Lo, and behold, below the fold on http://www.argusleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage, is a poll that asks the question:
"Should there be a limit on the size of a landowner’s political signs?" And currently there is a 72% to 28% opinion that there should be a limit.
Let me see if I have this right.
Landowner, means the land belongs to that person; or am I missing something here?
Personal property is a mainstay of the great American dream. It is also a key ingredient in capitalism.
Newspapers and pundits love to claim the first ammendment as a way to say what they want to; whether truthful or not.
Last time, I looked, the first ammendment was all about freedom of speech.
Those who disdain this great country, and the economy we have been blessed to be a part of, would deny us the right to make known our opinions.
You know, to my military mind, the use of "eminent domain" is, in itself, a denial of one of the mainstays of freedom: the right to own property.
And telling a property (landowner) owner what they can and cannot do on their property goes against everything that is right.
LORD help us!