The time is NOW -- Call Senators: "Why Aren't You Co-Sponsoring Censure?!"

[pat_k]

The Hearing Made Their Duty Crystal Clear!

Call your Senator. Ask why they're not co-sponsoring.

Ask to speak to the Judicial LA (or just ask to speak to someone who can answer your questions).

Don't just ask them to do it. Ask them WHY they haven't, and Challenge Their Reasons!!!

If you get through, tell us how it went!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Their oath to protect and defend demands action. The hearing demonstrated that we know all we need to know.


There is NO valid rationalization for failing to carry out their sworn duty by co-sponsoring the Censure resolution. Whatever rationalizations they invoke, we must keep challenging, probing and prodding.

Every member of Congress who stands mute is helping Bush corrupt the principles and institutions we established under our constitution.

As long as they stay silent, Bush can say, "Members of Congress are sworn to support and defend. If my actions violated the Constitution, more would be taking action. They aren't.)

Some simple truths and moral principles are all you need show them that there is no escape. There is ONLY one question: Whether to carry out their sworn duty or be complicit.

Need ammunition to take on their rationalizations? See the following. (Case to fight for Impeachment also applies to co-sponsoring Censure.)

To Impeach, or Not Impeach?
That's the Wrong Question

Additional resources:

http://january6th.org/drafts.html

[Savannah Progressive]

1. Well I live in Georgia, and my senators wouldn't vote for it

even if the phones rung off the hook from now to Labor Day demanding that they sponser and support it.

[fooj]

2. You might be surprised. C-span Repub callers were in support

of censure. The country is RAGING mad.

Peace.

[pat_k]

4. It is time we Get It -- The right revels in Accusation and Punishment

From To Impeach, or Not Impeach? (That's the Wrong Question)

The most serious problem members of the Democratic Party face is the perception that they are weak

Contrary to what many Democratic strategists believe, the perception of weakness has NOTHING to do with stance on national security. It is rooted in:

• The reticence that centrists seem to have when it comes to accusation and punishment. (Something the right clearly revels in.) Instead of going after wrong-doers, Democratic leaders seek to "investigate" or "make sure it doesn't happen again" (and the Republicans chuckle, "Gee, for a minute there, I though they were actually going to do something.")



• The tendency to refrain from fighting the good fights for "practical" or "strategic" reasons. Members of the Democratic Party may believe they are "picking fights wisely," but to observers, it appears they spend all their time predicting defeat and "saving their energy" for fights they can win. Outsiders looking in do not see "wise selection," they see cowardice. When the rare "winnable fight" does materialize, it is often for some incremental step or practical end that inspires no one.

Bottom line: You can't fight terrorism if you can't fight Bush. How can members of the Democratic Party expect Americans to believe they can stand up to terrorists, if they can't stand up to the man who terrorized Americans into war with threats of "mushroom clouds in 45 minutes"?

[pat_k]

3. Call and ask anyway. Don't give them the excuse "No One Asked Me"

. . .We can't let the idiots claim "My Constituents Aren't Calling for Censure"

[texastoast]

5. Mine either

Don't let it stop you. Never give up when it comes to defending our Constitution. At least you will be able to say that you did all you could.