BryanS

All man-made structures will return to the earth, eventually. People who cherish their old homes should sell them to local government entities - where they can be preserved "forever." Let everyone else live in freedom.

That is where Austin excels over Houston... I thought all we were allowed were a bunch of illegal taco trucks. But according to some, it is apparently legal to have street food vendors in this city... who routinely get clean water from a taco truck commissary every 24 hrs...

Not looking good for Annise Parker: http://offthekuff.com/wp/?p=23670 Gene Locke’s campaign has released the first poll taken since November 3. The poll was conducted Monday and Tuesday nights (November 9 & 10) by Paul Maislin, who also polled for Lee Brown and Bill White. The poll showed Parker leading by a 43-39% with 18% undecided. The margin of error was 4%. The poll shows that Parker and Locke are splitting Peter Brown votes fairly evenly with most white Democrats shifting to Parker and Brown’s African-American supporters moving to Locke. The undecided voters at this point are mostly suburban, white and Republican leaning. The suburban-white-Republican-leaning voters that have made up their minds about the race are breaking strongly in Locke’s favor by about a 70-30 margin. This group is primarily been responsible for Locke moving from 10% down in the election to within the margin of error of Parker. This is going to be a tight, close race. The alarms are starting to sound: "Beware of gay take-over" of houston city gov't if Parker wins. This campaign is going to turn negative and nasty. With primary emphasis being on Parker's sexual orientation. And that will be a shame.

BryanS Yep. I'm sure every taco truck in this city is doing that. BRYANS

Camino South, in Clear Lake, used to have gas lamp posts. My dad still owns the home he bought in 1985... some time, however, between 1987 and 1988... the gas lamp post just disappeared. Don't know what happened to it. Many others in the neighborhood - also gone. I doubt the gas lines were ever capped off. I don't recall there ever being an on/off valve. Whatever you do... do not strike a match if you are in Camino South...

It depends on what the condition was of the original 1400 sq ft. If you have to gut, and replace everything (foundation work, electrical, plumbing, insulation, new floor coverings, new kitchen, new baths, new central air, new windows, new siding, new everything) and bring everything up to code... you start approaching "building" 1400 sq ft + adding/building 600 new. You're building a 2000 sq ft house anyway. Plus, extensive renovation of existing space is like paying for it twice: once to gut and re-work and then again to put in the new stuff. Vs just building new - one time. In my example, I have two baths in my home. Both had several layers of wall paper. I spent more time trying to get the wall paper off in one bath than it took me to knock out, install, tape, float, and texture in the second bathroom (material was not that much). Me doing all the work. Some homes have walls that bleed - and never stop (haunted ones of course). My home had layer upon what seemed endless layer of wall paper... that seemed to have no end. It was truly bizarre. I read it is about 20K to demo a house. If I were a builder, I bet I could more than recover that cost by tearing down an old home and then building new+ a third floor, off setting the demo cost. Not to mention, in 30 years, you'd still have value in both in the structure and land. Whereas, the 80 year old renovated/added-on home (which will now be 110 years old) - could revert back to lot value, as the structure is beyond its end of life. I have no doubt your place is wonderful. It works for you.

But how much of that is value of the dirt? It makes no sense to me to dump any money into a 100K structure that sits on a 200K lot. Like fixing a totaled car. Which is why I would sell it... and let the next guy deal with it. Dirt for sale! (free house included). At some point, it is more economical to tear down and rebuild, from scratch. It's happening everywhere. And depending on how extensive quality add on work is... it becomes not so much "adding on," vs. building new anyway (especially if you're starting from new foundation work).

Just saw this... actually I don't... but anyway... People shouldn't gripe about not getting their money back for loans that do not fund. Take example, the appraiser. That person went out and performed work. Non-refundable work. If the place doesn't appraise, everyone involved in the deal should run for cover. Some of the best deals... are those that never happen. A $350 "loss" now is better than a $35,000 loss later.

Homes only have useful lives of 50 to 100 years. Eventually, all of Bellaire will be torn down, and rebuilt again. Homes built in a neighborhood of any era all look the same. No matter where you live Houston. Once the land value of your home approaches twice the structure value (as this one is approaching), good indicator that it may be better to rebuild (bigger and better) than do any major renovations. The cost of the structure starts to become inconsequential relative to the dirt it sits on. This home has good bones (despite the cracked, and repaired permit perimeter beam - this is Houston people). It could go either way: 50K to fix it up, pretty nice (to get another 20, 30 years out of it) or demo it (and not have to deal with cast iron drainage, inadequate electrical, no closet space, small cramped rooms, tiny kitchen, the outgrowth on the back of the house, no central air, etc, etc.) If I were to remodel this house, I would get a demo permit too. However, I would demo the outgrowth on the back. Keep the original windows, gut and make pretty the inside. How do we know this is not the plans of the owner of this place? People may be getting excited for nothing.

It was believed to be purchased for $1.25M from an Arkansas dealer. These cars don't belong in Arkansas or East Texas. Who knows what the actual title history is... given where this unfortunate car has been. I can't see anyone with any real serious money and sense for these types of cars ever buying one from any place in Arkansas. And certainly not East Texas. Something is up.

Agreed, they're not. ...and a typical person, with the kind of lifestyle that is demanded by having such a car... would never have any reason to be in La Marque, TX, either. Unless, perhaps, you are from East Texas, put up your entire business as collateral for an exotic car loan (which if you look at his combined "junk" inventory - he might be able to approach/scam $1M)... and have to make monthly payments... which you cannot afford. His web site: "OVERSEAS BUYERS ARE WELCOME!" ... yea... so you can RIP THEM OFF selling them totaled cars you've remade with your blow torch and welding machine, EastTex style. But I won't jump to conclusions. He may have just driven off the road, accidentally...

I am beginning to think this might be fraud? "Andy Lee House" ... of Lufkin, TX. Lufkin is in Angelina county. According to tax records... Mr. House owns two proprieties: A home built in 2003 valued at 147K. A commercial building of some sort, 1200 sq ft and 1600 sq ft on .72 acres valued at 48K. Yet, he was the driver and owner of a 1.25 to $2 million automobile? How does a 34 year old who lives in Lufkin, TX, who lives in a modest 147K home, come up with that kind of money for a car? Or... maybe he bought the car when the economy was good, but needs to sell it... except, the economy is bad... and well... it is insured. Problems with the story The pelican was a lie. He's 34. He's from Lufkin. Arnold Schwarzenegger called him to console him on the loss (per the truck driver - who knows). Drove off the road in a fairly controlled manner. Intentionally left the engine running - for 15 minutes - until the car died. Was completely calm after the event. ...and it just so happens that two guys with a camera got a picture perfect video capture of the event. And just so happened to catch a 1 in 15 type of car, driving down the road - just moments before it went into the water. Does he know these men? His company web site: http://www.performan...ld.com/about_us "The leader in salvage rebuilders" Really? Hmmm... Let's see... the insurance company totals out the car, paying you the value of the vehicle before the wreck... you can buy it back from them for salvage (maybe 20K?) - fix it up... and then resell $$$$. Double dip! Something doesn't add up here... Or maybe he just drove off the road.

There is an approaching on-ramp (making it look like he was veering right - nevermind that)... so yes, he was on the feeder the whole time... The article says: "The man jerked the wheel [after claiming to see a pelican], dropped his cell phone [because he jerked the steering wheel], and the car’s front tire left the frontage road and entered a muddy patch, which foiled his attempt to maneuver away from the lagoon." Where are you getting your details? It still looks like a controlled, smooth turn, right into the water. He might have been distracted by the cell phone conversation he was having... enough to make him think he was about to turn onto solid land vs. water. My favorite part: "A Daily News reporter arrived at the scene about 15 minutes after the car entered the water just in time to see the gurgling exhaust stop bubbling like an outboard motor as the 1001 horsepower engine died."

Actually... looking at the crash video... He appears to simply have missed his turn. He's traveling on the freeway... veers right onto an access road... and then veers right again - into the water. The little jut of land may have confused him. Because just a few seconds later in the video - you see the road you could have turned onto. He probably knows the area, knew he had to make a right turn - but just wasn't watching closely enough. No pelican. No cell phone. JUST A DUMB ARSE. I checked wikipedia to see if there was reference to this humorously tragic incident, surely there would be. There was no mention! So I added an entry. I am no longer a wikipedia virgin! http://en.wikipedia....hicle_Incidents Notable Vehicle Incidents On November 11, 2009, the owner of a 2006 Veyron inadvertently drove his vehicle into a salt water lagoon, near Omega Bay, in La Marque, Texas. The vehicle was submerged in approximately two feet of water before it was retrieved. This particular vehicle was one of only 15 in the United States.[32]

I love how the tow trucker driver ever so delicately washes his muddy hands in muddy water... before touching the car's leather-wrapped steering wheel (2:40). This video: I also find it hard to believe that a pelican is to blame for this incident... actually... looking at the crash video... I don't see any pelicans even near the car!

Oh... she's been drunk. And arrested. "After submitting to a breathalyzer test, Judd registered a .175 blood alcohol level, more than twice the legal limit in Tennessee in 2003" ...god! ... my monitor! my eyes!

No.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkftyHSf6sQ

You have between now and Thursday to register to vote. If you do it before Thurs, you will get your card in the mail before the run off. Must be 30 days before any election. Go to the courthouse and fill out a registration form now!

No one here illegally is going to fill out any official government documents - especially something like the census. Regardless if the question is there or not. This is nothing more than a political stunt, an attempt at political gain, on the tops of illegals. That's never been tried before, has it? I don't think you can keep politics out of this one...

I think she deserves more than that.

