Koppel faces off against neighbors; Nightline’ anchor at war in ferocious land dispute

Washington Post via MSNBC ^ | December 26,2002 | Matthew Mosk

[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.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I knew as soon as I typed "Alaska" I would offend someone. Substitute 'ends of the earth" for our 49th State, please. Koppel wouldn't know the diff.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

Oops. And, bump yours.

[RightWhale]

We're not offended. Give him 160 acres in Kotzebue on condition that he extend the road from Fairbanks to Kotzebue.

[F.J. Mitchell]

If ignorance is bliss, then obviously bliss is ignorance. Difference is that the ignorant who are at times inappropriately blissful due to a lack of knowledge about the seriousness of the subject under discussion, are capable, when ready willing and able,to correct their mis-conceptions and cure their ignorance . On the other hand those who regardless of mental dextrity or highest degree of education,that choose to be blissful despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, are not ignorant, they are stupid, and can honestly be defined as moderates, liberals or liberterindian-take your pick.

All those thirds of indian blood that I pretend to possess could easily be accounted for by declaring myself a Siamese Twindian-or blame my pitiful mathmatical skills upon the liberal dominated public education system, either of which rational people would accept as a legitimate excuse. Fact is though, I was testing your mathmatical skills-you did very well.

[Gary Boldwater]

In real estate everything is location, location, location. Try Denver, some years it's been going up >10%.

[F.J. Mitchell]

"But I live as far in the woods as my bank roll allows me to."

My bankroll ran out exactly six and six tenths of a mile into the woods outside a very small hick town, but that's like one hundred miles outside any major city. The good news is that my bankroll is building up faster than ever and I am just as happy as a tapeworm in feces.

[jim_trent]

I agree with that: We're never going to see eye to eye on this.

When you come around to believing that property ownership means something, let us know.

[laredo44]

Roll the dice and we'll see who prevails.

Is this your definition of the rule of law?

[IncPen]

Ted bought 16 acres of prime real estate just outside DC for about $169,000 per acre. That's about what subdivision land is going for per 1/4 acre in some parts of suburban Chicago...

And how is that relevant to the issue at hand? Except for envy, of course.

Nothing to do with envy, TQ, everything to do with being connected, and picking up the droppings of the Federal Government's S&L Bailout®. Let's see you or me get 16 acres of land- with taxpayers picking up the difference- for what I reckon to be a quarter (minimum) of it's real market value.

And then Koppel has the balls to write in a codicil on the remaining land that makes sure either he has the biggest house on the block OR his neighbors can't build anything SO big as to offend his liberal sense of 'really overdoing it'.

Koppel's a schmuck , let's not sugar coat it.

[TopQuark]

Let's see you or me get 16 acres of land- with taxpayers picking up the difference- for what I reckon to be a quarter (minimum) of it's real market value.

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.

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

[DWSUWF]

"...One can dream..."

LOL!

[DWSUWF]

"...but that's like one hundred miles outside any major city..."

I haven't lived 'in town' (with the exception of life in the barracks in the service) for 35 years.

I can't imagine putting up with people's noise and stink, close quarters, at this point in my life.

[DWSUWF]

"...When you come around to believing that property ownership means something, let us know..."

Ouch...

What a Dis...

I feel so violated...

[DWSUWF]

"...Is this your definition of the rule of law?..."

LOL!

No...

But this is the way the game is played.

For the last half century or so...

Been on a long vacation?

[laredo44]

LOL! ... But this is the way the game is played.

So, you find it hilarious that the rule of law is corrupted by the game players? I'm sure your amusing lack of principles would be welcome among rogues everywhere.

[DWSUWF]

"...So, you find it hilarious that the rule of law is corrupted by the game players? I'm sure your amusing lack of principles would be welcome among rogues everywhere..."

Your outrage is touching...

Yeah, the decline of western civilization is all my fault.

When I'm not destroying the rule of law single-handedly I'm causing tornadoes and floods...

Never a dull moment here!

[laredo44]

Yeah, the decline of western civilization is all my fault.

Perhaps not, but they'll certainly know where to find a useful idiot when they need one.

It's always nice when you suave, got-all-the-angles-figured types deign to exchange pleasantries with us rubes.

[DWSUWF]

"...Perhaps not, but they'll certainly know where to find a useful idiot when they need one..."

YOU believe that a property owner has an authentic right (not to be confused with the legal power, mind you) to saddle a deed with a limitation on the square footage of any dwelling that can be built on it in perpetuity and you think that I'm the 'idiot'?

LOL!

That's rich...

[laredo44]

and you think that I'm the 'idiot'?

My opinion on your inadequecies is related to your casual attitude toward the rule of law, not your thoughts on property rights.

As far a property rights are concerned, I believe they are enjoyed by the owner, not some future or potential owner or series of owners. If I, a hay fever sufferer, approach a neighbor and offer him $5000 not to raise ragweed on his property and to place a restriction on the deed that no future owner do either, I expect that to be honored. If some future ragweed horticulturalist would like to engage in his passion, the right path would be for him to purchase that right back from me. If I had died, and my property had been sold to new owners without their knowledge of the agreement, I would not oppose letting the covenant elapse. If other neighbors had purchased their properties and paid a premium knowing of the restriction, I could be persuaded that they have no standing as they paid no compensation to property owner with the restriction, so tough noogies for them. But if the owners buying my property knew of the restriction, they become heirs to the transaction and thus their approval must be secured for removal.

Sorry for being a bit convoluted. Hope you could follow along.