CTA Student Smack-Down


California Teacher’s Association Responds to “Camilla Letter”

Board Member Jim Rogers responds directly to student letter with abrupt condescension, sparking local outrage

In a singular act of political activism last month, the California Teachers Association board, with the leadership of CTA President David Sanchez, flexed it’s political muscle during the campaign, donating over a million dollars toward defeating proposition 8.  In this highly controversial move, CTA representatives raided the teacher’s union funds for  political causes that had been earmarked for lowering class sizes.  Now that the money has been lost and Proposition 8 has won, the heat is on.

In a letter questioning CTA choices in this matter, Folsom High School student Camilla X, wrote to CTA officials protesting their use of teacher funds and received this shockingly worded reply from CTA/NEA coordinator, Jim Rogers….and this is a direct quote:

“Thanks, Sweetie, but it’s over for now.  And it’s really none of your business.”

Mr. Rogers is one of the board members who made the decision to use teacher funds for political causes.  The reply to Camilla’s letter was sent directly to her email box and shocked her mother.  In responding to Mr. Rogers, Camilla’s mother Barbara X, had this to say:

“Regardless of your personal feelings on a matter, Camilla was exercising her rights as an American to discuss her views and opinions with appropriate representatives. The message you are giving reflects your personal and selfish interests (not appropriate as an elected board member) and also sends the message that it is not okay for citizens to express their views.

Camilla’s letter was thoughtful, respectful and eloquently written. Your response showed little to no thought and was not respectful. I will continue to make calls to ensure that this type of behavior is not allowed in the California Teacher’s Association.”

To which the venerable Mr. Rogers, rather than issuing an apology to the student, replied hotly:

“Such hate and bigotry… Such a shame.”

Mr. Rogers should be ashamed of himself for such a response to a student.  I have no words for this kind of incomprehensible action.  To have the head of a teacher’s group show such disrespect and rudeness to a young student is outrageous.  California’s teachers should be ashamed to be associated with such an organization.  Not only did the CTA send 1.25 million of teacher’s hard earned money down the proverbial rat hole, but they have shown, time and again their contempt for educators and their students.


That these calloused, shameful comments came from a board member is just beyond the pale and speaks to the inner rot at heart of the CTA itself.   —Beetle Blogger

Read the original Camilla Letter, it’s very well written:

Camilla Letter

Subject: In Protest of CTA’s $1.25 million donation to the “No on Prop 8” campaign
My name is Camilla and I am a junior at Folsom High School. On October 21, I stayed home from school to protest the $1.25 million your association donated to the “No on Proposition 8” campaign. I believe that this is something that CTA, which speaks for all teachers, had no right to do. Did you ask the teachers if this was okay with them? Did they approve this? You can tell me that your board and representatives voted and passed the decision to donate this amount of money for this proposition, but as I understand it, your board should make decision for education, not for political agendas.
You spent the teachers’ funds on a very controversial issue with which many of them do not agree.  Marriage between a man and a woman has existed since the beginning of human life on earth. Should Proposition 8 fail, it would cause the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman to be diminished and its powerful influence on society to be lessened. The failure of Proposition 8 would result in the meaning of marriage becoming little more than a casual relationship between any two adults and the weakening of the importance of the roles of a father and a mother in a child’s development. Marriage is not just about love or the desires of the parties entering into it. It about providing what is best for children, ideally a mother and a father who love them.
Does it really serve teachers and students best to sponsor changing the institution of marriage in this way?
While you have stated that you made this donation because all people should be allowed equal protection under the law, you must understand that many people do not agree that denying same-sex marriage equates to unjustified discrimination.
Domestic partners, whether homosexual or heterosexual, already have all the same rights and privileges afforded to them by law as do married individuals EXCEPT that their union cannot be called “marriage”. I believe that this type of “discrimination” is very different from the withholding of basic rights to
individuals based on their race or ethnicity, something that cannot be chosen or changed. Even if homosexual individuals do not choose their sexual orientation, their desire for their relationships to be considered equal in all ways does not justify changing society’s definition of marriage, especially when there are already laws in place which give them equal protection and rights.
I thank you for taking the time to read this letter. I hope that I will get a reply. I hope that you understand why I stayed home. It was not to get the day off but to say that I do not agree with this donation and am not for same-sex marriage and do not appreciate the representatives of the teachers in our public education system taking sides on such a controversial issue. I know that my actions did not adversely affect you but I did this as a matter of principle. I do wish to thank you for the good work you do in seeking better pay and benefits for teachers. My teachers make a positive difference in my life and I appreciate anything you do that will truly help them.


