Amy Coney Barrett for Supreme Court Justice

Status
Not open for further replies.
Very pleased, but I won’t be getting out in my driveway and doing my happy dance while cheering… it’s a pretty diverse neighborhood (think Sesame Street for old people) and I’m sure not everyone is feeling the love tonight.
 
Just think,
During the last presidential election we were all discussing whether getting Supreme Court Justices was an important consideration as we prepared to vote.
220 Federal judges later…

"McConnell has made a point to prioritize judicial nominations during the nearly four years Trump has been the president. Barrett will be the 220th federal judge appointed by Trump to this point in his first term, trailing only Jimmy Carter all-time.

McConnell’s dogged focus on judicial appointments led to there being zero remaining vacancies on federal courts of appeals – although Barrett’s confirmation Monday creates another for him to fill."

 
McConnell’s dogged focus on judicial appointments led to there being zero remaining vacancies on federal courts of appeals – although Barrett’s confirmation Monday creates another for him to fill."
Well, then, I hope he gets on the stick and “makes it so”, as Captain Picard would say, before January 2021 if things rattle out the way it’s looking like they probably will.

Hope his hands get better too. They’re pretty hideous-looking.
 
Last edited:
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

As Jackie Gleason always said, "how sweet it is!"

(That black square in the lower right is my son’s Nintendo Switch.)
 
Last edited:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
She’s in.
Was the vote along party lines? If so, that’s a pity.
It was, with one exception.

article

The one Republican who voted against voted on the principle that the vote was so close to the election, not as a statement against Judge Barrett.
 
No, it is usually just HOA (homeowners’ association) wars, property not being kept up, cars parked blocking the street for postal trucks and EMTs, interfering with the lawn guys’ work, and so on. Pretty anodyne stuff. And you have the peace of knowing that your neighborhood will always have a certain baseline of uniformity and attractiveness, which helps resale. Neighborhoods without HOAs can get pretty chaotic.
 
I am pleased this nomination is done and she has been sworn in, but if you are going to provide us with a Muppet break, my son asked me if I knew the name of even one vampire, so I used that one from Sesame Street. He responded that he didn’t count. “Of course he does,” was my reply.
 
Neighborhoods without HOAs can get pretty chaotic.
And neighborhoods with HOAs can get pretty grim in other ways. If people want to be part of one for whatever reason, that is their choice and I will be the first to say “not my business” and stay out of it. But I will never, under any circumstances, buy or even consider buying a property that is part of an HOA. Fortunately that is not likely to become an issue as I recently bought a decently sized parcel of undeveloped land that my wife and I will be building our final home on in the next few years.
 
Surely it’d be the Sesame Street Massive? 🙂

I would imagine that in the UK, as in Australia, if there is any standardising of the appearance and function of a neighbourhood it would be done by local government setting by-laws for particular areas. Of course you have quirks such as the Duke of Westminster actually owning a huge chunk of Cemtral London and being able as landlord to make.tenants standardise the look of the buildings there.

Certainly such regulations about building size.and appearance seem more and more to.be being built.into building approvals.for new neighbourhoods here.
 
Last edited:
40.png
HomeschoolDad:
Neighborhoods without HOAs can get pretty chaotic.
And neighborhoods with HOAs can get pretty grim in other ways. If people want to be part of one for whatever reason, that is their choice and I will be the first to say “not my business” and stay out of it. But I will never, under any circumstances, buy or even consider buying a property that is part of an HOA. Fortunately that is not likely to become an issue as I recently bought a decently sized parcel of undeveloped land that my wife and I will be building our final home on in the next few years.
HOAs have their benefits, being able to build, improve, and accoutre as you see fit has its benefits as well. It all depends on what you’re looking for. I am a radio hobbyist, and I would love to be able to put up a 30-foot tower on the side of the house, but that wouldn’t fly here. I just had in mind these neighborhoods, often with that distinctive style of houses from the 1950s through the 1970s, that degenerate into an architectural and landscaping “hot mess” as time goes by, without any rules or guidelines to adhere to. Your neighbor’s eccentric ideas as to what a house should look like, could impact your own resale value. In that my homes are ultimately investments as well as homes, I have to keep things like that in mind.

And lest anyone could have “off-topic” fears, the HOA question is an excellent instance of the principle of subsidiarity at work, and if anyone would ever raise an issue with my antenna towers… yeah, I might take it all the way to the Supreme Court 👩‍⚖️ 👩‍⚖️ 👩‍⚖️ 👨‍⚖️ 👨‍⚖️ 👨‍⚖️ 👨‍⚖️ 👨‍⚖️ 👨‍⚖️ 😁
 
First of all, as I said, not my business if you decide to buy in a neighborhood with an HOA. I hear the resale value bit a lot, and did a bit of Googling about it, with mixed results (some say yes, some say no, I seem to recall that the gain on the yes side averaged maybe 5% on the high end). I haven’t run the numbers, nor will I because I will never buy in an HOA neighborhood and I am not trying to convince anyone else not to, but I do wonder about the actual financial impact. Accepting for the sake of argument that the prices are some percentage higher that non-HOA areas, you are first spending more for the equivalent house and add to that regular HOA fees (which can vary widely, from almost invisible to what I would consider onerous), and the end result is selling for about the same percentage over the “competition” as you paid. Does it really make financial sense in any given case? I won’t even get into the dynamics of the market and how many people seek out HOA properties vs avoiding them as strongly as I do, mostly because I am not sure the data has even been collected.
 
First of all, as I said, not my business if you decide to buy in a neighborhood with an HOA. I hear the resale value bit a lot, and did a bit of Googling about it, with mixed results (some say yes, some say no, I seem to recall that the gain on the yes side averaged maybe 5% on the high end). I haven’t run the numbers, nor will I because I will never buy in an HOA neighborhood and I am not trying to convince anyone else not to, but I do wonder about the actual financial impact. Accepting for the sake of argument that the prices are some percentage higher that non-HOA areas, you are first spending more for the equivalent house and add to that regular HOA fees (which can vary widely, from almost invisible to what I would consider onerous), and the end result is selling for about the same percentage over the “competition” as you paid. Does it really make financial sense in any given case? I won’t even get into the dynamics of the market and how many people seek out HOA properties vs avoiding them as strongly as I do, mostly because I am not sure the data has even been collected.
You are quite right about the HOA fees, they are a de facto increased cost of the property in the first place. I may be looking at it through the goggles of “curb appeal”. I live in a “naturally occurring retirement community” or NORC (though we moved here in my late thirties, we’d found our “dream home” and the demographics were immaterial to us) and they are of the generation of "everything must be ‘just so’ ", though not nearly as oppressive as some HOAs I’ve heard of. I spent all summer reseeding and mulching sandy portions of the front yard that were not to the liking of the HOA boss — the grass is now lush and she is pleased. You always want to stay on the good side of the shot-callers.

Again, it’s all in what you are looking for.
 
2020 Democratic vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris went on record last year saying she might support adding additional seats to the Supreme Court, in an effort to swing the ideological balance of the judicial branch back to the left.

Beginning with Robert Bork’s failed nomination by Ronald Reagan in the 1980s – and continuing up until the most recent nomination of Justice Brett Kavanaugh – Senate confirmation fights have turned into political do-or-dies for both sides of the aisle, as reflected by Harris’ past comments to Politico.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top