Wednesday, March 22, 2006
Senator Salazar, Please Come Aboard!
Dear Senator Salazar,
I recently wrote to urge you to support and vote for Senator Feingold's Resolution for Censure. I must say that I found your reply less than encouraging.
There is no doubt that the president has broken the law. He has openly and notoriously admitted so on national TV. I see no reason why the Congress should not document this in the Record.
Many people seem to believe that to attack this president in even the slightest way will backfire, by causing the Republicans to rally around the Dear Leader. Given the numerous polls that indicate that nearly 70% of Americans generally disapprove of his policies, I do not see the downside for us.
When you were running for election, my friends and I canvassed Colorado Springs neighborhoods on your behalf. It was not always pleasant, here in the Conservative Holy City.
You were elected, and now, it's time to fight for the values of the people who fought to help you into office.
I know and appreciate that you are working on many worthy initiatives. Water and forest Management, Veterans Support and other noble causes are important to me too; but they will fall by the wayside if we don't restore our Government of the People.
I become sick when I remember that we allowed President Clinton to be impeached because he lied about an affair with an intern. Surely, the president's open and notorious disregard for the US Constitution is worthy of a slap on the wrist. It is time for Democratic Representatives to stand up for what Democrats, and most Americans believe in.
Please get on board, and support Senator Feingold's Censure Resolution.
Yours truly,
[jj]
Wednesday, March 08, 2006
Senator Roberts -- Chairman, Senate Cover-up Committee
Dear Senator Roberts,
I am very disappointed that the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence rejected a proposal by Vice Chairman Sen. John D. Rockefeller to conduct a Congressional review of the NSA warrantless spying program. As Chairman of the Committee, I trust that you can take significant credit for that outcome.
From reading the news, and other research, I estimate that more than 60% of Americans are feeling the way I do. We were really hoping that this time, our Congress would stand up for its People. The President of the United States first told us that "Wiretaps require a court order," and he later admitted on national TV that he had been authorizing and conducting warrantless domestic surveillance activities for nearly four years. One of those statements is a lie, which the president told all of the People.
Senator, do you represent the People of the United States; or do you represent the Secret Police?
I will spare you from the litany of instances I've observed, when you have supported the Administration's subversion of the US Constitution and the Rule of Law. It seems adequate to say that you have a consistent track record of having taken positions that favor the expansion of Executive privilege and power, while taking that privilege and power away from citizens. Your positions regarding warrantless domestic spying, Iraq intelligence, intelligence leaking and torture are contrary to everything I understand about the US Constitution and what it means to live in this country.
I believe that it was Franklin D. Roosevelt who told Americans that "We have nothing to fear, but Fear, itself." And I believe it was Benjamin Franklin who told us that if we gave up our Liberty for security, then we would have neither.
America and the world face a grave challenge from Terrorism. However, to meet that challenge, we need leadership; not governmental fear mongering.
We must play by the rules that have served us so well for nearly 220 years. If we must surrender our civil liberties to protect our national security, then I believe that the terrorists have already won.
As a US Senator, you are sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution, even if many citizens are sufficiently naïve that they would waive their Constitutional rights out of government-inspired fear. Your support for laws and policies that would nullify the Bill of Rights contradicts your Oath of Office, and it undermines the rights of all Americans.
Sincerely,
[jj]
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
"Civil liberties do not mean much when you are dead." Sen. Jim Bunning, R-KY
Dear Senator Bunning,
You are widely quoted, having said, in support of certain controversial provisions of the USA PATRIOT Act, that "Civil liberties do not mean much when you are dead."
I offer a corollary to your hyperbolic statement:
Being alive doesn't mean much when you live under an authoritarian dictatorship. Life doesn't mean much when the secret police can listen to your phone, read your mail, and audit your library records. Being alive doesn't mean much when the secret police can apprehend you without warrant, probable cause, criminal charges or legal counsel, - indefinitely - while denying you all of the due process that our Constitution guarantees to everyone.
As a US Senator, you are sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution, even if many citizens are sufficiently naïve that they would waive their Constitutional rights out of government-inspired fear. Your support for laws and policies that would nullify the Bill of Rights belies your Oath of Office, and it undermines the rights of all Americans.
In applying PATRIOT Act, the president's warrantless-wiretap, and other off-the-record domestic spying programs, the criteria that may justify governmental waiver of a citizen's Fourth Amendment protections are nebulous, if they are defined at all.
Certain over-reaching provisions of the PATRIOT Act, as well as the president's no-warrant wiretap activities, the torture and humiliation of prisoners, and the existence of secret, offshore gulags are a black eye on America, and no one who loves the United States of America should lend countenance to such conduct.
I see no reason why the government cannot do its job and still play by the rules that have served us so well for nearly 220 years. If we must surrender our civil liberties to protect our national security, then I believe that the terrorists have already won.
Sincerely,
[jj]
