Letter from Barbara Boxer California

[john940]

Calling her a "dike" is not going to win you many friends on this forum.  Maybe you should read the forum rules.  No hateful epithets about your percieved sexual orientation of Barbara Boxer, please.  Consider this fair warning.

I'm no huge Boxer fan, and I understand your vitriol, but calling her a "dike" does little to further your argument, and ultimately it only does yourself a disservice.

in sf they have the annual dykes on bikes in the pride parade, i think its quite an honor to be in it. live proud my brother!

[Madnsassy]

Calling her a "dike" is not going to win you many friends on this forum.  Maybe you should read the forum rules.  No hateful epithets about your percieved sexual orientation of Barbara Boxer, please.  Consider this fair warning.

I'm no huge Boxer fan, and I understand your vitriol, but calling her a "dike" does little to further your argument, and ultimately it only does yourself a disservice.

in sf they have the annual dykes on bikes in the pride parade, i think its quite an honor to be in it. live proud my brother!

The dykes on bikes was always the opening of the parade (moved away from SF and haven't been for ten years) and my favorite part.  All those women roaring down Market St. on their Harleys.  Quite the sight!  I've always been a closet Harley rider.  (Excuse thread drift.)

[Captain Ron]

I would never in a million years associate this word with them. The fact that my character comes off as homophobic by using that word on the forum makes me sad. I associate that word with something far far different than gay women. But nonetheless, I used it and I apologize.
I can see how a comment like that can completely derail the whole point of the post. And yes, I'm female, to take that ambiguity away. And apparently can't spell certain words correctly either.

No harm, no foul, luvnadoom.  Sorry if I came off as a harsh forum etiquette nazi zealot.  Welcome to LATOC, ya big dyke!  (Insert friendly self-deprecating emoticon here)

[yellowrocker]

Back to the original thread .......

All politicians act like they listen, but they don't IMO unless you represent a significant constituency or a group of campaign contributors. That's why lobbying is big business. I know I'm cynical, but IMO if you want your representative or senator to listen, you HAVE to pay them. So that forces all groups to either pay lobbyists, shut up, or just wither away. Boxer's response proves neither she nor her staff read your letters.

[shaleoh2]

              They are ALL in it .....................

                                                                to......
                                                                              win
                                                                                              it

[freedom]

These grants, funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (H.R.1) through the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, will be used to acquire land and property, rehabilitate or demolish abandoned properties, and offer down-payment and closing-cost assistance to low- and middle-income homebuyers.

This is the part that gets me.

Maybe I'm old-fashioned, but, the way I grew up, if you couldn't pay for something, you couldn't have it. If you can't come up with the down payment and/or closing costs, how in the hell are you going to pay a monthly mortgage?

Home ownership is not for everyone. Why do we think it is?

[luvndadoom]

Couldn't agree more freedom. But what would happen if Boxer stood up and said, Ok, we aren't taking the money, give it back to the taxpayers, so they don't have as much debt. If you people want a mortgage you have to work for it!

Can you imagine? Too many people honestly believe that this type of a program will help the economy. I just recently came across this:
http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/7-7-09-housing-crisis-report.pdf
Lays it out in black and white. Yet they're still doing it. Why?

So the gov't can LOOK like they're getting tough on the banks while at the same time, they're still bailing them out through these grants.

So they basically just shifted the bailouts from (loaning them money at 0 percent, enabling them to make huge amounts of money in the stock market and keeping the profits) through the front door, to (just flat out GIVING them the money by giving our money to the states to buy the banks toxic mortgages) through the back door.

Ain't it grand.

I also just realized this should be in the financial news sub-forum. Moderators please move if need be, I'm obviously still learning.

[yellowrocker]

Home ownership is not for everyone. Why do we think it is?

I think most can afford some sort of home. It just seems that people buy way too much house for their income.

[freedom]

Home ownership is not for everyone. Why do we think it is?

I think most can afford some sort of home. It just seems that people buy way too much house for their income.

_{perhaps ...}