More Letters:

See the entire correspondence sent to us as source material, including replies from CTA President David Sanchez, here—notice his fear of the media on this one…he knows they’ve been caught with their ends in the breeze.




  1. Will said,

    November 17, 2008 at 3:58 pm

    I am concerned that elected officials used tax money to serve their political goals. That is an egregious abuse of power.

  2. November 17, 2008 at 4:04 pm

    They are not using tax money nor are the elected by the people. The CTA is a teacher’s union where officials are elected by members of that union. Teachers in that union give money to the union out of each paycheck as dues. This money is supposed to be used by the CTA to further the causes of it’s members, namely the California teachers. It’s reprehensible that they used the hard earned money of the teachers of this state to go against the wishes of so many teachers. Many teachers that I know have attempted to get their money refunded without luck. There does not appear to be any accountability for the way the money is spent. From what I can tell, the organization is quite corrupt and wields significant political power. The thing that concerns me most is the fact that teachers are trapped in the organization because without it, it is nearly impossible to get a job in California as a teacher. From that point of view, the CTA is little more than an extortionist thug. It’s hard to imagine a situation where this would benefit our children.

  3. chadabshier said,

    November 17, 2008 at 4:40 pm

    Wow… what a creep.

  4. prop8discussion said,

    November 17, 2008 at 6:12 pm

    this is really embarrassing for the CTA.

  5. Buck said,

    November 17, 2008 at 6:39 pm

    I personally disagree completely with Camilla, but would have treated her with more respect. There is no excuse for rudeness on the part of any employee of CTA, but then there is no excuse for rudeness in calling him a creep. Creepiness is in the eye of the beholder, I suppose.

    CTA has every right to spend its money as it sees fit, just as every other labor union, Knights of Columbus group, company, church, or individual has a right. In my opinion, it is appropriate for CTA to spend money on this issue.

    CTA sees it as a matter of civil rights, fair education, and the tyranny of the majority. There are gay teachers, students, and staff who need the respect that comes with equal rights for all. Most especially, gay students need protection from the abuse and bullying that is rampant in schools, and which we all have seen. Until we are all treated respectfully, it is within the realm of education to try to teach everyone to respect diversity and fairness. How they spend their money is their business. If teachers don’t agree, they can change the CTA leadership.

    Prop. 8 will be overturned by the courts. If Camilla believes civil partnership has all the rights and privileges of marriage, then why is there a distinction? I suggest her parents trade in their marriage certificate for a civil partnership certificate if it’s the same thing. Face it, this is an issue about not believing gay people should have everything the rest of us have. Period. Dress it up any way you want. It’s still a “separate but equal” issue and it’s shameful.

  6. clay said,

    November 17, 2008 at 6:44 pm

    How do the teachers that are against this political use of their dues, or appalled at the outrageous comments of Jim Rogers to a student and her mother fight back? Of all the organizations that exist to support their members, it is very disconcerting that a board member of an educational organization has such amazing in-tolerance and condescension for students and their parents. Power corrupts, apparently.

    We have now seen that embarrassment has little or no effect on those who have zero respect for morality, that only works on people who have a conscience, or parents that teach values.


  7. California Crusader said,

    November 17, 2008 at 6:48 pm


    Didn’t know if you’ve seen this yet from Michelle Malkin. It’s utterly disgusting! http://michellemalkin.com/2008/11/17/anti-prop-8-mob-watch-san-franciscos-castro-district/

    Thanks for the great CTA post! I’ll be discussing it soon on my blog! http://californiacrusader.wordpress.com

  8. teeny said,

    November 17, 2008 at 7:25 pm

    It is *so* infuriating to constantly be accused of hatred and bigotry. Their idea of “equality” is for the law to be on their side while they flaunt their behavior in the faces of those who disagree with them. And they will not rest until the law forces the rest of us to sit down and shut up.

    This is their idea of being on the cutting edge of civil rights?

  9. waltzinexile said,

    November 17, 2008 at 7:48 pm

    First, the California Teachers Association is not an educational organization, it is a union. And second, I’d venture to guess that the board took a vote to decide whether to donate money to the No on Prop 8 campaign, and that a majority of the board voted to do so. Funny how you don’t seem to care too much for the majority vote thing when it’s not working for your side.

  10. beetlebabee said,

    November 17, 2008 at 7:59 pm

    Waltz, you’re new and missed the previous discussion we had on the CTA when they first made the donation. The teachers in our area were up in arms because they’d just voted to use those funds for decreasing class size. Now the funds are gone, the teachers weren’t asked, and it all just turned into a giant pumpkin.

    I can see why Mr. Rogers there is a little frustrated. He’s probably getting some heat, and who is this girl to pile on anyway?

    Yeah, he shouldn’t be in education. Union thugs aren’t supposed to act like union thugs around the constituents. It’s bad form.

  11. BertN said,

    November 17, 2008 at 8:20 pm

    “There is no excuse for rudeness on the part of any employee of CTA, but then there is no excuse for rudeness in calling him a creep.”

    Creep is as creep does. Dude should be forced to apologize publicly for his rancid behavior and then compelled to write a check on the spot for 1.2 million of his own money to the pro-marriage PAC or 527 of the X family’s choice.

    Oh, wait…that’s HIS tactics. Ours are simply to publicize the actions of the CTA and let people judge for themselves.

    Which they did on Nov. 4.

    I struggled with my vote until election day. In the aftermath, I’d vote Yes in a heartbeat. It’s not about marriage; it’s about the “tolerance” fascists trying to destroy their parents by proxy.

  12. waltzinexile said,

    November 17, 2008 at 8:38 pm

    One of your cohorts actually provides quite a bit more detail on her blog:


    It would appear that the State Council of Education would have been a more appropriate recipient for Camilla’s letter.

    And respectfully, to clarify: Mr. Rogers has no constituents. He’s not an elected official. I suppose as a board member of the CTA, he might have been elected to the board, but then his constituency would be the teachers who belong to the union, not students.

  13. Mike said,

    November 17, 2008 at 9:11 pm

    If it’s in the internet. It must be true.

  14. beetlebabee said,

    November 17, 2008 at 9:13 pm

    Actually Mike, I spoke with Camilla’s family just today. This is an exclusive report. I personally vouch for all the facts and reporting.

  15. beetlebabee said,

    November 17, 2008 at 9:39 pm

    Sorry about the delay Waltz, your link got you into the spam box somehow. No worries, I fished you out.

    “Whatourcountryneeds” at blogspot is using information on the secondary page of my post. There’s a link at the bottom of the original post to the source material. She has my permission. Thanks Liz!

    Constituent noun:
    1 : one who authorizes another to act as agent 2 : a member of a constituency 3 : an essential part : component , element

    Whether elected by teachers or no, teachers, students, schools, principals etc. are essential elements to the California Teacher’s Association and the NEA, both of which Mr. Rogers represents in his role.

    Regardless of his role in school bureaucracy, where is his sense of human decency? Of responsible adult role modeling? Love of children…?

  16. waltzinexile said,

    November 17, 2008 at 10:01 pm

    No worries about the link/spam filter.
    And I didn’t mean to make it sound like I was ratting her out for non-attribution. I was merely pointing out that she had a great deal more information as regards this matter.
    Finally, perhaps Mr. Rogers’ sense of human decency is offended by those who wish to relegate same sex couples to second-class citizenry. I can’t say for sure, as I don’t know him.

  17. beetlebabee said,

    November 17, 2008 at 10:12 pm

    Teeny, Cutting edge of civil rights is exactly the point. It’s the height of hypocrisy to on one hand moan and groan about doing unto others and on the other to be sniping at some girl for a thoughtful letter.

    Aren’t we supposed to be encouraging literary skills here? Political involvement? Making a difference and all that? Except when it comes to me, don’t question me. It’s actually quite a symbolic little exchange there between emails. Microcosm of the bigger problem.

  18. ivoteyesonprop8 said,

    November 17, 2008 at 10:35 pm

    Elected officials definitely use tax money to serve their own political goals. I can’t believe the letter this girl got from the CTA. Totally outrageous! That’s awesome that she wrote to the CTA and articulated her position on the issue, and props to her Mom for writing in and standing up for her daughter.