Yes. And what happened in Maine? 50% saw no harm in marriage equality. They stayed home and did not vote. Had they felt otherwise, they would have voted to repeal. They didn't. ~25% believe in marriage equality. They voted. So ~75% of the population of Maine saw no harm in equal marriage rights or positively endorsed that "no harm" position on election night by voting... Yet a slim ~25% (plus some change) minority group got their way, and set the law for all others to follow. Such horse crap. Sorry to repeat this point. People cannot say that gay marriage will lead to the downfall of society... because it is already legal in several states and several nations and the sky didn't fall. There is already a proven track record, to the contrary (in fact Massachusetts now has the lowest divorce rate in the country; gay marriage actually helped, right?). People tend to forget that. And people tend to forget that voting down gay marriage will not make gay couples - and their children - go away. The other side proclaims: we don't want this in our schools or near our children. Guess what? It's already there! Do you honestly think by robbing a child's parents of the right to marry will stop that child from referring to their two moms or two dads questions/taunts/threats by other school children? I don't think so. Same-sex couples already live in martial arrangements, at great risk with no legal protections, and have been for decades, if not centuries. The "root cause" of homosexual orientation does not matter. No substantive proof is required, nor should ever be required. People stamp their feet like little children claiming: "I was born this way! I was! It's like being black!" Yawn. Because at the end of the day... the Constitution also protects those who make choices to freely associate with others in groups, as affirmed by Supreme Court rulings in the 1950's (first amendment). People who are Jewish... chose to remain Jewish. And they can get married. Yet, by population, there are more gays and lesbians in this country than there are Jews. So why can't gay and lesbian people get married - even if homosexuality is a chosen association, like all religions? (the size of a minority group doesn't matter - I just put it there as reference). There is no need to prove homosexuality as an immutable characteristic as a basis to extend marriage equality rights, or the protections of any laws in this country; it is completely irrelevant. EDIT: Those who oppose marriage equality have already run out of chicken little arguments.

You don't compromise anything on civil rights. You bring up a good point about being voted down again and again... Regarding all that voting... In reading other blogs and news sources... In Maine, ~50% of registered voters showed up. Roughly half of that number voted on a measure that affected 100% of all the population of that state. So you have ~25% of a voting population, affecting what everbody else does. Same story pretty much everywhere on this issue. And while having that minority voting group accept or reject standards for livestock may be appropriate (as was the case in CA - chickens got more space in their pens), it is never appropriate to accept/reject/alter fundamental human rights in this matter (as was done in CA; humans lost rights, animals gained them). Because in effect, what you really have is the tyranny of a minority group raping another minority group of its rights. And that's just not right. That is why these matters are much more appropriately addressed by legislatures and the court system. Those two branches of government deal with the whole (you have a 100% representation of a population in a legislature; courts look for equal protections for all people) vs. parts of a whole (i.e. popular voting whereby a minority governs the whole). Also... I am less inclined to think this is all about religion as it is more about urban v. rural - more than anything. Religion is proving to be more of a red herring/diversion on this topic... And that's why Nate Silver is wrong.

Agree, but.. I'm only advising to drop the word marriage from any government sanctioned form of union because there are those who are religious that first associate marriage with the church, and not state. Those are the ones protesting all the time. But if gays want to call it civil marriage and continue to climb the mountain, be my guest. Like I said, I don't really care either way - it doesn't affect me. I just know that term Civil Union is far more disarming and in a perfect secular world, my government would only issue those to any two consenting adults. We should not have to change the name of anything to please people who are protesting. They aren't the ones being harmed. Gays aren't calling it civil marriage. It is civil marriage. And we don't live in a perfect world. As such the "civil union" approach to this whole problem won't and doesn't work.

Civil Unions are theoretically all the rights and benefits of civil marriage, at a state level only. They are non-transferable to other states that do not also have civil unions. The states must give full faith and credit to the records and judicial proceedings of other states. If a state does not have a similar civil union set up, the union/contract, cannot be transferred. It evaporates as soon as you cross state lines. The same is also true of same-sex civil marriages (that are banned in states that do not have them). All this is tied up in courts due to real Constitutional problems with denying marriage rights, denying the transfer of those rights, etc, etc. Civil unions are supposed to have all the benefits of civil marriage - but they don't. Because even if you live in a state that has them... insurance companies, and other entities can be multi-state enterprises. They are accustomed to doing business a certain way. For example, if you're filling out an insurance policy, you may find only these choices: Single or Married. There is no "civil unioned" box. People who are "civil unioned" cannot check the married box - even though they are supposed to have all the benefits of married people. That is what many people have found in states that have unions vs. marriage. And that is just one reason, among several others, why they are failures. New York state will honor, and give full faith and credit, to same-sex marriages performed outside of its borders, but it will not grant same-sex marriage certificates within the state. NY also has no civil union set ups. NJ has civil unions, but not same-sex marriage. So people "married" under a different name/system in NJ, have nothing when they go to work in NY. That problem can be solved by NJ "upgrading" to marriage. Just one very small example in the country. This is not a superficial semantics problem. It is a problem of irrationally excluding one group of people from a legal framework of rights and responsibilities that all others are entitled to. It is also not a "states rights" issue either (the mantra of "letting states decide" is garbage). It is a human rights issue. No person, in any county, in any state in the entire United States of America should be denied the fundamental right to marry. Hopefully, the Supreme Court will find this true of same-sex couples and will swiftly and permanently bring to an end this insanely cruel practice of voting away people's rights at the ballot box or requiring people to move from their homes to other parts of the country to secure their freedoms. That is un-American to me.