Day 352- The next battle

I just want to take a moment, before I start praising the efforts of those who have been fighting for the civil rights of men and women in the armed forces, to call out those who voted against those rights today, or who decided not to vote at all.

The following Senators:

Alexander (R-TN), Nay
Barrasso (R-WY), Nay
Bennett (R-UT), Nay
Bond (R-MO), Nay
Brownback (R-KS), Nay
Bunning (R-KY), Not Voting
Burr (R-NC), Nay
Chambliss (R-GA), Nay
Coburn (R-OK), Nay
Cochran (R-MS), Nay
Corker (R-TN), Nay
Cornyn (R-TX), Nay
Crapo (R-ID), Nay
DeMint (R-SC), Nay
Ensign (R-NV), Nay
Enzi (R-WY), Nay
Graham (R-SC), Nay
Grassley (R-IA), Nay
Gregg (R-NH), Not Voting
Hatch (R-UT), Not Voting
Hutchison (R-TX), Nay
Inhofe (R-OK), Nay
Isakson (R-GA), Nay
Johanns (R-NE), Nay
Kyl (R-AZ), Nay
LeMieux (R-FL), Nay
Lugar (R-IN), Nay
Manchin (D-WV), Not Voting
McCain (R-AZ), Nay
McConnell (R-KY), Nay
Risch (R-ID), Nay
Roberts (R-KS), Nay
Sessions (R-AL), Nay
Shelby (R-AL), Nay
Thune (R-SD), Nay
Vitter (R-LA), Nay
Wicker (R-MS), Nay

are all cowards. The men and women on this list ought to be ashamed of themselves and their votes today. If any of my readers hail from the states represented by these Senators, I encourage you to e-mail them to express your displeasure at the way they have represented you and the other citizens of your state. It doesn't matter that the motion passed, that history has passed by these aging bigots and their old world views. These men and women, at least today, did not support American troops the way they deserve to be supported.

Dear Mr. President,

I was at work today when my phone alerted me to a new e-mail from you. It began:

Moments ago, the Senate voted to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

When that bill reaches my desk, I will sign it, and this discriminatory law will be repealed.

Gay and lesbian service members -- brave Americans who enable our freedoms -- will no longer have to hide who they are.

The fight for civil rights, a struggle that continues, will no longer include this one.

I think this is my favorite way to receive such good news. Not to live up to your accusation of the left being totally impossible to please or anything, but I can't help fixating on the idea that troops who are risking their lives to serve our country can't marry the people they love. We'll let them serve- now even openly- but we won't let them marry their partners. I know, I know, you and congress need a minute to breathe, to recover from this long-overdue fight, but this is too important to rest. It is unfathomable to ask gay and lesbian Americans to serve a country that still legally treats them as second-class citizens.

So while you're celebrating this hard-fought victory, I hope that you are looking ahead to the next battle. I want to feel proud of my country today, hearing news like this, but I can't help lamenting the distance we have before us, the long way we have yet to go.

Anyway, thanks for the e-mail. Keep up the good work.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 346- "Bigotry disguised as prudence"

It still seems an unwritten rule in establishment Washington that homophobia is at most a misdemeanor. By this code, the Smithsonian’s surrender is no big deal; let the art world do its little protests. This attitude explains why the ever more absurd excuses concocted by John McCain for almost single-handedly thwarting the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” are rarely called out for what they are — “bigotry disguised as prudence,” in the apt phrase of Slate’s military affairs columnist, Fred Kaplan.

-Frank Rich "Gay Bashing at the Smithsonian"

Dear Mr. President,

Frank Rich's column in the New York Times is worth reading, and not just for the brilliant and characteristically eloquent way he takes down the hypocrites crying "hate speech" about the Smithsonian's exhibit including "A Fire in My Belly." Beyond the cold political outrage, Rich draws a parallel between the deaths of bullied gay teens and the deaths of so many artists and the ones they loved to AIDS. His words convey a palpable helplessness, the frustration of watching from a distance as so many suffer and die needlessly as those in power condemn them, of listening as the hateful bullying from the right once is once again allowed to marginalize the gay community without objection.

