A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

This forum is for discussion of politics, diplomacy, law, and justice
Rich Jordan
Trigger Junkie
Posts: 1583
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:04 am

A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby Rich Jordan » Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:08 am

Especially an ambulatory turd like the senior senator from ill annoy who is in no danger of losing his seat no matter what he says or does? I know he does not give a shit about anything a 'constituent' sends, especially one who disagrees.

I've written very terse letters, neutral letters, etc in the past. This week he just pushed things too far; I was seriously pissed while writing.

Mostly if I get a response it is either boilerplate or a 'thank you for supporting my position' (which to date I never have). Even Obama, when he was a Senator, used to acknowledge a letter of opposition as such but Durbin probably counts nearly unanimous support by this method.

I sent this today. It won't matter but I am curious if anyone knows if an 'angry' letter (but with no profanity or threats or...) is any different to a rep or senator than any other?

=====

Senator Durbin
it is distressing that after so many years of being “represented” by you, I can no longer be surprised when you broadcast your contempt for your constituents and your duty to them.

You hare off on any point that might bring political advantage, even if that means ignoring or actively hurting American citizens and LEGAL immigrants who respected this nation enough to follow our laws. So now your sole focus is on amnesty for illegals? Not on your real constituents, or your actual duty or sworn oath?

In 1986 our government granted amnesty to many illegals then in the country, which led to an immediate increase in the number of people crossing the border in violation of the law. They promised it was a one time thing, and that steps would be taken to increase border security and severely reduce the number of illegals gaining entry so such steps would never need to be taken again. There was even talk at the time of being able to increase the number of legal immigrants welcomed into this country. But we know what politicians’ promises are worth.

You have been one of the persistent obstacles to increasing border security and stopping the flood of illegal immigration. Despite promises that if a DACA deal is passed that there would be cooperation on border security, long bitter experience has shown that is a despicable lie. You and Senator Schumer cannot be trusted on anything related to immigration other than amnesty and ‘open borders’ actions; if our government rolls over on DACA there is little doubt you will continue to obstruct any and all efforts to increase border security.

Do you have any concern for an American child whose parent or parents commit crimes? Those children have their lives turned upside down, perhaps being sent to distant relatives (if they are lucky) or foster care. It isn't their fault, but they pay a price for their parents' actions. And we rightly point at their parents and their bad choices as the cause of the hurt their children face.

I feel for the children brought into this country by their illegal alien parents. But it is NOT America's fault or responsibility. Just as criminal parents harm American children, these aliens placed their children into the position they are in; they are responsible for any bad consequences.

Many might wonder why all of your concern is reserved for the illegals; you have not made any points about aiding the American children impacted by their parents criminal activities. But the answer is as simple as it is despicable. Votes. Those American kids are already here and will someday be voters. But the illegals...

Those of us who have followed your career understand your primary concern is building vote plantations of dependent people, and making it as difficult as possible for those trapped in them to ever be able to escape the poverty and dependency your plans extend and exacerbate. Americans and legal immigrants will have to compete against even more people for jobs; teenagers will continue to be pushed out of traditional entry level jobs, and a substantial percentage of the amnestied illegals will immediately go on public assistance, medicaid and food stamps, placing ever greater burdens on those programs and the citizens and taxpayers who have to fund them. And as a result, America’s option to increase LEGAL immigration continues to be compromised, and the people who respect this nation and its laws are left hanging while illegals are coddled and rewarded.

But then, that's nothing new for the senior Senator from the increasingly broken state of Illinois.

I’ll check the box for a response, but also based on past experience, all I expect is either a boilerplate platitude, or more likely a response implying that my expression of outrage at your dereliction of duty is actually another happy letter of support from a constituent… I’ll let you decide.

...

tfbncc
Loose Cannon
Posts: 787
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:00 am
Location: NE Florida

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby tfbncc » Sun Jan 21, 2018 5:17 am

Well written, but as you already surmised, it has about as much chance as a fart in a windstorm of actually changing anything. Perhaps if you sent the next one in an envelope covered in tar and feathers...

Ray

Rich Jordan
Trigger Junkie
Posts: 1583
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:04 am

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby Rich Jordan » Sun Jan 21, 2018 8:13 am

The state dems around here have hair-triggers for anything they can make someone believe is the least bit threatening. One of the worst offenders has had the state police go after constituents after providing them (and the media) out of context snippets and blaming 'right-wing fanatics'. While I don't know if Durbin would do the same, his deceptive treatment of opposing constituent emails (and postal mails before the anthrax scare) would give me pause. An additional reason, beyond decorum, to not include any profanity.

I can't wait for retirement; we'll be out of illinois so fast there's be a sonic boom.

User avatar
randy
Moderator
Posts: 7209
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2008 12:33 am
Location: EM79

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby randy » Sun Jan 21, 2018 3:51 pm

For it to matter whether or not it is an angry letter would imply that it is actually read.
...even before I read MHI, my response to seeing a poster for the stars of the latest Twilight movies was "I see 2 targets and a collaborator".

User avatar
scipioafricanus
Loose Cannon
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 11:08 pm

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby scipioafricanus » Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:37 pm

We both have the same goof as a senator. Nice letter, but it won't matter except get you on another list somewhere.
If there is a Stairway to Heaven, is there an Escalator to Hell?
If God wanted men to play soccer, he wouldn’t have given us arms. - Mike Ditka

User avatar
Windy Wilson
Active Shooter
Posts: 4672
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:32 am

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby Windy Wilson » Sun Jan 21, 2018 9:08 pm

scipioafricanus wrote: it won't matter except get you on another list somewhere.


This. Remember, Leftist violence is speech and conservative speech is violence. They have great imagination in finding "dog whistles" and "coded messages" and secret meanings in words and phrases they used themselves mere years ago. Hate speech is unprotected speech, and hate speech is something some leftist somewhere disagrees with and doesn't have the mental capacity to form a contrary argument, let alone a refutation on the points.

Angry speech is easily morphed by these people into threats.
The use of the word "but" usually indicates that everything preceding it in a sentence is a lie.
E.g.:
"I believe in Freedom of Speech, but". . .
"I support the Second Amendment, but". . .
--Randy

Rich Jordan
Trigger Junkie
Posts: 1583
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:04 am

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby Rich Jordan » Sun Jan 21, 2018 9:34 pm

As mentioned I'm very familiar with the dems word games in the state level. The turds are doing the same thing to constituents who disagree with them that the 'swatting' trolls do online. And this being illannoy and them being machine turds, they face no repercussions.

I guess it was all rhetorical. I just needed to vent.

User avatar
Netpackrat
Probably Unemployed
Posts: 12276
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 12:04 am
Location: Anchorage, AK

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby Netpackrat » Mon Jan 22, 2018 8:40 am

There is this guy by the name of Travis Corcoran, who used to blog...
Cognosce teipsum et disce pati

"People come and go in our lives, especially the online ones. Some leave a fond memory, and some a bad taste." -Aesop

User avatar
HTRN
Probably Unemployed
Posts: 10754
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:05 am
Location: Under your bed with a knife
Contact:

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby HTRN » Mon Jan 22, 2018 5:25 pm

The phrase "dont invite the man into your life" springs to mind..
EGO partum , proinde EGO sum

Describing what HTRN does as "antics" is like describing the wreck of the Titanic as "a minor boating incident" ~ First Shirt

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

User avatar
kapikui
Case Shiner
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 5:06 am
Location: Pocatello, Idaho
Contact:

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby kapikui » Tue Jan 23, 2018 9:01 am

I seem to remember a liberal congresswoman from California claim that threatening to vote against her and to donate to her opponent was terrorism.

User avatar
Windy Wilson
Active Shooter
Posts: 4672
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 6:32 am

Re: A letter to a senator - does anger make a difference?

Postby Windy Wilson » Wed Jan 24, 2018 2:44 am

kapikui wrote:I seem to remember a liberal congresswoman from California claim that threatening to vote against her and to donate to her opponent was terrorism.

I'm sure it was; the mere thought sends terror through her stone-heart.
The use of the word "but" usually indicates that everything preceding it in a sentence is a lie.
E.g.:
"I believe in Freedom of Speech, but". . .
"I support the Second Amendment, but". . .
--Randy


Return to “Politics, Law, and Justice”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests