values; "Liberal" judges/officials don't really try out new things. Each group tries to impose its views and values on the society as a whole.

Welcome back to the class war. If for some reason, you thought that it had ended, have a rather rude awakening.

Gekkogecko – I see you prefer the political model over the sociology model! :D

Can’t say as I agree with you about the conservative vs. liberal definitions. I don’t see rulers as being necessarily oppressive, but I get the impression that you do – the class warfare thing.

Still think Joe & Jane Average got boinked on that last ruling tho. Stay tuned!

I was listening to this on the radio tonight

"A revolting development. After US Supreme Court Justice David Souter votes to turn private home into an office complex, a private developer attempts to seize Souter's home to build a hotel."

It is a group out of California. They are getting a lot of people giving money to the cause. The Hotel will be called 'Lost Liberty’ and the dinning room will be called 'Just Deserts’. They have approached the local municipality to start the application process. It’s going to be interesting to see where this goes.

I heard this story today too. Crazy.

I only hope it's more than a story!