Homeless Shelter closed because Director is a Republican
- 12-29-2005, 01:06 AM
Homeless Shelter closed because Director is a Republican
If You're A Republican & A Shelter Director--Expect Increased Rent
Dome Village, a transitional housing program for 32 people in downtown Los Angeles, released an urgent media alert. Basically, their rent is increasing from $2,500 per month to $18,333 per month.
Why? Because the L.A. Times reported that Dome Village director is a Republican. The non-Republican property owner of Dome Village didn't want to subsidize this "Republican" operation.
Here is the release:
Dome Village Threatened With Closure
After 12 years, and just a few days before Christmas, Dome Village transitional housing community has received a notice of a rent increase of nearly 800% that will force residents back on the street. This issue will be addressed at a Press Conference conducted by Ted Hayes and the Directors of Justiceville/Homeless, USA
WHEN: Friday, December 23rd 2005 at 10.00 AM
WHERE: The Dome Village, 847 Golden Avenue, Los Angeles, CA., 90017
CONTACT: Ted Hayes
After learning that Ted Hayes visited a Republican womenıs group, landlord and retired attorney Milton Sidley wrote a one-line letter informing Justiceville/Homeless, USA (JHUSA) that he will raise the rent from $2,500/mo plus property taxes to $18,333/mo plus property taxes in late 2006. When asked why he raised the rent, Sidley replied, ³This Democrat is tired of supporting Ted and his Dome Village.²
Sidley knows that Justiceville/Homeless USA cannot survive this punitive increase. The multi-millionaire sent the rent-increase notice two days after reading a Los Angeles Times article that referenced Ted Hayesı support for President Bush. Sidley has retaliated against Hayes in a way that will displace 32 men, women, and children.
The directors and residents of Dome Village are making an urgent appeal for public assistance to find another site to build a new village. We cannot allow this innovative project, working to end the cycle of homelessness in the United States, to come to a tragic end.
Another version is @ http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2...3/102604.shtml
- 12-29-2005, 01:07 AM
12-29-2005, 01:28 AM
Reprinted from NewsMax.comFriday, Dec. 23, 2005 9:51 a.m. EST
Democrat Landlord Bilks Republican's Homeless Shelter
A liberal lawyer in Los Angeles is threatening to throw nearly three dozen homeless center residents back on the streets because of something he finds indefensible: The center's founder is a Republican and voted for President Bush.
Roughly 30 men, women and children may be forced to leave Dome Village – a 20-year non-profit center for support and housing of the homeless – and will have to try to survive on the streets because of a punitive rent hike imposed by the landlord right before Christmas.
Milton Sidley, a retired attorney and landlord, said he discovered earlier this month that Ted Hayes, founder of Justiceville/Homeless, USA, was a Republican.
News of Hayes’ political affiliation came after a visit to a Republican women’s group, reported by the L.A. Times, which referenced Hayes’ solid support for President Bush.
Two days later, Sidley decided to raise the rent at Justiceville’s "Dome Village” from $2,500 per month to $18,333 per month because, he states, "This Democrat is tired of supporting Ted and his Dome Village.”
So much for the notion that Democrats want to help the country's poor.
The more than 600 percent rent hike cannot be absorbed, Hayes said, meaning Dome Village cannot survive unless Sidley retracts this demand.
According to a Dec. 4 article in the L.A. Times, Hayes "forsook a middle-class lifestyle years ago to live on the streets because he believed it would allow him to better serve the homeless." He has been a registered Republican since 2003.
Hayes, who is black, told the Bel-Air Republican Women’s Federation that his politics are similar to their own and his compassion for those in need are reflective of his political believes and moral strength.
"I support President Bush, and I support the Republican Party," reports the Times. … "I don't believe in the welfare state … If you're poor, you're still expected to be a responsible citizen in this society. I believe in strengthening the hands of the poor where they can learn to stand on their own two feet."
The directors of Dome Village are making an urgent appeal for public assistance to find a new location to aid the homeless and build a new facility. The Justiceville/Homeless, USA group plans a press conference in L.A. Friday to bring national attention to this issue.
12-29-2005, 05:31 AM
12-29-2005, 08:25 AM
sounds like the 'liberal' landlord is showing some real 'conservative' values.... Anyone "outraged" that this guy is getting a dose of his own social-darwinist medicine is a flaming hypocrite - so I expect to hear A LOT about this from Bill O'Reilly.
After all, it's little different from the way Wal-Mart has "served" a thousand small towns across America.
12-29-2005, 10:33 AM
Guess I'll be moving to the next overpass now.....I just wish they would have let me go back in and get my potty jar
12-29-2005, 12:25 PM
Geeze BW, I used to respect what you had to say. That was one of the most ignorant posts I've read all year. I don't quite follow why you feel that the landlord is showing "conservative" values. Not quite sure what you have pictured as "conservative values."Originally Posted by BodyWizard
I also don't follow what makes you say that Ted Hayes is "getting a dose of his own social-darwinist medicine." How is the guy getting his own "social-darwinist medicine" by helping the poor?
Wait a sec, if you're a Liberal, you wouldn't need a basis for what you say. At least most Liberals don't believe they do. It's always someone else's fault.
12-29-2005, 01:33 PM
Maybe you didn't read it, or maybe you're just filled with hate, I don't know.Originally Posted by BodyWizard
The shelter was paying rent at a certain price. The landowner then raised the rent because he read that the director supported President Bush.
You think anyone who is outraged is a hypocrite? The democratic party always claims Republicans don't give 2 ****s about lower class Americans, and yet a democrat is throwing 30 homeless out of the street for no reason other than the director is a Republican. That's hypocrisy.
01-01-2006, 12:52 AM
This is the ONLY thing George Washington and the other dudes didnt prepare for in the constitution. The formimg of political properties. Blindly following/opposing something simply because your party does throws off many checks and balances in government and economy.
Great finisher to the holiday season.
01-01-2006, 03:11 AM
How many times have I heard Rush and Boortz, among others defending money as a form of speech and the use of money as valid political action? More than a dozen, certainly. This is not something I hear liberals arguing for; since conservatives like & support it, I call it a conservative value.Originally Posted by Mass_69
That said, it seems to me that the landlord is making a form of political speech here - I just observed the irony in it being a conservative homeless shelter & a liberal employing the tactic.
Do you disagree?
If you're not familiar with the basic notions of social darwinism, they are roughly that 'survival of the fittest' dictates that the most capable and ruthless members of any society will rise to the top, and are therefore rightfully more important members; those who end up on the bottom in such a society are little better than cattle and may be considered expendable.I also don't follow what makes you say that Ted Hayes is "getting a dose of his own social-darwinist medicine." How is the guy getting his own "social-darwinist medicine" by helping the poor?
As for him getting his own medicine, I was thinking of the massive cuts in social services under the last 3 republican administrations - due to which. many shelters and other programs were closed down.
Again, the irony....
Well, that doesn't add much. What, if you don't automatically agree with me, I must be a liberal? And therefore unworthy of respect?Wait a sec, if you're a Liberal, you wouldn't need a basis for what you say. At least most Liberals don't believe they do. It's always someone else's fault.
01-01-2006, 03:24 AM
???Originally Posted by brogers
The landlord has the right to raise the rent. The tenant has the right to pay up or move out. The end.The shelter was paying rent at a certain price. The landowner then raised the rent because he read that the director supported President Bush.
Nothing personal - it's just business: the law of the jungle, survival of the fittest. You might not like his motives, I may not like his motives, but his motives are irrelevant. By the same token, if forcing this shelter to close is wrong, then forcing any shelter to close is wrong.
That's why it's so damn' important that we pay attention to what happens in Washington. It's discouragingly easy to make bad law.
oh, so this is like, nanny-nanny-boo-boo on the democrats? Because of this guy?You think anyone who is outraged is a hypocrite? The democratic party always claims Republicans don't give 2 ****s about lower class Americans, and yet a democrat is throwing 30 homeless out of the street for no reason other than the director is a Republican. That's hypocrisy.
01-01-2006, 03:36 AM
gotta agree, spatch - partisan politics have nearly destroyed every attempt at self-govenrment so far. And how far back the **** goes - I was really startled recently to learn just how much we're still affected by events and loyalties from the English Civil War. And the French Revolution, from which we get our very concept of political left and right and their association with liberal and conservative, was just madness, even if they did get the idea from us.Originally Posted by spatch
It'll be interesting to see how we deal with the problems inherent in a 2-party system over the next couple election cycles.
Well, gents - Happy New Year to you all, I am outta here!
01-03-2006, 06:43 PM
Unfortunately, I dont listen to Rush or Boortz much, or any radio for that matter, but I dont hear other conservs saying that, and still dont agree in calling that a "conservative value." Actually, the most popular example of using money (or not using) as a form of speech is boycotting - something that is generally more popular with the Libs.Originally Posted by BodyWizard
I am familiar, hence my original comment. While we could debate your so-called "massive cuts" by the last 3 Repub. admins., even though the current one is spending more than the Clinton admin. on social services, remember that closing a shelter based on a necessity (lack of use, abuse of uses, whatever the cause) and closing one out of spite, while I dont condone either, are 2 very different ideals.Originally Posted by BodyWizard
But back to Ted Hayes and his dose of his "social-darwinism medicine." While you explained the meaning of SD, and picked on the past 3 Repub. admins., you failed to address my original question:
"How is the guy getting his own 'social-darwinist medicine' by helping the poor?"
Unless you know Ted Hayes or something about him that was not in the arcticles, your comment was completely wrong.
BW, I said IF you are a Liberal...Originally Posted by BodyWizard
Don't worry, I still think you are a respectable Member here at AM, I guess I just dont agree with you on Politics.
01-03-2006, 06:54 PM
01-03-2006, 11:11 PM
01-03-2006, 11:16 PM
Ummmmmmmmm.......I can't believe anyone believes anything published on Newsmax.com.....it's like a right-wing Weekly World News.
01-04-2006, 01:35 AM
Oh and stuff on mainstream news is soooo much more accurate right?Originally Posted by yeahright
Dan Rather anyone?!?!
01-04-2006, 02:35 AM
The first article is taken from a homeless organization, BTW.Originally Posted by yeahright
I added Newsmax's article because it had some more info on it. And while it is obviously more negative to the owner, it presents the facts perfectly fine.
01-04-2006, 08:07 AM
every news source as an inherient bias.. that is one reason to get information from more than one source..
01-04-2006, 12:21 PM
01-04-2006, 02:08 PM
No, the first post is from the website of the guy experiencing the rent hike. He claims it's because of his political affiliation and then Newsmax reprints it. Sorry, there's no journalism there.....just propaganda.Originally Posted by brogers
01-04-2006, 02:39 PM
That's funny, the first one is from the website of the non-profit organization PATH (People Assisting The Homeless), and I don't see Ted Hayes listed on their Board of Directors, Advisory Board, or Staff...Originally Posted by yeahright
01-04-2006, 03:14 PM
You either didn't read it, or just ignore what the landlord himself said, and did.Originally Posted by yeahright
01-04-2006, 03:35 PM
Originally Posted by milwood
YES! I love finding out who Paris Hilton is sleeping with and what magic age-defying skin creme the stars use that I cant afford!
01-04-2006, 03:51 PM
01-04-2006, 06:15 PM
in much the same way, each political party has an agenda, and they shape everything to support that agenda; loyal Remopublicrats should remember that good party members have been crucial to some of the most powerful nations of the last 100 years: Nazi Germany, The USSR, and the People's Republic of China.Originally Posted by Matthew D
Our Founders were explicit: the American Experiment in self-government can only survive if EVERY citizen stays informed, debates the issues, and thinks for themselves. Only by listening to those who disagree with us can we achieve this end.
01-04-2006, 11:28 PM
No I read it but I don't simply believe something because someone posts it on their blog. I could post on my blog that President Bush told me he keeps Osama Bin Laden in his shirt pocket and it wouldn't make it true.Originally Posted by brogers
Here, you have someone claiming that the landlord said something "When asked why he raised the rent, Sidley replied, This Democrat is tired of supporting Ted and his Dome Village".....but where are the facts? Who asked him? How id he respond? Who was the audience?
If you read this article in a real newspaper http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...ck=1&cset=true
you'll see the story treated in a balanced manner.
And to be honest, if I had been subsidizing a shelter for more than a decade by charging token rent, without ever a thank you from the Director, and then found out that the Director was a proud member of a political party that constantly cuts funding for programs for the homeless, I would probably tell him to go F himself as well (ABOUT ME: I'm a lawyer who works for a non-profit and have spent much of my adult life helping homesless/at-risk people).
01-05-2006, 02:50 PM
Ah the LA Times is a much more balanced media sourceOriginally Posted by yeahright
Yeah I'm sure they are making up quotes. The guy is an attorney, and I have no doubt he would bring a lawsuit if they were intentionally misquoting him.
His words and his actions say plenty.
01-05-2006, 10:27 PM
REALLY?!? Then you shouldnt watch any news on TV, or for that matter read anything in the papers. Because MOST of it comes from blogs. Blogs of people who are neck deep in it. The modern media plageurizes (spelling) them word for word.Originally Posted by yeahright
I understand where you're coming from; but you've got a few delusional views on how the world really works; lawyer or not. As in thinking ANY publication that comes out of California can be considered "balanced". LOL. Or the real impact of blogs in the current western world; READ UP!!! There's a LOT of cool information out there; and you get to read it in its full unaltered form before its broadcasted on the evening news.
01-06-2006, 04:49 PM
^^^Typical 2 wrongs make a right leftist thinking, complete with irrelevance and a Bill O'Reilly jab.Originally Posted by BodyWizard
Similar Forum Threads
- By Distilled Water in forum Supplement LogsReplies: 365Last Post: 09-26-2010, 04:56 PM
- By Salyers1121 in forum General ChatReplies: 0Last Post: 04-28-2006, 12:32 AM
- By iwinulose2981 in forum Weight LossReplies: 3Last Post: 03-10-2005, 12:23 PM