I can relate to the way Rich feels. It's appalling to see the Smithsonian capitulate to the homophobic bullies on the right offended by art. And while Republicans in congress pile on their own objections, they continue to hold up repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell, and, as Rich notes, have yet to participate in the anti-bullying it gets better project. I think that common sense tells us a piece of art that some find offensive is far less deserving of the condemnation of members of congress than a national epidemic of homophobia and its attending death and suffering. I don't understand. I know I am removed from it, living in the privilege of a white-skinned heterosexual body. But I couldn't help but see the faces of my friends in the stories of the young artists dying of and losing loved ones to AIDS, of the boys giving up on life because they fear they will never live and be accepted for who they are. I see them in these stories and I ache for losing them and seeing their losses. Most of all, I feel angry. Angry that I cannot protect them from people like this, people with the power to help them who do nothing but make it worse and then have the audacity to get angry about their expressions of frustration. It is unsurprising that a religion wielded as a tool of oppression will become the target of criticism and frustration by those it oppresses.

Heterosexual Christians wrote the laws of this country. They have determined who can vote, who can marry, whose lives are worth funding research to save and who gets to serve in the military. It is long past time for it to be ok to make and display and honor art that expresses the pain at the damage that their system has caused. The Smithsonian made a mistake, backing down in the face of this manufactured controversy. I think it is time that you (and more of those with the power to change our cultural acceptance of homophobia) stood up and said so.

Mr. President you campaigned on the promise that life for gay and lesbian Americans would be better under your administration than under President Bush's. While there may be a limit on how many minds you can legislate into acceptance, there are unjust laws that are within your power to change. The alteration of this exhibit at the Smithsonian may seem like a small thing, but it is the latest in a long series of capitulations to the idea that not only is being gay unacceptable, being angry at the way the rest of the country treats you isn't either.

Please read Mr. Rich's column, Mr. President, and ask yourself if you are still fine doing nothing on this issue.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 343- Tax cuts, bandwagons and war drums

Dear Mr. President,

OK, I get it already. Lots of prominent leaders across the political spectrum have come out in support of your tax cut compromise with the Republicans. I mean lots. And releasing their endorsements one at a time in separate press releases was pretty funny. Gail Collins pointed out that liberal Democrats have been asking you to get mad for a while, and now we're complaining that you finally got mad- at us. And you have every right to be mad, I suppose, as none of us were mad enough to show up on election day and give you a congress that might have your back (though, to be entirely fair, you might have found better ways to spend the primary season than propping up every tired blue-dog with a pulse.) For all of my suggestions that you either refuse tax cuts for the rich or refuse tax cuts for all of us, I wasn't the one responsible for negotiating the compromise (and I won't be the one responsible for negotiating the next 2 years worth of legislation through congress.) You made a call and now you're standing by it.

Collins, in her opinion piece, laments those on the left still landing hard from their fall off of the Obama bandwagon, while smugly declaring her own fall is off of the "line in the sand bandwagon". I suppose I might also be accused of letting my loyalty to you as a person & my membership in the cult of personality surrounding you conflict with my true bleeding-heart liberalism. As many who supported you in 2008 walk away, disappointed, decrying the whole bandwagon mentality, I wish I could join them. Maybe it's a mark of an inferior mind to need a higher authority to place my faith in, but I haven't still haven't heard a better alternative. Should the anti-bandwagon crowd offer me another leader, or convince me that we don't need one, maybe that will change. For now, while I often think that you're wrong, but I'd never trust myself to do your job better.

In all of the outrage about tax rates and the inexplicable failing of the cloture motion to repeal DADT, I was getting more fed up with congress than with you. To add to all of this, the House has passed legislation preventing any Guantanamo Bay detainees from being brought to domestic prisons. Today has not done much for my rapidly dwindling faith in the American people and those we elect to represent us.

My own time has been selfishly consumed with a struggle to finish my final papers for class, study for my exams, and maintain something that resembles sanity closely enough to keep my boss from worrying about me. I can't fix the economy, I can't get basic equality for gay and lesbian Americans and I can't close down Guantanamo bay. I jumped on your bandwagon in the first place because you said that you could. And while my frustration might be more deserved by several members of congress and those who didn't find the time to vote in the midterm elections, unfortunately you're the one I picked for a pen pal. We can't possibly be losing the fight on this many fronts at once.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

PS

The only thing that's bolstered my spirits today is the news that Suheir Hammad, one of my favorite poets, will be speaking at a TED conference soon. They published the text of her poem "What I will" and I thought I'd send it along to you.


What I Will
by Suheir Hammad

I will not
dance to your war
drum. I will
not lend my soul nor
my bones to your war
drum. I will
not dance to your
beating. I know that beat.
It is lifeless. I know
intimately that skin
you are hitting. It
was alive once
hunted stolen
stretched. I will
not dance to your drummed
up war. I will not pop
spin beak for you. I
will not hate for you or
even hate you. I will
not kill for you. Especially
I will not die
for you. I will not mourn
the dead with murder nor
suicide. I will not side
with you nor dance to bombs
because everyone else is
dancing. Everyone can be
wrong. Life is a right not
collateral or casual. I
will not forget where
I come from. I
will craft my own drum. Gather my beloved
near and our chanting
will be dancing. Our
humming will be drumming. I
will not be played. I
will not lend my name
nor my rhythm to your
beat. I will dance
and resist and dance and
persist and dance. This heartbeat is louder than
death. Your war drum ain’t
louder than this breath.

Day 315-Veteran's Day

Dear Mr. President,

Today we honor those who have fought and died for our country. I'm grateful for more than just the excuse to sleep in and miss class. I'm grateful for those who served in the armed forces, for the sacrifices they have made and the service they have done our country. I say all of this as an unapologetic critic of the wars we currently wage, the conduct of some of our troops therein, and of the military's anti-gay policies. I do not believe that my gratitude and my criticism are mutually exclusive.

On the contrary, I believe that the best way to support our troops is to never ask that they put themselves in harms way unless it is absolutely necessary. Unless our survival or our very humanity compels it. That we never put them at risk of torture by torturing our own enemy prisoners. That we never order them to kill in the name of an unjust war. I believe that we support our troops when we insist on allowing openly gay soldiers to serve. When we fully fund rehabilitation programs, health and especially mental health programs, education and employment opportunities for veterans. This is how we walk the walk of those yellow ribbons we wear.

I hope that today you reflect on the wars you inherited and the way they have been waged. On the kill lists, the interrogation methods, the civilian deaths that put our own troops at risk and destroy so many lives (and so many minds) on both sides. On the mistakes made, the mistakes perpetuated and the lies told to cover them up. I hope that you reflect on these things and conclude, as so many of us have, that our troops deserve better.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 312- Quack. Quack. Quack.

Dear Mr. President,

For all the prattle about the new agenda of the Republican-controlled Houe, the year isn't quite over. While the lame-duck session may be a short one, and subject to the unfortunate political reality of a weakened Democratic party, I hope that repealing DADT is given the effort it deserves. The support of Defense Secretary Robert Gates for such a repeal (and his sage urging that the repeal take place before the new year) should indicate enough will within the military establishment to pull off such a herculean task.

I suppose my usual cynical dismissal of the political courage of Democrats will kick in any moment, but I actually feel pretty confident about the prospects of a lame-duck session. From my perspective, the Senate has been governing like lame-duck senators since 2008. It seems as though there is at least the same chance of the repeal as there was before the election.

As usual, I believe that the Senate's action on this issue will be a direct result of White House leadership. Only Presidential direction and political influence will ensure that the Democrats are successful in this attempt. Coming through on this major campaign promise would be an encouraging sign to all of your supporters that, even after a loss like the midterms, you aren't giving up on the change we were promised.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 274- A tough week

Dear Mr. President,

Before I start in on tonight's letter, I just want to say that I watched your speech to the Gen44 summit last night and thought it was excellent. It was exactly the kind of old-school campaign speech I was writing you about yesterday, and so I should apologize for not having watched it before writing my last letter. I actually laughed out lout several times and would have cheered at the end, had I not been watching it at work in our bookstore's cafe with my headphones on and already disturbing the people around me. We need more of that, Mr. President, and not just because of the upcoming elections. There are even more important things at stake.

Tonight, a friend of mine from high school wrote a poignant blog post on the ongoing difficulties faced by gay Americans, A tough week in the struggle. In it, he discusses the tragic and high-profile suicides of several young GLBTQ Americans as well as several acts by celebrities and government officials showing homophobia is alive and well in our culture.

Repealing DOMA and DADT cannot wait. Changing our laws might not have saved the young lives lost this week, but it might go a long way toward changing the stigmas against gays and lesbians. The cruel bullying that led to the suicides this week comes from a culture that accepts and even normalizes homophobia. You can't change that, but you can change the laws that say our government agrees with that irrational fear. These archaic relics of our hateful past have no place in our modern discourse or in our modern legal system.

I've been following a number of these sad stories this week, but I've also seen another story posted and reposted by friends around the world. It's about a campaign aimed at gay youth called "it gets better." I went to a high school where being GLBTQ was not generally accepted. A number of my friends struggled with their identity as such at the time, and also with depression, fear, and bullying as a result. Some came out. Some stayed in the closet. All of them went to high school knowing that the taunts of their classmates reflected an accepted viewpoint of their society, endorsed by their own government. DOMA and DADT might be articulated in language that is more sophisticated than the crude taunts of high school bullies, but it comes from the same mean-spirited fear that ought to be a thing of America's past and not our present.

It has been a tough week for gay rights in this country, and a tragic week for the families who are suffering the loss of a loved one because of it. You're in a position to offer more than just your condolences, Mr. President, and I certainly hope you do.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 266- 100 days

Update: It turns out due to an error earlier in the year this should actually be called "99 days" oh well. Live and learn, eh?

Dear Mr. President,

The measure of a presidency is often taken by the accomplishments of the first 100 days. I think this is silly. You've got to allow at least a few days to find all the light switches and figure out how to navigate the west wing, right? Not to mention all the the thanking people for their help getting you elected, the waiting for congress to remember that no one in the country knows who they are after election season ends, and, of course, the post-victory poll numbers can't be taken that seriously. But I have 100 days left to write to you this year, and I want to make my last 100 letters count. In 100 days, I want to think that my country will be different. I want to think it will be stronger, economically, and that the Bush-era tax cus will be allowed to expire. I want to think that it will be a freer, and more fair country, where gay and lesbian Americans will be allowed to openly serve in our military and marry whomever they please. I want to think that our image abroad will be improved by the closure of Guantanamo bay, the end of combat in Afghanistan, and that truly fair-minded American leadership in the Palestinian/Israeli peace talks will help create a stable, free and secure Palestinian state. We might also be a greener nation, with an end to harmful agricultural subsidies, a robust new energy policy and heavier federal investment in making our national infrastructure more environmentally friendly. Every single one of these things is possible in 100 days. (I may also wish for socialized health care and higher education, but I recognize those things can't happen in 100 days.) All of this can happen. And while my cynical, realistic side believes that none of these things will be accomplished in so little time, the part of me that still hopes for a better future believes that your next 100 days can be just as important and productive as your first 100 days, or the 100 days that will come after December 31st. And, while I have 100 letters left to write, you can bet that I'm going to bug your more than ever about every single one of these goals.

2010 has been kind of a rough year for you and your presidency. But it's got 100 days left, and that's plenty of time to turn things around and change the way this year and your administration is remembered by history. I hope you make them count.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 263-Prime Rib

Dear Mr. President,

The first time I heard Lady GaGa's music, I was with my best friend. While our upbringing has made us proud indie-rock lovers prone to asserting that our fandom predates a band's national popularity, we've always had a weak spot for catchy dance music. Lady GaGa's attempts to market herself as a redefinition of what is beautiful annoyed me, to be sure, (skinny blonde girls have, to my understanding, been thought beautiful for most of human history,) but I remained an unrepentant fan of her music. Today she gave a speech protesting Don't Ask Don't Tell, entitled "The Prime Rib of America". I think that a celebrity using her fame to humiliate three members of the US Senate into possibly changing their support of a bigoted policy is better than having a tabloid-splashing public breakdown à la Lindsey Lohan, Brittany Spears or Amy Winehouse. (Which, of course, isn' to say that Lady GaGa has to choose; her mugshot may yet grace Perez Hilton's homepage.) Our culture's fascination with celebrity is not unique to the modern era, nor is it unique to America. It seems, unfortunately, that the human condition requires our bizarre worship of the beautiful and famous. I would imagine that many celebrities would gladly return to the freedom of anonymity, the ability to walk down the street without make-up and not worry about being photographed. The ones who at least make enough peace with their fame to try and do some good with it are admirable.

While GaGa's speech wasn't exactly the Gettysburg address, it had moments of poignancy that I hope the people mocking her heard. The Senate Amendment to repeal DADT is currently too close to call- it seems that not a single republican can be found willing to put morality and justice above party loyalty. Should the 41 Republicans continue to hold to the threat to filibuster, I think the Democrats ought to make them. Make them filibuster a hateful, archaic policy based on a dying prejudice. Make every single Republican member of the Senate talk until they fall over with exhaustion for the sake of denying American soldiers their rights. And broadcast every second of it. Because I think the contrast between a gorgeous American popstar standing up and asking her country to live up to its promise and the Republican members of the Senate trying to perpetuate bigotry and intolerance would make for some great pre-election television.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 205- Face the (Netroots) Nation

“What I’m asking you is to keep making your voices heard, to keep holding me accountable. To keep up the fight.”


Dear Mr. President,

I don't think I count as an official member of the Netroots Nation, and I wasn't in Vegas for the convention, but, since I'm a blogger and I write you every day, I'm going to go ahead and tell myself that I'm part of your intended audience, anyway. I liked your video address, the promises you've renewed to repeal DADT and to close Guantanamo Bay. I hope that, this year, these are promise you can keep. I think the only aspect of this video that strikes me as disingenuous is the get-out-the-midterm-vote request, especially given the way so many centrist Democratic incumbents were given the support of the White House over their more progressive challengers during the primaries. Does it strike you as just a bit distasteful to ignore all of the progressive voices demanding better representation in congress and then ask those same progressives to show up on election day cheering for the lesser of two evils?

This being said, I think the New York Times' analysis of the speech as a "Pep Rally for an Uneasy Democratic Team" perhaps reads a bit too much into the fact that you used clips from Rachel Maddow's show to tout the administration's accomplishments. I think you know that the Netroots movement still has a tremendous number of loyal Obama supporters, even, (and maybe especially) those most vocal about our disappointment with the amount of compromise we've been asked to accept. However, as you so eloquently remind us in your speech, change comes from the bottom up. We've organized, raised money, marched, written and voted. We're asking for change. We're creating change. I think your administration could do a better job empowering and engaging the blogging community. The White House blog is great, but it could be developed into a more relevant forum for honest dialogue with the public. A press room without the press, or the spin, where questions are answered and discussion fostered. A blog that not only allows actual comments, but involves members of the communication department in responding to the discussions.

As inspiring as your address was, I hope the convention you were addressing, and the larger progressive blogging community, has not failed to inspire you, as well. The dogged pursuit of a wiser and more just government, a freer society, and a healthier planet is largely responsible for your election, and the Netroots Nation is only beginning to realize its potential. Now is the time to find the courage to keep your promises to us, Mr. President, not only because it is politically expedient, but because you know it is the right thing for this country and for future generations of Americans.

I guess what I mean is, please don't forget that we're asking you to keep up the fight, as well.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Hey all- speaking of the Midterms, here are some must-see midterm political ads. In case they've escaped your notice:










And, if you're in the giving mood, ActBlue

Day 34

Dear Mr. President,

Repealing 'Don't Ask Don't Tell' is the right thing to do, and I'm glad you've made it a clear priority. Legalizing gay marriage is also the right thing to do; I hope in the coming months we hear more about it from your administration. I don't think marriage is an institution that exists between more than two people. That is to say, I don't think including other types of partnerships in the definition of marriage affects me & my hypothetical marriage. Otherwise, I'd argue that arranged marriages, or marriages that take place on reality shows, or pretty much anything that happens in Las Vegas, are all threats to the Institution itself.

Any one citing their religious traditions as the basis for their opposition to same-sex marriage, (and I am sorry to have to include you in this, Mr. President,) should, by their own logic, be equally opposed to any marriages outside of their religious tradition, which would seem to include, in your case, marriages between non-Christians. Since you don't seem to be calling for a ban on non-Christian marriages, I can only assume that your real reasons for your opposition to same-sex marriage are more complicated than you claim. I have a difficult time understanding this position on the issue, but I do appreciate that you, at least, don't seek to impose your religious views on the entire country. I still think you've got it wrong. I'm sorry, Mr. President, but I just don't see the same god that values love, and kindness, and consideration for others supporting the oppression of people because of who they love.

I hope that your administration continues to seek justice and equal rights for the gay community. I applaud your aggressive approach to repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell, and I'm gratified to see it sparking a national discussion on the issue. I know many of my letters so far have been complaints about what you're doing wrong or not doing enough of, and I'm sure many of the letters to follow will be the same, but, for today, I just want you to know I think you're doing a good job.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 28- State of the Union

Dear Mr. President,

I loved the State of the Union address. I thought you were eloquent, uncompromising and honest. I was cheering out loud at my laptop several times. Your proposal for student loan payment caps, if enacted, will help me save the money I need to pay for school. My degree feels like a real possibility for the first time in a long time. I was also impressed with your commitment to health care, your call to action to both parties. Promising to repeal 'don't ask don't tell' was a needed boost to the left's confidence. I think, on the whole, the speech was excellent.

What unsettled me was the number of people I talked to who had no idea the speech was even happening. From the clerk at the grocery store, to the people in the ER waiting room, who asked my roommate if we'd been attacked, I was shocked by the people who weren't aware of the night's significance. Where does that disconnect come from? Even my politically minded friends have difficulty seeing how the things you say in your speech affect them. Are we too comfortable? Too cynical? Too shallow? Or is it that we've been let down too many times?

For example, I read the transcript of your Q & A in Florida today. One young woman asked you a question about your lack of response or condemnation for the Israeli and Egyptian treatment of Gaza. The audience booed. To your credit, you calmed them down and asked them to be respectful. Unfortunately, you then proceeded to disrespect the woman in an even worse way, responding as you did with a talking point, and not one that answered the question. She asked why you did not condemn human rights violations, and you responded by pontificating about all the reasons we are Israel's ally and how complicated the situation is. Mr. President, she was not asking you to denounce Israel or outline the conflict's complexities. She was asking why you did not condemn specific actions. Any reasonable adult can tell you that this is a question that can be answered without renouncing our allegiance to Israel. The answer to this question is either "I do condemn these acts, but I understand why Israel and Egypt are concerned" or "I don't feel that the you, the UN, the ICRC, and much of the international community are correct in characterizing these actions as human rights violations, let me tell you why...." Maybe if my generation felt that a straight answer from a politician was possible when it comes to tough issues, more of us would pay attention when you speak.

Anyway, Mr. President, I was quite proud of your speech, even if I'm disappointed by the Q & A. I hope that you consider just how answers like the one you gave this woman contribute to the "deficit of trust" you addressed last night.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey

Day 22

Dear Mr. President,

Paul Krugman has some very important things to say about health care in today's New York Times. I agree with his call for Congressional Democrats to "stop whining, and do what needs to be done." He says this needs to happen in the face of poor leadership from the White House. I'm not sure I agree. I thought your speech at the town hall meeting today was a clear demonstration of your commitment to the issue, but I think the State of the Union will be the real test. I don't think you should be shy about telling the American people just exactly what is holding up this reform- their congressional representatives.

Krugman's point about bipartisanship is also a valid one. Once again, the Republicans are demonstrating their superior legislative strategy. The health care reform bill is incredibly conciliatory- I'd imagine there are several moderate republicans who would support it, in principle. Unfortunately their party's goal- to prevent Democrats from appearing effective- is more important than doing right by their constituents. This is something democrats could do a better job of calling them out for. Which party is standing on principle and which is putting politics before the national interest? I don't think Democrats have communicated this well to the public.

Finally, I think that a concession to your own base is probably in order. We've been roughed up the last few weeks, the left is lacking fire and excitement. How about checking off some of the campaign promises you can do without congressional approval? Repealing DADT? making real progress towards closing Guantanamo? These may cost you political capitol with the centrists and the right wing, but it would energize your supporters and remind congressional democrats (many of whom owe their seats to your electoral coattails) that you came to Washington to do more than compromise- and so did they.

Respectfully yours,

Kelsey