    I didn’t get a response to my email to the CTA though :(


  19. CL said,

    November 17, 2008 at 10:46 pm

    This is to Buck- The issue at hand is not as they are trying to force in to the Civil Rights pocket and that is what many don’t want to understand. Under Civil Rights a Civil Union already fulfills that requirement. So why do Gays keep pushing the issue? Because if they can get a judge to proclaim it as a ‘Civil Rights ‘ issue they can legally attack Religion. You see God has already said how he feels about homosexuality. So if by law “Marriage’ is determined to be legal for gays then if a Minister or Pastor that marries Heterosexuals refuses to marry gays, that Church can be sued and will likely loses its tax exemption. This is fact! And they know it and want to force Religion to accept the gay life style. It is the Gay community attacking the Religious community. Is this not a free Country where people are suppose to have freedom of Religion? “Marriage’ is a Religious rite or Ceremony and has always been so! They are not asking for tolerance witch they have a right to. This last week even Elton John came out and said he did not believe the gay community should have marriage, but that Civil Unions were enough. Marriage is a Religious rite or Ceremony and should be protected under the first amendment. I don’t dislike Gays but I do resent what they have been doing, trying to destroy something from another group. They are not ‘tolerant!’ And this CTA thing they have been running amuck for years. Even if a teacher doesn’t want to join the Union they still take the money out of the Teachers checks and deny them any of the Union benefits. For many Teachers it they voice disagreement on issues they continue to take the money from them and have denied opportunities to vote on Union issues. They are a corrupt group that spends way too much money in places that they have no business spending and come up short in places where the money should be spent. If there is anyplace where Government regulation should be placed it is the CTA.

  20. CL said,

    November 17, 2008 at 11:03 pm

    Buck by the way not all gay people even believe that Marriage should be afforded to Gays. I know some that voted no and I;ve spoken to others that say the same. In England and much of Europe and Scandinavia this issue was already addressed. They are Married Civally. Amd it is the same. They are tring to take away the first Amendment Rights of the Religious Population. How about these facts 70% of Blacks that voted voted Yes. 50% of Hispanics voted yes. 30% of whites that voted voted Yes.

  21. Jake said,

    November 17, 2008 at 11:42 pm

    The whole thing that bugs me about this is how our individual rights are being taken away. When elected officials go against the voice of the people it goes against everything that we stand for, everything that our country was founded on. Now the Govenator says that he want to try and overturn prop 8. We have voted on this TWICE!!!!!! I think that the voice of the people is obvious here. Marriage is between a man and a woman.

  22. beetlebabee said,

    November 18, 2008 at 12:01 am

    I didn’t get a response from the CTA either. I guess I didn’t sound vulnerable enough.


  23. waltzinexile said,

    November 18, 2008 at 1:00 am

    I don’t know if “vulnerable” was a requirement; I got an email response from CTA within hours.
    Someone please tell me Jake is being ironical. Please.

  24. lizziejane99 said,

    November 18, 2008 at 2:30 am

    What’s frustrating to me is that anyone is trying to understand Jim Rogers’ reaction and sympathize with him. He was wrong to say what he did. Period. He stomped on an impressionable child’s freedom of speech, effectively telling her to stick her head in the sand because “it’s none of [her] business.” I’m so glad he picked education as his profession. What a wonderful role model for our children. *oozing sarcasm* And I agree with whoever gave props to her mom. I’m a mom, too, and I can just feel my hackles rise at the thought of someone speaking to my child that way in response to a thoughtful, well-written letter. She had very valid points and he shot her down with a condescending smack on the head, refusing to even address the issues. I guess teenagers (and relatives of teenagers) are above his pay scale. Argh.

  25. Lisa said,

    November 18, 2008 at 10:55 pm

    Here was my letter to the CTA and my response from Jim Rogers (my my, he is eloquent and diplomatic!)

    I am writing to you to express my extreme displeasure at your contribution of $1.3 million dollars to the No on 8 campaign in California. As an institution that is supposed to be protecting teachers, I find it unbelievable that you can contribute to this cause.

    If proposition 8 does not win, teachers will soon be required to teach about same-sex marriage in schools. With California having a dismal 70% graduation rate, it is clear that we do not need to add more to the curriculum when we are already failing at teaching what is currently required. Why would you further burden the educational system by adding more?

    If I were a teacher, I would be very irritated that your actions could cause me to have a larger workload for the same pay. How is this in the best interest of the teachers of California? Our teachers already have a tremendous responsibility and workload, and their pay is very low. Why would you push for something that makes their jobs harder?

    Not only that, but the polls indicate that the margins are very close on this measure. That means that approximately half of your teachers (the people you supposedly represent) oppose this measure. What about them?

