Hi blue! I didn't mean to reopen this thread but I wanted to thank you so much for the compliment and I have been at our state convention for the last four days (and there is no way to e-mail you!! [img]smile.gif[/img] )
I think of these boards now as family and as families are, we may not always agree or get along but you can't imagine not having them in your lives!
Michelle---I want you to know just how much I appreciate and respect you. Being able to help you in this situation is an unexpected blessing, and I'm thankful I could do it.
Also, please know I know full well this incident does not reflect upon the entire PTA. Lord, our state (Virginia) would have a cow if anyone even attempted starting to do such a thing as Palo Alto has done.
What I like about you is your guts to stand up for what you believe in, and your obvious love for helping kids. Keep it up! I know you will... [img]smile.gif[/img]
Whether PTA is political is a non-issue for me and this post. I am grateful for the heads-up because we are very close to California and they continue to make decisions which make us and others across the country cringe.
I have no problems with PTA and it's political activity, it is when a group of parents abuse that power by taking on an issue such as this that is destructive to the real goals of our organization. (And California is an island unto themselves!) I don't blame the PTA for it. Hopefully the state PTA of California will recognize that this does not align with our mission and it will be voted down at convention.
If nothing else, I am glad that I was able to find out about this early on and so is the rest of our state board.
Blue, although your motives were a bit different, you have done me a service and for that I thank you.
To be fair blue, I think the National PTA is pretty honest in its political aims. PTA doesn't hide its political bent, in my opinion. It's all over National's web site.
I don't see it as a broad conspiracy.
I actually think the heavy emphasis on the political (as opposed to your assertion that there's some kind of effort to hide it) has been a factor in driving groups away from PTA. For many groups with whom I talk , the political "muck" (like this dust-up) are distractions not to be bothered with, when the local group's (quite valid) mission is to make their school a great place for kids.
I, too, am not interested in a "PTA/PTO" bashing session. I just want the political activists in the PTA to be honest about what they want, what their agenda is, and why they're using a children's organization to do it. BTW, I did say this did not represent all PTA's in my original post......
At least the NEA had the guts to say it sponsored the women's march in Washington Sunday. Agree or disagree, at least we have a good idea where they're coming from and where they want to go.
Come on, blue67ccm! This forum is a great place to debate, and some of us have passionate opinions about certain topics. But we've all seen this section of the forum go off the rails a little much in the last few months.
Posting this because it's quirky or outside the realm of what most of us consider relevant is one thing. But to cite it as evidence to
debunk some theories about the "non-political" stance of the PTA
???
Even the article says that out of 23,000 chapters, this is the ONLY instance known. Hardly "evidence" of anything.
Please let's not start new thread with the intent to inflame another PTO/PTA bashing feud.
