Neal Barton's POV

More government overreach


POSTED: Thursday, April 17, 2014 - 7:13pm

UPDATED: Thursday, April 24, 2014 - 12:16pm

Going back to the Nevada situation we spoke of yesterday, here's another similar story. I've been keeping up with this for about two months.

This is from CNS News and they got this from the Associated Press.

In Breckenridge Colorado, a couple has agreed to sell a 10-acre parcel in the Colorado mountains to Summit County for open space after a months-long court battle. The Summit Daily News reports Andy and Ceil Barrie reached a $115,000 settlement on Friday after court-ordered mediation.

County authorities moved to seize the land by eminent domain in October, saying water quality and wildlife habitat were threatened because the Barries wanted to use a motorized all-terrain vehicle to cross national forest land to get to the property.

Andy Barrie said he thought he had a valid argument, but he had already spent about $80,000 in legal fees and couldn't afford more-- how convenient.

The feds just starved them out. They were thrown out of their home and had to buy some flat land because they dared to ride a four-wheeler on their property.

And I was thinking about the deal in Nevada, you have those BLM agents out there with guns drawn on the rancher who would not pat grazing fees. He wouldn't not pay his grazing fees and they draw guns.

But, as far as I know, no guns have been drawn on the land the BLM patrols on the border where illegals and drugs are being brought into this country.

That's my point of view, whats yours?

You can email me at or feedback me at KETK Neal Barton

Comments News Comments

It was still Texas and a Texas Republican controlled court who stood with a foreign corporation against a Texas and US Citizen in the first place not President Obama or the Federal Government.

Nope don...

It seems you don't understand how the courts work.

AFTER the Texas court of appeals they can then file in FEDERAL COURT.

It is a long long process.

Hope for change in 2014. Make this election a NO DEMS election.

That is what I said dumber thab dirt deaf. sure they can file in federal court if they have the money to do it

Yes dumber than dirt deaf I know exactly how the courts work and it was the state of Texas who approved the Eminent domain land grab for the XL foreign for profit corporation and the republatard dominated texas supreme court that stood against a US citizen, a Texas citizen for a foreign corporation. Acitizen that had their land taken only because they did not have the funds to fight a foreign corporation. If you do not the funds your case never makes it to the federal level.

No deaf, President Obama has nothing to do with the Texas Appeals Court that is dominated by republicans.

Texas Appeals Court Upholds Keystone XL Land Grab,:Law360, Houston (May 23, 2013, 6:26 PM ET) --


Eminent domain is a federal concept. Used since the start of this nation.

The basic concept is sound BUT it is very much abused.

And if Obama is in office when it is abused, yes we blame him.

That is called... accountability.

Oh but it is Obama's fault right deaf. Here in Texas it is the republatards flash.

The corporations and the government are two sides of the same coin. A good example of how elections are bought is John Cornyn. He won the republican primary with a whopping 388,000 votes 2.8% of the voting age population (18 million). A clear mandate from the people of Texas! Of course 97.2% of the voting age pop didn't vote for him. But on animal farm. All the animals are equal, but some of the animals are more equal than others. Where's Neal when you need a journalist?

Don tried to show an example of hypocrisy, but succeeded in proving our point that the nature of any and all gov't is tyranny.

Sadly don you didn't read my post.

Do you ever read it?

I mean really read what I post instead of imagining what I post?

Hope for change in 2014. Turn Dems into the unemployed politicians of America.

No Deaf, the point I am making is that neal , you and those like you want to blame obama but never want to expose the republicans for what they do. The post that I made shows how the republican establishment of texas is all for taking peoples land for corporate profit. Repubs in congress and neal still complain about President Obama not allowing the XL for profit land grab.

I'm confused about the story, first it states "Barries wanted to use a motorized all-terrain vehicle to cross national forest land to get to the property." then says "They were thrown out of their home and had to buy some flat land because they dared to ride a four-wheeler on their property."

So was the problem them riding the four-wheeler on their own property or wanting special permission to ride on the National Forest property (which is prohibited)?

But it is ok to take someones property for profit....right neal, deaf and the other morons?
Texas Appeals Court Upholds Keystone XL Land Grab,:Law360, Houston (May 23, 2013, 6:26 PM ET) -- A Texas appeals court on Thursday removed a hurdle to TransCanada Corp’s planned Keystone XL Pipeline, rejecting a landowner’s argument that the company should have been forced to prove it qualified as a common carrier before it was given access to private property.
The Ninth District Court rejected

We need more skilled attorneys in state or out of state willing to pick these cases up, maybe they all work for the government and not for the working Joe or Jane. More media coverage and awareness would motivate others to contribute to the fight.

The use of eminent domain is so abused in this country. Even cities use it to take property so Wal-Marts can be built.

No that is not public use but just so a business that gives more property taxes can use that land.

And like Sen. Reid and his Chinese helping son, we wonder what all Summit County cronies are going to make money off this.

Oh, and did I mention they are all DEMOCRAT. Yes no doubt in Colorado they are to.

Hope for change in 2014. Make Dems walk the bread lines.

Anyone who has stood-up against a major corp. realizes that the tactic is to cause the complainant to incur legal fees greater than the expected recovery. With the government setting the example, why would a corp. be expected to act in good faith ?

Post new Comment