    What about the parents who have religious beliefs that do not agree with teaching that same-sex marriage is the SAME as marriage between a man and a woman, and will not have the option to take their children out of classes that go DIRECTLY against their beliefs? So much for the first amendment to the United States Constitution!

    Your actions in contributing to opposing this measure are unconscionable.

    Jim Rogers responded just minutes later with this:
    “Please do not e-mail me anymore of your extreme right wing hatred.”

  26. prop8discussion said,

    November 18, 2008 at 11:12 pm

    Lisa!!! what did you expect! your email is just dripping with hate and extremeness! geeze! why are you being so extreme!

    beetle–this story would be hilarious, if it wasn’t so disturbing. thank you for reporting this story (and lisa, thank you!).

    i had a conversation with a blogger today that started off completely nice (she professed that no one should commit acts of terrorism on the mormon church)– but then as i brought up some different sides of the prop 8 argument– it quickly devolved into cussing and swearing and promoting lies about the religion.
    all through however– she professed to be “open-minded.” it’s so so lovely right?

    it’s disturbing to see how quickly her “tolerant” front crumbles:

  27. prop8discussion said,

    November 18, 2008 at 11:13 pm

    sorry this is the link to the actually post:

  28. beetlebabee said,

    November 18, 2008 at 11:26 pm

    Wow, that guy is just a gem isn’t he? That makes me want to write to him….

  29. Rita said,

    November 19, 2008 at 12:55 am

    David Sanchez, CTA president states that “over 800 educators from throughout California voted by more than 2/3 to take positions on the initiatives we made recommendations on”. He accurately describes the process that set the vote No on Prop 8 on the CTA’s list for legislative funding.
    CTA has a budget, about $5million this year, for supporting legislative causes. The CTA council makes those decisions, then David Sanchez and his board are given the task of implementing those actions. So the BOARD of 8 or so people decided how much is given to each initiative. My understanding is that Jim Rogers is part of that board. If the rest of the members have similar sensibilities, their controversal use of funds makes total sense- how dare anyone questions them!
    As a teacher and a “moral conservative” I guess it’s time to get my $$ out of their hands. The big issue for me is the liability coverage I get from the union. Anybody know how to get similar coverage out of the union?

  30. californiacrusader said,

    November 19, 2008 at 2:54 am

    You can go here http://www.ctenhome.org/index.htm for info about the California Teachers Empowerment Network. I haven’t investigated it fully, but it is an option. As a California teacher, I am just as angry as you at the CTA (see my post here: http://californiacrusader.wordpress.com/2008/11/18/cta-why-am-i-giving-you-my-money/) But, I for one am staying a member of my local union, even though they are associated with CTA. I don’t think the solution is to dump our union representation. They have done much good at fighting for teacher pay against district administrators who seem to always claim they are “out of money”. I think the solution is to reform from within. Our unions are strong, just too liberal. As “moral conservatives” we need to get involved in our local unions and make our voices heard.

  31. Leslie said,

    November 19, 2008 at 3:54 am

    crusader – good luck with that one. When was the last time you ever heard of a union promoting a conservative point of view? I think the best we can do is to forward this string of emails to all the teachers we know, and let them know just who their great leader is. I for one, would not want someone like Mr. Rogers representing me in any way.
    This all harkens back to the previous posts about CVUSD’s rudeness about the sign. What really bothers me is that if students behaved like these people, they’d be suspended, given a Saturday school, etc. If a parent spoke to a teacher or principal, they’d be refused at the door of the school. Why do these things only work one way?
    The administrators say that they are on the moral high ground, but they, like the protesters at CA churches, are the ones that are rude, spewing hatred, and intolerant. It seems that they have a different translation of Webster’s dictionary than I do.

  32. Leslie said,

    November 19, 2008 at 4:15 am

    waltzinexile – If you got a fast response from CTA, my guess is that they liked what you had to say, because, other than Camilla and her family, everyone I’ve read comments from has never received a response (myself included).
    So what does this say about CTA? They’ll take your money whether you like it or not. They’ll spend it however they please, and if you object (as some teachers I know have) they will never respond to your objections.
    Don’t forget that CTA sued a member of our school board for actually wanting to get teacher’s opinions (about the start date of winter break). And they WON! Absolute power corrupts absolutely!
    I would love to see our schools kick out the union. They are of no benefit to students (ask Camilla), and only benefit teachers who are being sued by parents. If a parent is so frustrated with a teacher that they sue, it makes me wonder what was going on. The only party that needs this kind of support are the children! They need protection from people like Mr. Rogers, Mr. Sanchez, and Mr. O’Connell(not a member, but a real supporter of their causes,none-the-less).

  33. November 19, 2008 at 3:01 pm

    Teachers unions have become anything but organizations to represent teachers in many (if not most) parts of this nation. It’s sad, but it’s the truth. The larger a teacher’s union gets, the more powerful it believes itself to be and the more often it flaunts that power–usually to the detriment of the teacher’s it’s supposedly representing.

    One more reason to really rethink so-called “public” education. Administrators like Mr. Rogers (who doesn’t deserve the name) are rampant in these unions and their attitudes filter down to the cronies who follow them in the guise of teachers. The problem will only get worse if something radical isn’t done. My suggestion?

    All teachers who disagree with what the CTA has done should stage a walkout on the union. Stop sending them funds and then show up to meetings to protest them en masse. If the union can’t claim to represent the teachers, it has no basis for existence and will fall.

    Of course, most teachers will probably forget about this in another week or so as they look forward to Christmas break. By the time the year ends, they will have forgotten entirely as the rest of their busy lives takes precedence.

    I’d challenge parents and teachers not to forget and to make sure that, at the very least, Mr. Rogers finds a new neighborhood.

  34. Rita said,

    November 19, 2008 at 8:35 pm

    Leslie, Let me share what I know about the “suing” of a school board member. The person in question was told that his contacting the teachers was “wrong” in HOW he went about it. He used a relationship with a teacher to access the school email system. Then he sent an email asking for opinions about a vacation issue. The use of any list of emails or phone numbers is restricted for the protection of the people on the list. Why? well, we’ve seen how list have been used! Also when a teacher gets a questionable email (confusing source or protocol) often the response is DELETE, or please do not contact me or I do not understand, etc…
    When the union asks for teacher opinion, as it does regularly, the faculty has the issue explained, a discussion of info may develop, then we are asked to respond by ballot and our names are checked off a list. That insures that the response is valid. The feedback validity is only as good as the process used to collect it. I have been very careful not to use CVUSD emails to share blanket info on political or union issues. Why? I can not assume that my personal opinions can just be shared at will with the district just because I have their email addresses. UACT, the local union reps, cannot use the district mail except under very specific guidelines. They never take a survey online for the reasons I have stated.
    The issue became heated and aggravated when the board member refused to admit that he had breached protocol. We all make mistakes for
    good reasons. But if you refuse to see why and how the communication system in a school district works then the teachers union is obligated to force the issue. I have no issue with the union standing up and insisting that an established protocol be followed. As I recall, the other part of the issue was that we as teachers had already voted on the vacation issue months earlier.
    Just to finish the thought about our local union, I have always found them to be supportive and transparent. The new president sat with me for 2 hours explaining how the props were voted on, the info was shared in a frank and candid manner. We send only 3 delegates to the state council (800 or so in total).

  35. Rita said,

    November 19, 2008 at 9:33 pm

    California Crusader- This is the site and direction that I have been looking for. This site is for ALL teachers who are fed up with the CTA mode of governing! I am blown away at the site- it has all the info (liability issues, pros and cons of leaving union, how to’s) for making an educated choice about the union. Can’t say enough about how helpful, thorough, and informative the site is for any teacher. Thanks!

  36. californiacrusader said,

    November 20, 2008 at 4:44 am

    Could you contact Lisa and ask her permission for me to post her comment on my site? Great stuff and more proof of CTA arrogance.
    California Crusader

  37. beetlebabee said,

    November 20, 2008 at 11:04 am

    That Lisa is from “An Analogy” –I don’t have an email contact but I’ll see what I can do.

  38. Justice said,

    February 27, 2009 at 12:35 am

    It is a shame you did not post the entire content of Mr. Rogers’s correspondence as you did Camilla’s. I would have liked to have seen the sections that you displayed in their original context.

  39. beetlebabee said,

    February 27, 2009 at 2:22 am

    Mr. Rogers is welcome to add to this if he would like. I welcome his input, however, this is the entire context of his comments.

    At the end of the post, there is a link to the complete correspondence. Mr. Roger’s comments are completely brief as written, not because I edited them.

    “See the entire correspondence sent to us as source material, including replies from CTA President David Sanchez, here—notice his fear of the media on this one…he knows they’ve been caught with their ends in the breeze. https://beetlebabee.wordpress.com/camilla-letter-correspondence/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: