Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Koppel faces off against neighbors; Nightline’ anchor at war in ferocious land dispute
Washington Post via MSNBC ^ | December 26,2002 | Matthew Mosk

Posted on 12/26/2002 5:39:33 AM PST by John W

Dec. 26 — On the air, he has played the delicate role of referee to Israelis and Palestinians. In the midst of South Africa’s clash over apartheid, he brought Foreign Minister R.F. Botha and Archbishop Desmond M. Tutu into U.S. homes on the same television broadcast. But at home in Potomac, where he is building a massive riverfront estate on 16 acres of cattle pasture, Ted Koppel is at war with his neighbors.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: pissingmatch
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 last
To: laredo44
"...My opinion on your inadequecies is related to your casual attitude toward the rule of law, not your thoughts on property rights..."

Well sport, 'property rights' is the game at this table.

But I'm flexible...

Now... Can you tell me, with a straight face, that you honestly believe that we live under the 'rule of law'?

And this isn't idle curiosity on my part...

I just want to know whether you're sentimental or delusional.

101 posted on 12/26/2002 4:35:57 PM PST by DWSUWF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: DWSUWF
Now... Can you tell me, with a straight face, that you honestly believe that we live under the 'rule of law'?

What I can honestly tell you is that we should live under the rule of law. Whether we do or do not is immaterial to that. I may be both sentimental and delusional, but I am not peverse.

102 posted on 12/26/2002 4:41:33 PM PST by laredo44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: Gary Boldwater
Minneapolis (outside the central city, of course) was clipping along at better than 10 percent annually while we lived there. When we sold out house in Prior Lake (a 4th tier suburb, south of Bloomington, MN) we estimated appreciation was closer to 15 percent/year 1992-2001.
103 posted on 12/26/2002 4:49:34 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: jimt
I'd pull the h/AC ductwork and call it "unheated space" until the lawyers went away. Then put it back in. Park a lawn mower in the room and call it a garage.

Thank that'd fly?

104 posted on 12/26/2002 4:51:09 PM PST by Mamzelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: laredo44
"...I may be both sentimental and delusional, but I am not peverse..."

LOL!

You're not delusional, laredo... Just sentimental.

Law is what we make it, and -most of the time- it's a filthy business at best.

You either don't understand, or you conveniently ignore, that MY argument here has been just as solidly based on a quixotic ideal as your utopian pining for 'the rule of law' is.

With regard to restrictive covenants, you don't agree with me…

And laredo, I honestly, truly, genuinely don't give a fig that you don't.

It's really not complicated.

105 posted on 12/26/2002 4:57:06 PM PST by DWSUWF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: DWSUWF
Me too!
106 posted on 12/26/2002 6:29:16 PM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: John W
Reading the full article, the Koppels appear to be on solid legal ground, and are being smeared.
107 posted on 12/26/2002 6:33:55 PM PST by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TopQuark
Please, stop spewing conspiracy propaganda: all this is public information. In addition, most of the parcel, as you have noticed, was bought by another firm.

TQ, untie your undies and read what's going on here. Ted Koppel picked up 16 acres of prime land because your federal government backed empty loans against it, and unloaded it on the cheap when the loans failed (at by my guess a 75% discount). I don't know about you, but I'm damn mad about having footed the bill (not about not hearing about the sale- what kind of a straw argument is that?).

Bill and Hillary Clinton had a little game going with the Madison Guaranty S&L where they overpaid for a parcel, had it reappraised by a friendly banker, sold it, bought it back, and so on. And when the S&L collapsed, the loans were 'backed by the government' so they had no reason to pay anything back. You're goddamn right this was a conspiracy-- tho I'm not saying this one was Koppel's (or Clinton's)

Bringing in the martyred "taxpayers" into this is unbecoming.

What's unbecoming is having to live in a country with gleeful sheep like you who aren't just willing to send your confiscated money to Washington, you'll drive it there and shovel it onto the pile.

Disgusting.

108 posted on 12/26/2002 8:33:43 PM PST by IncPen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: IncPen
That is all fine. I just pointed out that this has nothing to do with Koppel.
109 posted on 12/26/2002 8:46:54 PM PST by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: DWSUWF
Hey... There are a LOT of things I don't worry about simply because I don't have to...

You're different in this regard?

Yes, I give a damn about other people's rights that don't affect me. No, I'm not a selfish bastard.

110 posted on 12/27/2002 10:19:53 AM PST by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: stands2reason
"...Yes, I give a damn about other people's rights that don't affect me..."

You're just not paying attention S2R...

The ENTIRE thrust of my argument here is that intangibles like 'viewsheds' and the underlying restrictions intended to create and enforce them are a BS corruption of the law, fully ripe for challenge, and that they are in no way whatsoever equivalent to authentic intangibles like mineral or water rights, which may rightly be divorced from a property's surface rights.

I'm not indifferent to the rights of another, I dispute that this particular ersatz 'right' is legitimate.

This isn't that tough to follow...

"...No, I'm not a selfish bastard..."

If, by 'selfish bastard' you mean someone who looks out for number one first...

Duh...

I plead guilty.

If you don't look out for number one first and foremost you'll be victimized. That's the kind of world we live in, that the sort of creatures we are.

If you are truly 'unselfish', as defined here, would you mind if I victimized you?

If no one else has dibs on your cash, would you send it to me ASAP?

To put your interests before mine would be, as you know, a selfish act.

And we can't have that, can we?

111 posted on 12/27/2002 10:41:03 AM PST by DWSUWF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: DWSUWF
Those are My sentiments as well.
112 posted on 12/27/2002 11:39:40 AM PST by F.J. Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-112 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson