EAllusion wrote:A day after receiving some criticism from the UN human rights council, the Trump admin has withdrawn the US from it.
You. are. joking. I read yesterday that this was a possiblity and he has? I've only been reading so far today about increasing pressure from additional fronts.
The man is not to be believed.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Does anyone have an opinion either way about what the nature of an email to our state reps should be in order to be most effective--and actually read by someone?
For example, a lengthy documentation laden message vs a brief message? I'm ready to go either way.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Jersey Girl wrote:Does anyone have an opinion either way about what the nature of an email to our state reps should be in order to be most effective--and actually read by someone?
For example, a lengthy documentation laden message vs a brief message? I'm ready to go either way.
Honestly from everything I've heard and from my own experience I've found that emails go largely unread. Phone calls to the district office, not DC, or letters (I know, too slow) are the best ways to get points across.
ETA: Given how many calls/letters/emails offices get a day I would probably try to be brief as possible. Make sure you tell them you're a constituent and about your special expertise in ECD, both those things should grant your position more weight (I'm sure you knew that but a lurker might not).
Last edited by Guest on Tue Jun 19, 2018 6:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"If you consider what are called the virtues in mankind, you will find their growth is assisted by education and cultivation." -Xenophon of Athens
subgenius wrote:So NOW your position contradicts Mak's since Republicans have also criticized the current policy?
As they should. But this has no comparison to what happened with Gonzalez 18 years ago.
so, taking kids out of parent's arms is not the same as taking kids out of parent's arms...got it!
Hawkeye wrote:
(and for your feeble little mind...both are matters of actual law)
No, they're not. What is happening now is Trump policy, not law.
No, enforcing the law is a matter of law..ergo the rather sticky binding ability of the oath of office. But i get ya, you were used to Obama having policies for not enforcing laws because it would instagram well. But i get it, on one hand when Obama enforced the law to detain children behind chain link it was ok, BUT when Trump enforced the law and detained children behind chain link it was not ok. Aren't the voters of Georgia lucky to have you...bet you miss Sonny doncha?
Hawkeye wrote:
subgenius wrote:Hey at least you did not mind kids being behind chain link in 2014, because Obama's reason was mo better....(again, we are pretending you actually knew back in 2014 even though you have already exhibited that you have mostly been blissfully unaware of your hypocritical stupidity).
Kids old enough to trek across country on their own and being temporarily detained, is hardly synonymous with children so young they're dependent on their parents for survival being ripped away from them their mothers so they can sit in a cage with a teddy bear and not be allowed to touch anyone.
So to be clear - exactly what part of the following policy (inasmuch as it applies to a family caught breaking the law) do you find objectionable ? -
families are intentionally split up only if a child is determined to be at risk or if a child's parent or legal guardian is referred for criminal prosecution."
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
Jersey Girl wrote:Does anyone have an opinion either way about what the nature of an email to our state reps should be in order to be most effective--and actually read by someone?
For example, a lengthy documentation laden message vs a brief message? I'm ready to go either way.
Honestly from everything I've hear and from my own experience I've found that emails go largely unread. Phone calls to the district office, not DC, or letters (I know, too slow) are the best ways to get points across.
ETA: Given how many calls/letters/emails offices get a day I would probably try to be brief as possible. Make sure you tell them you're a constituent and about your special expertise in ECD, both those things should grant your position more weight (I'm sure you knew that but a lurker might not).
Let me just say that I don't know how many times after reading this morning's headlines that the phrase "goddamn son of a bitch" has come out of my mouth and I won't list what those headlines are but just start with how we HAVE to take children away and how Democrats want an immigrant INFESTATION and you'll get the gist of what I've been reading. And Sessions and using the Bible as a basis for support, and that DHS Kirstin whatever who first claimed we're not separating only now how we won't stop--bitch. And now we're planning to withdraw (or according to EA that we already have) from the UN Human Rights Council and how Melania comes right out against this vs Ivanka "Ms. I will advocate for women and children" (my ass bitch) who hasn't uttered one word about these events...okay I feel a little better listing some of it and yes, I really talk this way and fast. Not in a professional setting.
So back to communication types. I've got an outline with sources regarding the Bible claims that Sessions made (see the verses I posted above for ideas), the impact of chronic stress/sustained levels on children, the manipulation of policy to the extent of exploiting children as leverage for political purposes, how the power is in the hands of the President and secondly, in the hands of our congress (See what Ted Cruz is up to) and the expression of moral outrage. All I have to do is sequence it up, edit, and go.
So lengthy communication via email and cut to the chase message via voice mail.
Best I can do on short notice and thanks for your advice.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
A bit of irony here in the fact that what the administration is doing is psychologically setting up children to become the very types of gang members and criminals that the administration claims to abhor.
Okay that's out of my gut now, too.
Failure is not falling down but refusing to get up.
Chinese Proverb
Jersey Girl wrote: [...snip...] So lengthy communication via email and cut to the chase message via voice mail.
Best I can do on short notice and thanks for your advice.
That all sounds great. I'd recommend redialing if you get pushed to voicemail which honestly shouldn't happen often since there basically should always be a body available to field your call(certainly for a senator or senior rep), especially if you can hold for a bit. If they ask to direct the call you can tell them what your call is about and they often have a staffer(s) that is designated to respond to those kinds of calls. If you get a hold of a live human that seems to care, inform them of all the extra information you are giving in the email so they can follow-up if need be.
As an aside to anyone that might be calling on this or any issue, remember that the people you are communicating with are people too. They often are not paid very well (if at all) and worked hard, you probably aren't their first communication on the matter and some people have probably already been rude to them about it. Be kind.
Hawkeye wrote: ... this has no comparison to what happened with Gonzalez 18 years ago.
so, taking kids out of parent's arms is not the same as taking kids out of parent's arms...got it!
You might want to read up on this one before trying to lecture others about it incorrectly. You don’t appear to realize that Gonzalez was returned to his father by the US.
From Wiki, here’s some basic information that you could have easily accessed, to avoid looking foolish:
González's mother, Elizabeth Brotons Rodríguez, drowned in November 1999 while attempting to leave Cuba with González and her boyfriend to get to the United States. The U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) initially placed González with paternal relatives in Miami, who sought to keep him in the United States against his father's demands that González be returned to Cuba.
A United States district court ruling from the Southern District of Florida that only González's father, and not his extended relatives, could petition for asylum on the boy's behalf was upheld by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. After the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the case, by order of U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno, federal agents took González from the paternal relatives and returned him to his father in Cuba in June 2000.
Last edited by Guest on Tue Jun 19, 2018 7:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jersey Girl wrote:A bit of irony here in the fact that what the administration is doing is psychologically setting up children to become the very types of gang members and criminals that the administration claims to abhor.
Okay that's out of my gut now, too.
The head of the American Academy of Pediatrics, Dr. Colleen Kraft, toured one of the facilities. She witnessed a little girl (no older than two) having an emotional meltdown. The staff tried to comfort her by giving her toys and books. The one thing they couldn't do, was try to provide any form of physical comfort. The rules prohibit any physical contact.
I'm certain you are well aware of the various studies of lasting impact that type of thing has on social bonding hormones in still-developing brains. Toss in the brain damage caused by prolonged elevated cortisol levels... so many of these children will carry the scars of this for the remainder of their lives.
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead." ~Charles Bukowski
Church Statement on Separation of Families at the US-Mexico Border OFFICIAL STATEMENT18 JUNE 2018 - SALT LAKE CITY
Due to media inquiries, the Church has issued the following statement:
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has long expressed its position that immigration reform should strengthen families and keep them together. The forced separation of children from their parents now occurring at the U.S.-Mexico border is harmful to families, especially to young children. We are deeply troubled by the aggressive and insensitive treatment of these families. While we recognize the right of all nations to enforce their laws and secure their borders, we encourage our national leaders to take swift action to correct this situation and seek for rational, compassionate solutions.
Who knew that LDS really meant Liberals Doing Socialism? Eh, subby?
I know, we'll blame it on the party no longer in power in any branch of federal government.
Last edited by Guest on Tue Jun 19, 2018 8:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
