Driving liberals, dhimmis and illegal alien apologists absolutely insane since 2005...

Gerry Connolly Steals From Constituent

By Greg L | 16 June 2010 | Gerry Connolly, Fairfax County, Prince William County | 4 Comments

Where in the oath of office that Congressmen take does it mention that they must steal directly from their constituents in order to further their campaigns?  Tonight I pose that question to Congressman Gerry Connolly, whose theft of the intellectual property from one of the people he supposedly represents clearly violates his oath of office and once again demonstrates the brazen thuggery masquerading as legislative representation that is the only thing Connolly can manage to offer the 11th District of Virginia.  If it weren’t so incredibly consistent, it would be laughable.  Instead, it’s simply enraging.

I take you now to the Fairfax County Examiner, which documents yet another case of brutish behavior from the disgrace of Northern Virginia:

Mr. Herring responded, “Thanks for your email.  Our use of the photograph clearly falls within the fair use doctrine.  See the Center for Social Media’s Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Online Video.”

While I appreciated the cleverness of his response and how articulate he was in explaining to me why the Connolly campaign had a right to steal, I took it upon myself to research the matter even further.

In the end the only thing that was “clear” was the shadiness and lack of knowledge on “fair use” by the Connolly campaign. Furthermore, it was “clear” that YouTube did not agree with the assessment by Mr. Herring and they promptly removed the video within a few hours of my formal notification of copyright infringement…

Gerry Connolly is a complete disgrace.  While he votes to enact punitive laws enforced with all the terrifying power of the state that we are subjected to, he casually and jokingly breaks the law believing he will never be held to account.

This November, he must be held to account.

So how about it, Gerry?  Explain to us how your behavior is consistent with the oath of office you took, and whether that oath actually means a damned thing to you.  Lots of your constituents would really like to know.



The opinions expressed here are solely the views of the author, and not representative of the position of any organization, political party, doughnut shop, knitting guild, or waste recycling facility, but may be correctly attributed to the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy. If anything in the above article has offended you, please click here to receive an immediate apology.

BVBL is not a charity and your support is not tax-deductible.

You can follow the discussion through the Comments feed. You can also pingback or trackback from your own site.

4 Comments

  1. Peter Danlyn said on 17 Jun 2010 at 11:35 am:
    Flag comment

    Hardly in the same league as Ronald Reagan, who associated his campaign with “Born in the USA” after Bruce’s people refused to let him use the song. In a subsequent speech he used the cadged phrase and invoked Springsteen in the same breath.

    Pretty overt actions to overcome a direct refusal to use someone’s intellectual property.

  2. VA_Magoo said on 17 Jun 2010 at 11:38 am:
    Flag comment

    uh, a politician that respects the law? Your kidding right? How can you even begin to think this man believes in the Constitution? Have you not seen his voting record? He has voted “Pelosi” 98% of the time, and the 2% he voted against “Pelosi” was votes he knew wouldnt hurt the cause…

  3. Jack said on 17 Jun 2010 at 1:27 pm:
    Flag comment

    The photo is the least of what Connolly has stolen. How about years of revenue surplus from property taxes on (previously) rapidly rising Fairfax County real estate?
    Just one example is wasting millions of dollars buying an apartment complexes full of illegal aliens and others who didn’t legally qualify (due to earned income level) for subsidized affordable housing.

    Instead, he received a promotion for putting our county into a $500 million budget deficit. Thanks Gerry. Please send him back to his cushy job at SAIC and out from the public payroll.

  4. local gop said on 17 Jun 2010 at 1:28 pm:
    Flag comment

    uhh connolly is right, it falls within fair use doctrine. you tube is a company that’s first goal is to cover its a#% from a law suit. them removing it does not indicate something illegal. if i had to guess their corporate policy is probably much more rigid than fair use of media policies. don’t complain when you place a photo in cyber space and it is used by someone else.

Comments are closed.


Views: 958