There's usually a bargain to be found in foreclosure actions, especially when $18,000,000 is due: there should be plenty of room to negotiate,

/

The saga of the 8 Old Round Hill Lane foreclosure action seems to be drawing to an end, especially now that one of the defendants has filed a “Disclosure of No Defense”.

The court docket can be found here.

A cautionary note: the couple has, I believe, long-since been divorced or at least has been involved in lengthy, adversarial litigation*, and the wife, who has been enjoying sole possession of the premises, seems to have neglected to perform needed maintenance on the structure, so who knows what condition it’s in?

*- Police: Woman drove through garage door

Updated Jan 24, 2012 10:04 p.m.

Sheri G. Lampert, 54, of 21 Meadowcroft Road, was charged Monday with breach of peace and second-degree criminal mischief after she drove a vehicle through the garage door of a Doubling Road residence, police said.

Arriving officers observed a woman standing on the front steps of the residence, screaming at the door, police said. The vehicle had front-end damage, with pieces of wood sticking out of the hood, police said.

The garage door was also damaged, police said. Lampert admitted driving the vehicle through the door, according to police.

Lampert is scheduled to appear in state Superior Court in Stamford on Wednesday.

I wrote on this subject 10 years ago: The Curse of Greyledge Continues

Shari Lampert (not the Sears Lamperts) has had quite of time of things since she and her now former husband Spencer razed Col. Bolling’s estate, “Greyledge”, at 133-137 Doubling Road back in 2007. Her latest bid at notoriety is reported today after being arrested for teeing off on her house keeper with a five iron back in June.

One June 29th, police received a complaint of a physical altercation between an employer and her housekeeper. Police say 56-year-old Shari Gay Lampert had a tumultuous argument with her housekeeper and demanded restitution for the alleged damage the housekeeper had done in Lampert’s home while employed there. During the argument, Lampert wielded a golf club toward the victim before entering the victim’s car to take the victim’s purse and remove all of her cash from it. An investigation determined that there was enough evidence to arrest Lampert for larceny and disorderly conduct, police said. Lampert turned herself into Greenwich police Friday on an arrest warrant and was charged. Lampert was released on $2,000 bond and will appear in court August 1st.

Ms. Lambert seems to have some anger issues – she was arrested in January, 2012 for driving her car through the garage doors of her husband Spencer’s new digs, again in May, 2012 for a “domestic dispute”, and, it appears, a few other times as well.

Like Dunellan Hall (Helmsley’s Folly) up on Rogue’s Hill, which has seen nothing but tragedy since it was constructed in 1918 , the Bolling estate’s streak started with the death during WW 1 of Colonel Bolling himself and now, it seems, extends to it’s latest owner. These days there’s nothing left of that estate, but the land remains and can be yours for $10 million (and my guess is for far less). The question is, who would risk the wrath of the Bollings?

(h/t, Publius)

Relax, fellas: there's only one person in the US who would buy anything as unreliable as a British junker, and his Riverside garage can only accommodate two of them, at most.

/

Range Rover and a Jaguar in their natural habitat

Grifters gonna grift

/

If it matters, Crockett pocketed $2 million in crypto-currency from two seperate superpacs. Just say’n.

And as long as we’re talking about this rising star of the Democrat Part, I might as well drag this story from the draft folder of a couple of days ago: Except that I'm long past the capacity for outrage by the Congressional Grifters, I’d be more outraged that Hot Wheels Crockett was flying First Class at taxpayer's expense than I am at her displaying the person we already know. As it is, meh – just the usual behavior of our betters and more deserving.

Dem Rep. Jasmine Crockett cuts passengers in wheelchairs as she’s slammed for ‘abusing her power’ at airport

Accompanied by taxpayer provided security guards as well.

There's a new sheriff in town: update on yesterday's Columbia Library occupation

/

I forsee travel to a foreign land in your future

I’d feared that nothing would be done to punish these thugs — the Columbia administrators let them stay inside for five hours, after all, before calling in the police — but Columbia no longer controls who gets punished (that would be no one) and who gets the boot.

Marco Rubio to Review Visa Status of Pro-Palestine Protesters Arrested at Columbia University Library

Hundreds of pro-Palestine protesters clashed with New York City police outside Columbia University in Manhattan on Wednesday night. Earlier in the day, protesters took over the school’s library. This backfired as authorities locked them inside and arrested many of them. Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced he’s reviewing the visa status of those arrested, meaning they could be sent packing back to their home countries.

It’s good start; now expel those who are students, and send all of them: foreign visa holders, students, and run of the mill trespassers alike, to Rikers Island for, say, two weeks, to reflect on things, and for the encouragement of others. That would be end of this crap, right there.


Green Privilege (Updated)

/

Bernie Sanders Claims He's too important to Fly Commercial

Sanders, of course, has been "fighting oligarchy" with his pal Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), aka AOC, but the problem is that a) most people don't know even what "oligarchy" is and b) Sanders reportedly spent $221,000 on private jets so he could attend those "Fighting Oligarchy" rallies. 

In April, Fox News spotted the two "party of the people" reps exiting a private plane that cost a whopping $15,000 an hour to fly. Here's more from the Fox News website: 

Sanders boarded the luxury Bombardier Challenger private jet at the Meadows Field Airport in Bakersfield, California, on Tuesday afternoon, according to a photo captured by a source on the ground and shared exclusively with Fox News Digital. Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, whom the source also spotted boarding the private jet, spoke at their 'Fighting Oligarchy' event in Bakersfield just hours earlier. 

Flight records reveal the jet landed at Sacramento Mather Airport on Tuesday evening, which is about a 20-minute drive to Folsom, California, where the self-identified Democratic socialists hosted their second rally of the day. After publication Thursday, Fox News Digital obtained new footage of Sanders and AOC exiting the private jet in Sacramento Tuesday evening from California resident Matvei Levchenko.

The jet Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez were seen boarding and deplaning made stops in Salt Lake City and Boise prior to landing in Bakersfield, according to flight records. The arrival dates match the duo's 'Fighting Oligarchy' events in Salt Lake City and Nampa, which is about a 25-minute drive from Boise Airport. 

Fred Baier: "You know, Elissa Slotkin, senator from Michigan, she said you shouldn't be using 'oligarch.' It's over people's head. You've gotten criticized from other people. Free Beacon says Bernie Sanders spent $221,000 on private jets fighting the oligarchy tour — paid for by friends of Bernie Sanders —that you've spent millions of dollars in campaign funds on private jet travel over the years. How do you push back on both of those things?" Baier asked. 

Sanders' response? "When's the last time you saw Donald Trump during a campaign mode at national airport?"  (Because it always comes back to Donald Trump.) 

"No, no...he's also not fighting the oligarchy," Baier responded. 

To which Bernie replied, "No. You run a campaign and you do three or four or five rallies in a week. The only way you can get around to talk to 30,000 people. Think I'm gonna be sitting on a waiting line at United waiting, you know, while 30,000 people are waiting? That's the only way you can get around. No apologies for that. That's what campaign travel is about. We've done it in the past. We're gonna do it in the future."

Champion of the Little People, even though they should know better than to delay their betters by clogging up airports, when they should just stay put.

UPDATE:

That’s a pretty poor response for a story that’s three weeks old. The Free Beacon first reported this on April 17, which also notes that Sanders has spent “millions” on private jets over the last several years even apart from “fighting the oligarchy”[.]

Note that Sanders is  “fighting the oligarchy” alongside a Congresswoman who crashed into her first year in office, ala the Kool-Aide Man running through a brick wall, demanding to ban “farting cows and airplanes,” and now she’s happily flying across the country as well on a private jet.

Bernie’s Website states, “Climate change is a threat to the planet: We must address it”

You must address it. As for he and AOC:

A lot of hot air

/

Here’s the hysterical headline touting a new assault on gas stoves:

Common appliance raises kids’ cancer risk nearly twice as much as adults’ — and it’s in 2 out of 5 US homes

aww, it even includes a picture of an adorable little cancer victim — gas stoves kill again!

Benzene, a harmful chemical found in gasoline, cigarette smoke and paint strippers, is a known carcinogen. Long-term exposure to high levels of benzene has been linked to leukemia and other blood-related cancers.

Now, a new study out of Stanford University reports that benzene-caused cancer risks are significantly higher — especially for children — in homes with medium to high usage of gas stoves and inadequate ventilation.

“Natural gas and propane stoves emit benzene, a known carcinogen through combustion,” the researchers explained in the forthcoming July issue of the Journal of Hazardous Materials.

“To our knowledge, ours is the first study to assess the carcinogenic health risks from benzene formed during gas combustion from stoves, as well as leukemia cases attributable to gas stove use.”

Gas stoves have come under fire in recent years as studies suggested they emit pollutants like nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, benzene and formaldehyde, which can trigger asthma and potentially increase the risk of heart disease and other health problems.

The stoves have fueled heated debate about health and environmental concerns and government overreach with limitations or bans.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order in January that “safeguards the American people’s freedom to choose from a variety of goods and appliances,” including gas stoves.

The order followed a watered-down rule from the Biden administration requiring some gas and electric stoves to be more efficient.

Other restrictions have had more teeth. In 2023, New York became the first state to ban the installation of new gas stoves in most new homes and buildings. It’s set to take effect in 2026 for buildings under seven stories and in 2029 for larger structures.

NYC also has a ban on natural gas in new buildings — the ordinance was upheld in federal court in March.

Meanwhile, research on the potential effects of gas stoves continues. About 38% of American households, or roughly 40 million homes, have these appliances.

Stanford scientists say that 6.3 million Americans are exposed to the top 5 % highest benzene-emitting gas stoves.

They measured emissions in 87 homes across 14 counties in Colorado and California for a 2023 study.

For this new study, they simulated different cooking scenarios involving varying burner intensities and oven temperatures with minimal or no ventilation.

When there’s no ventilation, benzene exposure in kitchens and living rooms is highest in smaller apartments, followed by manufactured homes, attached homes and detached homes, the researchers found.

“Particularly concerning were the elevated risks in bedrooms, where people typically spend the most time,” they wrote.

Their analysis also suggested that children’s cancer risk from gas stove exposure is 1.85 times higher than adults.

The researchers noted that children generally breathe faster and take in more air — and therefore more pollutants — relative to their smaller body size.

“Since there is no safe limit for benzene’s carcinogenic effects, it is crucial to further evaluate the health risks associated with these effects,” the study read.

Ventilation plays a key role in reducing benzene concentrations — the researchers recommend opening windows and using good-quality outdoor vent hoods. Homeowners could also switch to electric stoves.

“The study underscores the importance of addressing combustion-related indoor air pollutants to protect public health, particularly in households with limited ventilation,” the study authors wrote.


It’s a bunch of bullshit, with “tests” conducted in airless, unventilated cubicles, and with the usual failure to mention what, exactly a “1.85 X higher risk of cancer means in actual numbers, so I asked GROK. Bottom line: you can keep your stove, if the Greens will let you.

Q: “a new study "suggests: that children’s cancer risk from gas stove exposure is 1.85 times higher than adults. That's pretty useless information without knowing what the actual risk is that's being increased; can you give some numbers in layman's terms?”

Grok:

The study you’re referring to, published in the Journal of Hazardous Materials in 2025, evaluates benzene exposure from gas stoves and its associated cancer risks, particularly for children. The 1.85 times higher risk for children compared to adults sounds alarming, but without context on the baseline risk, it’s hard to gauge its real-world impact. Let’s break it down with the available data, explained in plain terms.

What the Study Says

The study focuses on the top 5% of benzene-emitting gas stoves in the U.S., affecting about 6.3 million people. Benzene is a known carcinogen linked to leukemia and other blood cancers. The researchers used a model to estimate how much benzene people are exposed to in homes with these high-emitting stoves, especially under medium to high usage (e.g., cooking with one burner for 30 minutes twice a day for medium use, or multiple burners and the oven for high use) and poor ventilation.

The key finding is that children’s Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk (ILCR) from benzene exposure is 1.85 times higher than adults’ in these scenarios. This is because children breathe more air relative to their body size, spend more time indoors, and have developing bodies that may be more vulnerable to carcinogens.

Actual Risk Numbers

The study provides some specific estimates, though they’re framed in technical terms. Here’s what we can extract in layman’s terms:

  • Cancer Risk Threshold: The World Health Organization (WHO) sets a “safe” cancer risk threshold at 1 in 1,000,000 (or 1E-06, meaning 1 additional cancer case per 1 million people exposed over a lifetime). Risks above this are considered elevated.

  • Children’s Risk: In homes with high gas stove use and poor ventilation (e.g., no range hood or open windows), the study estimates that for every 1 million children, up to 16 additional cancer cases could occur due to benzene exposure over their lifetime. This is specifically for kids in non-ventilated apartments with the worst 5% of benzene-emitting stoves.

  • Adults’ Risk: Since children’s risk is 1.85 times higher, we can estimate adults’ risk by dividing. For adults, the risk is roughly 8-9 additional cancer cases per 1 million in the same high-exposure scenario (16 ÷ 1.85 ≈ 8.65).

  • Range of Risk: Across different home types (apartments, detached homes, etc.) and usage scenarios, the risk for children in non-ventilated homes with medium to high stove use is 4 to 16 times higher than the WHO’s safe threshold. So, the cancer risk could range from 4 to 16 cases per million children compared to the “safe” 1 case per million. For adults, this would be roughly 2 to 9 cases per million.

Putting It in Perspective

  • Baseline Risk: Without gas stove exposure, your lifetime risk of developing leukemia (the main cancer linked to benzene) is about 1 in 200 (or 5,000 per million) for the general population, based on American Cancer Society data. The additional risk from gas stoves in these worst-case scenarios (4-16 per million for kids, 2-9 for adults) is a tiny fraction of that—adding less than 0.01% to your overall leukemia risk.

  • Worst-Case Scenario: The 16-per-million risk for kids applies to:

    • Homes with the top 5% most polluting gas stoves.

    • High usage (e.g., cooking with multiple burners and the oven for hours daily).

    • No ventilation (no range hood, no open windows).

    • Small homes or apartments where benzene concentrates more.

  • Typical Homes: In homes with low to medium stove use or good ventilation (e.g., using a high-efficiency range hood or opening windows), the risk drops significantly, often below the WHO’s 1-per-million threshold. For example, high-efficiency hoods can reduce benzene exposure by 75% or more, and open windows can cut it by up to 99%.

Limitations and Caveats

  • Modeling, Not Real Cases: The study uses a computer model (CONTAM) to estimate benzene exposure, not actual measurements in thousands of homes. Real-world risks could vary.

  • Not All Stoves: The findings apply to the worst 5% of gas stoves, not every gas stove. Most stoves emit less benzene, and risks are lower with proper ventilation.

  • Estimates, Not Certainties: The 16-per-million figure is an estimate, not a count of actual cancer cases. It’s based on assumptions about lifetime exposure and benzene’s potency.

  • Other Sources of Benzene: Benzene is also in cigarette smoke, gasoline, and industrial emissions. Gas stoves are just one contributor, and their impact is small compared to, say, smoking or working in a refinery.

Bottom Line

In the worst-case scenario (high stove use, no ventilation, top 5% benzene-emitting stoves), gas stoves might increase a child’s lifetime cancer risk by about 16 cases per million (0.0016%) and an adult’s by 8-9 cases per million (0.0008-0.0009%). This is a small addition to the baseline leukemia risk of 5,000 per million. For most homes with moderate stove use and good ventilation, the risk is much lower, often negligible. Ventilation and reducing stove use are easy ways to minimize exposure.

Because who knows better how to run a business than a politician, especially a Democrat?

/

Hartford Yahoos draft anti-Amazon bill

HARTFORD — Warehouse workers would have added protections on quotas, breaks and reprimands under legislation approved along party lines in the House of Representatives on Wednesday.

The bill, which next heads to the Senate, was aimed at promoting better working conditions, said Rep. Manny Sanchez, D-New Britain, co-chairman of the Labor & Public Employees Committee. It would require employers to inform workers of production quotas and allow workers to request related information. It would also assure legally mandated meal and bathroom breaks.

The legislation passed 97-48 after a four-hour-long afternoon debate.

Who needs the Department of Labor, when we can bring in the full prosecutorial force of the state? William Tong and the UAW are licking their chops at the prospect of busting a non-union shop

House Majority Leader Jason Rojas, D-East Hartford: “It creates a process by which civil action can be sought, either by the attorney general or by individual employees in court." Sue, sue, sue.

Minority Republicans charged that the bill was tailored to apply to Amazon, which is planning a 3.2 million square foot warehouse straddling the Waterbury and Naugatuck border.

"This is a terrible message to send," said Rep. Steve Weir of Hebron, a ranking member of the Labor and Public Employees Committee. "Make no mistake, it's all about the messaging. The biggest of the big is Amazon. Non-union Amazon is right in the cross hairs. This bill is the Amazon bill. Everything this bill demands, Amazon is doing today."

Weir said that since the bill would apply to warehouses with more than 100 workers, it seems specifically written for Amazon, which has a growing number of warehouses throughout Connecticut. He said that during a recent tour of an Amazon facility, the warehouse seemed exceedingly clean with adequate safety wear and medical facilities for on-the-job injuries.

He said that new procedures have decreased injuries and increased productivity at Amazon facilities. "This business model is great for customers, it's great for the sellers," he said, stressing that pay starts at $20 an hour. "It's great for the consumer."

Weir warned that the legislation would "stifle competition" and discourage economic development and jobs coming to the state. "All we want them to do is come to Connecticut," Weir said. "Why are we doing this to businesses that are spending time and effort here? This bill is anti-business and anti-consumer at the same time."

After more than an hour of questioning Sanchez, Weir said he was concerned that complaints could strain the office of the state attorney general and offered an amendment that would remove a related section of the bill. The amendment lost in a 97-48 party-line vote.

Weir then called another amendment that would delete more references to the attorney general, shifting some legal responsibilities to the Department of Labor. That also failed along party lines, 99-47.

Veteran state Rep. Tom O'Dea said the overall bill would technically turn Amazon into a union shop without a majority vote of employees. "We should not be unionizing by legislation," he said, adding that throughout the country there is no unionized workforce at the sales giant. He predicted that if the bill becomes law, it would repel other companies from possibly locating in the state.

"What we're really doing is killing jobs," said Rep. Anne Dauphinais, R-Danielson.

Rep. Tim Ackert, R-Coventry, said he doesn't like the idea of warehouses but would vote against the bill. "We're the warehouse capital," he said. "And what are we going to do? We're going to over-regulate the industry. We need to take a serious look at what we're doing as a legislative body."

Oh, I’d say the Democrats have already taken a serious look at what they’re doing, and this bill is the result. Champagne Socialist AOC still proudly boasts of her single-handed victory blocking Amazon from establishing a headquarters building in her borough at the cost of 25,000 lost jobs. Our own Me-too Democrats have obviously watched and learned.