Got a hand written letter from my Congressman (Welch-VT) about Impeachment

[garybeck]

I have sent a couple or 3 emails to my Congressman about the importance of impeachment.

Today I received a hand-written note from him which I have typed out for you here:

Gary,

My issue with impeachment is NOT whether Bush/Cheney deserve it, it's that pursuing it, in my judgment, would fracture the Ds and unite the Rs. This would be damaging to restoration of the Constitutional rights and ending the war. Thanks for your note,

Peter

My response to him will be that I strongly disagree. I believe if there are impeachment hearings, they will further expose the lies and criminal activity of the Republican party and it will unite the PEOPLE of BOTH parties against Bush and Cheney for the obviously illegal and immoral acts.

The Dems have got to realize, this worry about fractioning the Democratic Party is a false concern. Impeachment of Clinton UNITED the R's and it will do the same to the D's now. It will also make even more R's abandon their blind faith when they see on TV what really happened.

[Hissyspit]

1. I STRONGLY disagree with him, too...

but good of him to send you a hand-written note.

[garybeck]

2. Wasn't there a recent poll that showed 70+% of Dems want Cheney impeached?

I think that proves it's a uniting force.

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. So, if 30% if Democrats don't want impeachment, what percentage of Democrats

in the House will oppose impeachment? Keep in mind that many of the 44 Blue Dog Democrats in the House represent districts where there are more Republicans than Democrats.

[DeSwiss]

3. Ask him if he's considered....

...the fracturing that will happen to the party among Dem voters (Progressive vs DLC-Regressives) if they continue to sit on their hands? Or don't they need us anymore?

[garybeck]

4. DLC-Regressives

that's the real problem. those folks have the money.

[DeSwiss]

9. My concern is....

...that many young Democrats worked very hard to get the Dems control of Congress last November. The DLC thinks they did it all by themselves. Or so the story goes. But I'm not sure these young people will be as patient with this sober and deliberate process (or lack thereof), now that the Dems are in charge. They're asking what did we work for?

Many were so disaffected in 2000 that they ran to Nader as if reaching for the Holy Grail, and so they learned about the politics of money the hard way. But now, when they play by the rules and stick it out and win, they see their leaders allowing a criminal to inhabit the WH and run roughshod over their rights.

I've got three kids ranging in age from 32 to 22 and it feels like they are disconnecting from what's going on because they don't believe the Dems have the heart to do the right thing. They're as frustrated as am I. And I'm beginning to wonder if they're not right....

[Truth2Tell]

5. Yep, "Unite the R's"

That's the talking point for today.

Seems to be going around.

Lunacy.

[Captain Angry]

6. I would calmly reply with this:

I think it would be in our best interests to make the Republicans decide to unite against the Constitution.

Impeach on the facts, none of the emotional or gray areas. If the Republicans decide that defending Bush is more important than supporting the Constitution, then they'll be on record as such.

[Hissyspit]

7. Excellent. n/t

[sojourner]

25. exactly.......

[EFerrari]

8. He's got it backward, imho. Keep pushing!

[FogerRox]

10. KNR for the Sunday shift

[EFerrari]

11. Kick

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

12. I'd restate his position for him...

..."So in other words you don't contest that the Bush administration is guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors and does deserve to be impeached, however, due to political considerations you're not supporting it?"

And I'd ask him:

"Is that how we got the Patriot Act? -- political considerations?...And the Military Commissions Act?...Is that why Dems didn't simply refuse to authorize more funds for this illegal war? -- political considerations?

Is that why the unanimous vote for Lieberman's amendment clearly designed to pave the way for our impending assault on Iran? -- political considerations?"

"Are there ever matters/issues of sufficient import that they are actually decided based on what is right rather than political considerations? -- and if so, what are they?"

"Do you honestly believe your constituents are being well served when the decisions you make, presumably on their behalf, that often so profoundly affect their lives, are driven purely by political considerations?"

--------------------------------------------------

I'm sure you can come up with better questions than this -- just a few that occurred to me.

Good luck.

[liberalla]

16. "So, in other words... "

You reframed it beautifully. Excellent questions!

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

27. Thank you. nt.

[checks-n-balances]

13. Also make clear that their inaction signals weakness on their part

at least it does to most of us at DU. Sitting on their hands and/or making ridiculous excuses just emboldens those who have already gotten away with murder. I'm sure you can find a polite but firm way to communicate that!

Good luck!!

[snot]

14. I worry that what he means is

not that it would fracture the Dem citizens, but that he believes that a substantial portion of the Dem congresspersons would not support it -- that it would fracture the Dem pols. It shouldn't be that way, but I'm afraid it is; and if so, he could have a point.

Although I do think that just the investigations would be extremely helpful -- but can we have those regardless?

[DeSwiss]

15. He said: "would fracture the Ds and unite the Rs"

I thought that's why we helped them gain the majority in November. So that we would be the one's uniting? Not them. How soon we forget.

What I want to know is, if they aren't going to be there for us now when we need them, where should we be when they want us?

[Senator]

17. You might also ask why "our side" gets to benefit from ongoing torture??

If he really believes what he said, how is he better than bushcheney?

Putting party over nation is putting party over nation.

---

[DeSwiss]

18. Well said.....

...there are no more angles from which to triangulate. Everyone damn one of them looks just as shitty as the one before and the one to come after.

Rahm? DLCers? "No guts, no glory."

[Spurt]

19. End the war?

"This would be damaging to restoration of the Constitutional rights and ending the war."

Exec has made it clear they will not be ending the war, and it is evident they are/will ignore Congress. Therefore how is your congressman going to end the war other than by impeachment?

Restoring the constitution is similarly a fools errand without impeachment. I just can't see those nutters backing down until they are punched down. Perhaps your critter might explain how he is going to achieve restoration.
Maybe he sees some legislation being prepared for attachment to a signing statement.

[Vinca]

20. I'm stunned you got a handwritten note from someone in Congress! nt

[texpatriot2004]

21. He's not there to pursue his own interests, he is there to pursue

yours. Is this a representative form of government, as it was intended? His opinion doesn't matter but yours does.

[ShaneGR]

22. Regardless of position, I'm AMAZED you got a handwritten letter...

So rare.

[garybeck]

26. well this is Vermont :) I imagine the volume of mail is less for him :)

[Ghost in the Machine]

23. Print this out and include it in your reply -

This was a post from DU'er rateyes last night:

You made a solemn promise. This is that promise:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter."

1. You cannot support and defend the Constitution and at the same time allow the executive branch to continue to deny us our civil rights guaranteed by that same Constitution.

2. You cannot bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States which says, among other things, that all treaties are part of the "supreme law of the land," and then look the other way when the POTUS breaks the provisions of the UN Charter to get us into an illegal war, along with the provisions of the Geneva and Hague Conventions. Such crimes are crimes against the Constitution, and therefore are "high crimes." It is your DUTY to impeach and remove from office the entire Bush administration.

3. You said that you take the obligation to protect the Constitution "freely, without ANY mental reservation or purpose of evasion;" If, indeed, this is true, why is impeachment "off the table?"

4. You said that you will WELL and FAITHFULLY execute the duties of your respective offices. It is your DUTY to impeach and remove from office those in this administration who have clearly committed high crimes. How WELL and FAITHFULLY are your executing THAT duty of your office?

Here is a measuring stick for you to use: The Illegal War in Iraq. Are you assenting to it by continuing to fund it? Can you really look in the eyes of the families of those who have lost their lives or have been wounded and TRUTHFULLY tell them that their sacrifice is worth it, and we must give it a "little more time?" Do you REALLY believe that? Can you justify keeping our combat troops in Iraq for ONE MORE HOUR, as if doing so will make the situation any BETTER? Can you? And KNOWING that the only way to END this war is to quit funding it, and that the ONLY way to ensure the restoration of our civil rights is to impeach Cheney, Bush, and Gonzales...what are you doing on those fronts?

Just asking."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1404564&mesg_id=1404564

[Nunyabiz]

28. Got to agree

The democrats could not possibly be more wrong, in fact if they DONT Impeach they will lose so much support that I would say it would be likely that a Rethuglican will easily steal the 08' election and gain back many Congressional seats.

[Canuckistanian]

29. You're exactly right. Why would it fracture the Dems?

What Dem would be afraid of impeachment once the ball got rolling? I can understand some reticence now.

The number one concern for most politicians is future election prospects. And with impeachment, the majority of America is already there.

Any Dem who fights this once it gets going, is going to be suspect in my book.

[Javaman]

30. "it would fracture the dems and the repukes"...

aka it would upset the apple cart, the two party system and all the graff and grifting going on that supports all the "extra"s and influence that they enjoy.

god forbid for that to happen...:sarcasm:

[Psyop Samurai]

31. "would fracture the Ds and unite the Rs"...

Somebody really got in on the ground floor with that meme.

It seems impervious to reason.

[garybeck]

32. he's got it backwards but I'm going to try to set him straight :)