The Credibilty Problem

In Saturday's Washington Post, Ted Kennedy wrote a piece entitled, "Alito's Credibility Problem."

It provides a sneak preview of what's to come.

Monday at noon, the confirmation hearings of Samuel Alito are scheduled to begin.

The libs on the Senate Judiciary Committee are sure to be entertaining. Teddy and the Dems will grandstand and posture and make fools of themselves. They always do, especially Teddy.

He writes:
Every Supreme Court nominee bears a heavy burden to demonstrate that he or she is committed to the constitutional principles that have been vital in advancing fairness, decency and equal opportunity in our society. As Judge Samuel Alito approaches his confirmation hearings next week, the more we learn about him, the more questions we have about the credibility of his assurances to us.

I think every Senator bears a heavy burden to demonstrate that he or she is committed to the constitutional principles that have been vital in advancing fairness, decency and equal opportunity in our society.

How do Senators demonstrate this?

For starters, they should not try to undermine our military personnel and endanger them while they are serving in harm's way.

They should not slash away at troop morale.

Senators should not provide aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime.

And of course, no Senator should drive off the road, escape to safety while leaving his car submerged in water, allowing a young woman to drown, and then fail to report the incident to authorities.

Yes, every Senator bears the heavy burden of behaving morally and responsibly and in accordance with the laws of our society.

In my opinion, Teddy is the heavy burden. His presence in the U.S. Senate diminishes the body's credibility.

Speaking of diminished credibility, the Dems have decided to make a change to their witness list for the Alito hearings.

Stephen R. Dujack will not be appearing before the committee.
That's too bad. I wanted to hear from him.

Read the writings of the witness that the Dems initially chose as part of their strategy to put Alito's character and credibility in a negative light.
Animals Suffer a Perpetual 'Holocaust'

By Stephen R. Dujack

(Excerpt)

Like the victims of the Holocaust, animals are rounded up, trucked hundreds of miles to the kill floor and slaughtered. Comparisons to the Holocaust are not only appropriate but inescapable because, whether we wish to admit it or not, cows, chickens, pigs and turkeys are as capable of feeling loneliness, fear, pain, joy and affection as we are. To those who defend the modern-day holocaust on animals by saying that animals are slaughtered for food and give us sustenance, I ask: If the victims of the Holocaust had been eaten, would that have justified the abuse and murder? Did the fact that lampshades, soaps and other "useful" products were made from their bodies excuse the Holocaust? No. Pain is pain.

My grandfather wrote, "[A]s long as human beings will go on shedding the blood of animals, there will never be any peace. There is only one little step from killing animals to creating gas chambers a la Hitler.... There will be no justice as long as man will stand with a knife or with a gun and destroy those who are weaker than he is."

We all have the power to stop suffering and misery every time we sit down to eat.

Dujack actually compares the slaughter of millions of people with our food supply.

What a level-headed, moderate guy!

Obviously, the Dems had a change of heart about having Dujack criticize the credibility of Alito.

I suppose they figured that with Dick Durbin on the Judiciary Committee, they already had the imagery of Hitler and the Nazis covered.