Line-Drying Clothes

[cvcgrad]

Just wondering if anyone still dries clothes on a clothesline?

My mom dried clothes on a clothesline for many years!

[LeAnn]

I still hang my clothes on the line during the summer. It makes for a bit more ironing, but it is worth it for the costs saving and the freshness!

[Vox Humana]

You aren't allow to hang clothes out to dry in my neighborhood!

[Sandy]

I always hang my clothes out on the line except in the winter. They smell so fresh! S

[Dawn]

yes. All year round.

[Phisherman]

Same here. Clothes lines are not allowed, I'm envious of those who have one!

[skp9011]

I wash clothes in the sink and rinse them with the sprayer. (Cold water of course) Sometimes, I even use the local river. I have gone to a newer system of collecting rainwater in order to avoid rising local utility rates. Now, this is really the way to go.

As most know, the electric companies are monopolistic. They would prefer you to dry your clothes in an electric dryer. Oil and gas drive the turbines. Without revenue how can GW Bush and his cronies flourish?

Perhaps another CA electric faux crisis is in order, eh?

[Mrs Bonk]

mumbo jumbo fwiw I line dry

[e-mail] wrote:

[Dorot29701]

I have a small umbrella type clothes line that can be taken down (in case of high winds or hurricanes) and it's alright with my home owner's association because it can't be seen from the street. I use it and a dryer. Really does save on electricity.

Dorothy

[Jim Helfer]

Uhhh. Didn't that happen under Clinton's watch? Or do we have some convuluted illogical rationalization on how this is another thing he won't be held responsible for after his 8 years in power (and I know, I voted for him twice).

[Vox Humana]

Actually, the CA electrical crisis happened under Bush. The state asked for help and Bush refused. Later it was learned the Enron, one of the companies that profited by the crisis, had ties to Bush.

[Jim Helfer]

The S*** hit the fan when Bush was president, but the mess certainly was in full swing under Clinton. Why is it so hard to admit?

Those guys in CA signed rididulous contracts with people that they probably should have known were crooks. Maybe Bush _should_ have used a big pile of the taxpayer's money to bail them out, but I've never seen any good argument that he _had_ to.

Jim

[Vox Humana]

"Jim Helfer" wrote in message news:0N6dnRA [e-mail]...

As you rightly point out, there were agreements signed by people in CA while Clinton was in office. There were also wildfires, hurricanes, outbreaks of disease, and earthquakes while Clinton was in office. Your error is assuming a cause-and-effect relationship when there is none. I don't think anyone blamed Bush for the energy crisis. He did fail to act to mitigate the damage, and that seem consistent with his entire approach to governance as witnessed by the testimony at the 911 hearings. Your suggestion that he could have used "a big pile of the taxpayer's money to bail them out" is an example of the logical fallacy called false dilemma. It wasn't a matter of using tax payer's money, it was a matter of using his power to cap the wholesale electrical charges. That would not involve one red cent. His failure to step in and cap prices plunged the state, and the state's utilities, into a crisis. It all looks like the first step in a concerted effort to oust Davis from office while rewarding his biggest contributors like Enron -- this at the expense and misery of millions of people in a state that coincidently didn't vote for him. There is no doubt that his actions would have been quite different if there were rolling blackouts in Florida. He would have acted first, and placed blame later.

What's interesting about this example is the it was the first time that most Americans ever heard about Enron or Ken Lay. Little did we know what was about to unravel as the nation's largest bankruptcy and corporate fraud investigation. It was the first time that we knew about Bush's ties to Enron and his relationship with Lay. It is also interesting that most of the players in the energy crisis where from Texas. This all happened while Dick Cheney was holding secret talks with undisclosed participants who were setting the administration's energy policy. Now we have a case before the Supreme Court because Cheney refuses to disclose who he met with in these meetings and the decision will be made, in part, by a judge who takes vacations with Cheney -- the same judge that appointed the Bush/Cheney administration. If you can't admit that there is something wrong with this picture, then you aren't being honest. But as we see, the Bush administrati on has an agenda that is not derailed by fact or logic. When the Saudi funded attack on our county occurred on 9/11, his first instinct was to punish Iraq. It was easier and had the potential for more Halliburton involvement than to go after Saudi Arabia. Bush is an opportunist who will subject millions to risk, both physical and financial, to further his personal goals. Unfortunately, there is so much secrecy and so many lies that we seldom see the true goal before it finding ourselves mired in a crisis. I'm sure he is doing his best, though.

[Viviane]

I only use the dryer in extreme emergencies - lots of rain or need the clothes quickly. Why pay to dry clothes when the climate in Sydney (Australia) is so good. I was raised in England and visited California in my teens and was shocked to hear that everyone used dryers in such a wonderful climate - in England people rarely use them even though the climate is terrible. I remember doing the laundry run several times on one day if there were showers - hanging up, taking down, hanging up again etc.

Viviane