Daily Archives: October 5, 2012

Whoopie!

Snuck up while I was busy. Thank you all, and please come back – we do this every day.

 

22 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

I’m watching this one

59 Old Mill Road, which was asking $776,000, reports an executed contract today. I reported on this property when it came on two weeks ago because its listing agent closed all viewings and offers after just 12 hours, a curious thing to do if one is trying to obtain the highest price for the owner. There are many other curious things going on with this property, including on-again-off-again foreclosure actions, so I’ll be interested to see its final sales price and who buys it. More on this later, I’m sure.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Britain’s High Court rules on Abu Hamza’s last attempt to avoid deportation to the US: hand him over

 

Wave goodbye, Abu

The son of a bitch has been fighting extradition for decades, all the while living large on the British taxpayers’ coin. His ability to evade justice is kind of surprising, since he lost his limbs to a mine in Afghanistan and didn’t have a leg to stand on.

Comments Off on Britain’s High Court rules on Abu Hamza’s last attempt to avoid deportation to the US: hand him over

Filed under Uncategorized

546 views away from 10,000,000

Time to post pictures of kittens and hot babes.

UPDATE, 1:25: 9,999,910

Here’s one now!

10 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

Just to remind readers that we do report on Greenwich real estate, when there’s anything to report

I don’t usually follow condo sales unless I have a buyer interested in one, but the only sales activity reported so far today is a one bedroom at 47 Lafayette Place, selling in a bidding war(!) for $365,000. it asked $349,000 and was wrapped up in just twenty-two days. All it takes is two people wanting the same thing. Sold in 2001 for $305,000, but improvements were made after that.

Comments Off on Just to remind readers that we do report on Greenwich real estate, when there’s anything to report

Filed under Uncategorized

There was a time when a refinery shut down could be handled

California has temporarily run out of gasoline and folks out there are blaming the shortage on refineries closed for maintenance and one breakdown. But why would such a minor disruption cause so much havoc? Well I can think of a number of reasons, including the state’s mandatory “summer fuel/winter fuel” regulations that prevent gasoline from being shipped in from out of state. The refineries have petitioned the state regulators for permission to switch over to the winter formula but so far no luck: the dream of these people is to end driving, so a fuel shortage is a feature, not a bug.

I’ll wait for Californian bloggers and analysts to come up with all the regulations restricting the production and distribution of gasoline in their state but I’m confident that that analysis will bear out my suspicion: the present turmoil is the direct result of the green’s campaign to end driving and was entirely predictable.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

After debate debacle, Obama reassures Russia

Tell Mr. Putin that after I’m reelected I’ll be more flexible

7 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

What media bias?

Brief moment aiding and abetting the enemy terminated by quick-thinking reporter

Pool Report #11

Motorcade is rolling from the debate venue at 8.39 pm.

In an amusing moment, poolers were sitting in the Press One van outside the debate hall and the driver said “I think that Romney did real good.” There was a moment of baffled silence, before our steno , Bec, put two and two together and said “guys we are in the Romney van.” Blind panic then ensued as we piled out the van and sprinted towards the correct motorcade, which was parked right in front of Romney’s. Disaster was narrowly averted.

Stephen Collinson
AFP White House Correspondent,
Washington

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Our tax dollars at work

Hartford road kill

Our selectmen held a meeting yesterday and after a great deal of thought, approved a 25-mph sign for Lincoln Avenue in Old Greenwich. I have no problem in theory with a requirement for such approval because without it we’d have anarchy, with lemonade stand signs and ads for Democrats sprouting up everywhere. But this part caught my eye: “The request is now sent to the Office of State Traffic Administration for approval.”

Do we really have a state agency overseeing the placement of road signs in every municipality? Really?  What must a town do to obtain approval? Furnish a study, with maps, charts and 8 X 10 color glossy photos with pictures and arrows on the back? Does a team come down from Hartford to see the site for themselves?

What could be more of an exclusively local decision than the placement of a speed sign on a tiny street like Lincoln? If a town has to go through Hartford for such a simple task, is it possible that similar bureaucratic speed bumps are imposed on private individuals and businesses in this state? Nah, that would be crazy.

 

16 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized