Tag Archives: Richard Blumenthal

Are Liberals Liable for Americans Dying?

Glock-Constitution-998x666Originally posted at American Thinker

Recently, Bernie Sanders blamed Donald Trump for his #FeelTheBern/”Free College but no Free Speech” crew acting up at Trump rallies.  That sort of lack of accountability is par for the course, because liberals, who never take the time to evaluate themselves, usually expend tons of energy pointing the finger of accusation at those less guilty.

A perfect example of that practice involves a Democrat in Congress who wants to overturn the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, a bill the 109th Congress passed in 2005 that was instituted to protect the gun industry from frivolous lawsuits.

In hopes of reversing gun industry protections, Congressman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) proposed H.R. 4399, the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act.  To build support on Capitol Hill for the legislation, Schiffteamed up with Connecticut Democrat Senator Richard Blumenthal, who proposed repealing the 2005 bill.

The bottom line is that, besides demonizing the gun industry, liberals want to make firearm manufacturers, sellers, and trade associations answerable to anyone and everyone considered a victim of gun-related violence.

Schiff, who supports immunity for illegals, argues that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is unfair because, when it was approved,  “Congress passed a unique form of immunity for only one industry – and that is the gun industry.”

Schiff rationalizes that line of thinking in the following way:

If you’re a carmaker and your airbags kill someone, you’re potentially liable. If you’re a pharmaceutical company and sell faulty drugs, you can be held liable. If you’re a liquor store and sell alcohol to minors, you can be held liable.

“Why should it be any different for gun manufacturers?” he asked.

Here’s why: if a madman purposely drives a car into a crowd and kills three people, should the car manufacturer be held liable?  If an individual accidently poisons himself or herself with a prescription drug cocktail, should the pharmaceutical company be held liable?  How about if a tanked-up drunk smacks a bottle of vodka over someone’s head in a bar brawl?  Should the liquor company be held liable?

Of course not!

But logic has little impact on liberals, who believe that both gun manufacturers and dealers should be prosecuted if a weapon they made or sold causes someone harm.  Why not hold liable the manufacturer of the belt Robin Williams used to hang himself?

According to Schiff, H.R. 4399 is needed because it targets gun dealers who sell firearms to “straw purchasers,” the middlemen who mediate between dealers and criminals.  Sharing his “who needs that many” liberal philosophy, Schiff explains, “There are straw purchasers who will buy dozens of the same gun. It’s quite clear they’re not buying those guns for personal use. Who needs that many of the same gun?”

“If [gun manufacturers and dealers] are no longer immune,” Schiff added, “they’ll be more careful who they sell to.”

Wow!  If  “straw purchases” are the concern, is Schiff also planning to pursue litigation against Eric Holder and Barack Obama, the kingpins of the “Fast and Furious” gun-walking scheme?  Will the Obama administration finally answerfor the hundreds of deaths, including that of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and ICE agent Jaime Zapata, both killed with guns the president put into the hands of Mexican cartels?

This brings the discussion back around to liberals refusing to recognize how the reasoning they use to justify what they oppose is much more suitable if applied to things they support.

For example, to justify a weak argument, Schiff cited car manufacturers being liable for faulty airbags but didn’t mention the countless numbers of dead Americans who, besides being murdered, or infected with a third-world disease, have died in car crashes where illegal immigrants have been driving under the influence of alcohol or driving illegally.

In response to a congressional inquiry, Jessica M. Vaughan, the director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), recently submitted the following findings:

The criminal aliens released by ICE [since 2010] – who had already been convicted of thousands of crimes — are responsible for a significant crime spree in American communities, including 124 new homicides. Inexplicably, ICE is choosing to release some criminal aliens multiple times.

In their own defense, ICE claim that 75% of those illegal criminals were released because of a court order, or because their country of origin refused to accept them back.

So in other words, while the left was busy trying to rout the Second Amendment, illegal immigrant criminals, released from jail with the approval of the Obama administration, have been killing and injuring innocent people.

So here’s a question: why do denouncers of the gun industry mandate Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence but not Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Illegal Immigrants?

The same politicians who aim and shoot irresponsible policy right through the heart of America have largely ignored the topic of  the five times deportedillegal felon who killed 32-year-old Kate Steinle in the liberal-approved sanctuary city of San Francisco.

Politicians like Schiff; Blumenthal; and, first and foremost, Barack Obama like to do battle over gun rights, but then, when an undocumented loose cannon like Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez murders an American with a stolen gun in broad daylight, they barely notice.

If Democrats want to punish the gun industry for making or selling a gun that causes injury or death, those same lawmakers should also be willing to accept responsibility when an undocumented immigrant they wanted set free takes a life.

That’s why zero weight should be given to Adam Schiff’s hypocritical bill. In its place, as recompense for each and every life destroyed by an illegal immigrant, Americans should demand a law that holds lax open-border politicians personally accountable.

Combat Blumenthal the Chameleon – American Thinker – May 22, 2010

Originally posted at American Thinker Blog

The White House has publicly stated Connecticut chameleon Richard Blumenthal’s Vietnam veteran pretense is no big deal.  For Democrats, the motto is, “Whatever it takes to get elected.”  And if the victory vehicle includes stretching the truth, don’t the ends justify the means?

Blumenthal… found himself on the defensive when the NY Times reported … he had repeatedly claimed that he had served in Vietnam. Blumenthal was in the Marine Reserves during the Vietnam War, but did not serve in Vietnam. Blumenthal says he misspoke about his record unintentionally and that it happened only a few times out of hundreds of public appearances.

If Blumenthal was thinking on his feet, the attorney general should have feigned a head injury to explain poor memory and a shaky grip on the facts.

Unlike Blumenthal, President Obama has mastered the practice of false pretext. So it stands to reason, if charades work for Barry, camouflage should also work for other Democrats running for public office.

Barack pretended to be politically moderate, experienced, post racial, as well as the human embodiment of hope and change. So why shouldn’t fellow Democrats follow the Leader’s lead? Because Barry Soetoro, which is Obama’s real name, has proven to be none of those things.

It works like this, politicians spend a season observing the American electorate and taking copious notes to determine what the public esteems, after which a false persona is fashioned upon the values observed.

Take for instance, as a precursor to seeking the Democrat nomination for President, Hillary Clinton moving to NY from Arkansas. Donning a Yankees cap and running for office in the Empire State, swearing the whole time to never run for higher office then, after becoming junior Senator, running for president.

Or how about a closet Democrat from Pennsylvania running for Senate as a Republican and then governing like a Democrat? Then, when the state shifts left, changing parties in hopes of winning the next election.

In fact, if planning to run for President of the United States, there’s even room for dodging Constitutional restraints, just hide your birth certificate and refuse to produce the original.

If biracial –procure minority votes by distancing yourself from familial, Caucasian heritage. Identify only with African roots and promote yourself as the first, Black, historic…whatever.

Obama was schooled in Indonesia, changed his birth name to an Islamic name then, for political expediency, joined a racist, anti-Semite church pretended to be Christian, ran for office, got elected, after which he never set foot in church again. So why can’t “Nutmeg State” soldier Blumenthal pretend to have participated in combat with the Viet Cong?

Blumenthal impressed potential voters by pretending to be veteran because the attorney general knew Americans respect military service. The Vietnam War has emotional influence over baby boomers, so Richard chose Vietnam.

And what’s the big deal anyway?  If double-dealing “happens only a few times,” misspeaking “unintentionally” shouldn’t be held against a potential candidate’s character –just ask Barack, I mean Barry.

Obama aka Soetoro spokesperson Robert Gibbs, when asked about Blumenthal pretending to experience Apocalypse Now style combat in Vietnam, replied, “I have not heard anything from the (White House) political shop that would lead me to believe anything other than our continued support.”

Maybe what the indomitable Gibbs meant to say was, “I have not heard anything from the White House that would lead me believe or recognize anything even remotely resembling the truth?”

Cartoon by cartoonist SooperMexicon

%d bloggers like this: