Barney Frank calls Scalia a "homophobe"

[Little-Acorn]

It's getting easier to tell the Democrats are desperate. Barney Frank, or example, is having a harder and harder itme explaining why he kept insisting, year after year, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were "just fine, there is no problem here", right up to the year they crashed and brought half the economy down with them.

So now he's trying to divert people's attention to something unrelated. Little surprise, he chose homosexuality as his preferred topic. But he couldn't bash Anonin Scalia about that, since Scalia actually went against some of the more recent Supreme Court majorities in gay cases.

So, here is Frank, making things up about Scalia that aren't true, announcing he has an unreasonable fear of gays, and then bashing him for it anyway.

Typical tactic for a Democrat unable to defend or justify his real agenda.

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

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090323/D9741AQ81.html

Rep. Frank calls Scalia a 'homophobe' in interview

Mar 23, 7:04 PM (ET)

WASHINGTON (AP) - Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank called Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia a "homophobe" in a recent interview with the gay news Web site 365gay.com.

The Democratic lawmaker, who is gay, was discussing gay marriage and his expectation that the high court would some day be called upon to decide whether the Constitution allows the federal government to deny recognition to same-sex marriages.

"I wouldn't want it to go to the United States Supreme Court now because that homophobe Antonin Scalia has too many votes on this current court," said Frank. The video of the interview is available online.

Frank's office did not respond to a request Monday to expand on his remark. Scalia also had no comment.

Scalia dissented from the court's ruling in 2003 that struck down state laws banning consensual sodomy. He has complained about judges, rather than elected officials, deciding questions of morality about which the Constitution is silent.

Controversial topics like gay rights and abortion should not be in the hands of judges, he has said, calling on people to persuade their legislatures or amend the Constitution.


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

[actsnoblemartin]

thats ok Barney Frank is a faggot :coffee:


It's getting easier to tell the Democrats are desperate. Barney Frank, or example, is having a harder and harder itme explaining why he kept insisting, year after year, that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were "just fine, there is no problem here", right up to the year they crashed and brought half the economy down with them.

So now he's trying to divert people's attention to something unrelated. Little surprise, he chose homosexuality as his preferred topic. But he couldn't bash Anonin Scalia about that, since Scalia actually went against some of the more recent Supreme Court majorities in gay cases.

So, here is Frank, making things up about Scalia that aren't true, announcing he has an unreasonable fear of gays, and then bashing him for it anyway.

Typical tactic for a Democrat unable to defend or justify his real agenda.

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

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20090323/D9741AQ81.html

Rep. Frank calls Scalia a 'homophobe' in interview

Mar 23, 7:04 PM (ET)

WASHINGTON (AP) - Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank called Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia a "homophobe" in a recent interview with the gay news Web site 365gay.com.

The Democratic lawmaker, who is gay, was discussing gay marriage and his expectation that the high court would some day be called upon to decide whether the Constitution allows the federal government to deny recognition to same-sex marriages.

"I wouldn't want it to go to the United States Supreme Court now because that homophobe Antonin Scalia has too many votes on this current court," said Frank. The video of the interview is available online.

Frank's office did not respond to a request Monday to expand on his remark. Scalia also had no comment.

Scalia dissented from the court's ruling in 2003 that struck down state laws banning consensual sodomy. He has complained about judges, rather than elected officials, deciding questions of morality about which the Constitution is silent.

Controversial topics like gay rights and abortion should not be in the hands of judges, he has said, calling on people to persuade their legislatures or amend the Constitution.


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

[PostmodernProphet]

Controversial topics like gay rights and abortion should not be in the hands of judges, he has said

interesting....I never thought I would agree with Barney Frank on anything......

[sgtdmski]

How courageous of Mr. Frank. If he really had some courage he would call the President that signed DOMA into law a homophobe as well. I mean if turth be told, Clinton signed the law into effect, making him the Commander-in-Homophobe.

If you are going to call the pot black, have the balls to call the kettle black too. Put up or shut-up Mr Frank.

dmk

[glockmail]

Anything that comes out of- or into- Barney's mouth shouldn't surprise anyone.

[Little-Acorn]

Anything that comes out of- or into- Barney's mouth shouldn't surprise anyone.

An image I did NOT need this early in the morning. :eek:

[Little-Acorn]

interesting....I never thought I would agree with Barney Frank on anything......

Your record is still intact. That was a quote from Antonin Scalia, not from Frank. Frank clearly disagrees with Scalia, and is happy that the courts may eventually decide the matter.

It's part and parcel of the liberal agenda. They know that, if they put their agenda up for examination, clarification, and a vote by the American people (thru their legislators), it would be voted down resoundingly, as nearly every such ballot initiative has been. Their only hope of instilling extra rights for gays, and changing the definition of "marriage", lies in activist judges on the courts who think their job is to make America what they want it to be, not what the legislatures and the Constitution say it must be.

Virtually ALL liberal "advances" came through the courts, not through legislation.

[Binky]

So what if he's a homophobe? Big deal. Millions of others are as well.

[Little-Acorn]

So what if he's a homophobe? Big deal. Millions of others are as well.

Actually, very few are. A "homophobe" is someone who is unreasonably afraid of homosexuals or homosexuality. In fact, many people dislike them, but few have any particular fear.

It's a word that was made up by the gay agenda pushers, in an effort to paint their opponents falsely. Don't fall into that trap.

A dislike of homosexuals or homosexual relationships and acts, is "equal and opposite" to a desire or approval of heterosexual relationships and acts. People who try to pretend that a dislike of homosexual relationships is "unnatural", would have to also show that an approval or desire for heterosexual relationships, is just as "unnatural".

They can't do it. But don't tell them so, they will get very angry, because you're harming their agenda.

But that has little to do with Frank's recent comments. He made them simply to invent a new enemy, and get people's minds off his culpability for the present financial crisis.

[Binky]

The point is, who gives a crapola?

[sgtdmski]

Homophobia is just another word that has been subverted by the left and given new meaning. The word homophobia properly defined is an irrational fear of the same sex and has nothing at all to do with homosexuality. Just as the word heterophobia describes someone with an irrationale fear of the opposite sex.

dmk

[avatar4321]

Why on earth does Barney Frank think anyone is afraid of him and his friends?

[Jagger]

I saw Scalia in Dallas last year. I couldn't believe how fat he was.

[Yurt]

I saw Scalia in Dallas last year. I couldn't believe how fat he was.

and bwarny fwank is thin....:poke:

[PostmodernProphet]

let's face it....Barney Frank is a homophuck.....

[Kathianne]

I saw Scalia in Dallas last year. I couldn't believe how fat he was.

and he you. Yes, he told me so.

[avatar4321]

I saw Scalia in Dallas last year. I couldn't believe how fat he was.

And that's relevant because...?

[actsnoblemartin]

I saw Scalia in Dallas last year. I couldn't believe how fat he was.

im sorry jagger, but thats a stupid-ass comment :slap:

[stephanie]

Serious question..

does Bwany Frank have any teeth..????:laugh2:

[actsnoblemartin]

Serious question..

does Bwany Frank have any teeth..????:laugh2:

no :laugh2:

[stephanie]

I think what few brain cells he had, dribbled out through his toothless piehole..

[actsnoblemartin]

he also suffers from verbal dhirhea


I think what few brain cells he had, dribbled out through his toothless piehole..

[actsnoblemartin]

i take it back, barney frank isnt a faggot... he is just a drunk

:coffee:

[glockmail]

Serious question..

does Bwany Frank have any teeth..????:laugh2:Not sure, he has his lips pursed in a permanent cock sucking position so that no one really knows.

[Jagger]

Scalia doesn't even buy into all the fundamental principles laid down in the Declaration of Independence. For that reason alone he should be removed from the bench.

[glockmail]

Yet you offer no proof of this accusation.

[Jagger]

Yet you offer no proof of this accusation.

Nobody has asked me for any proof.

[stephanie]

Nobody has asked me for any proof.

:link::link::link::link::link::link::link:

[Yurt]

Nobody has asked me for any proof.

it is well established that you are a liar...so just assume no one believes a word you say unless you provide proof

[actsnoblemartin]

it is well established that you are a liar...so just assume no one believes a word you say unless you provide proof

me thinks you zinged mc jagger :coffee:

[Jagger]

it is well established that you are a liar...so just assume no one believes a word you say unless you provide proof

Convince me that you actually care about the truth and I might provide evidence.

[Yurt]

Convince me that you actually care about the truth and I might provide evidence.

you make a claim, you must prove it

convince me you have not lied on this forum :poke:

[actsnoblemartin]

you make a claim, you must prove it

convince me you have not lied on this forum :poke:

exactly

[avatar4321]

Convince me that you actually care about the truth and I might provide evidence.

Convince me you actually understand what's going on in this conversation by actually posting support for your claims and not going off on some tangent that has nothing to do with this conversation.

[glockmail]

Nobody has asked me for any proof.I'm asking now. Or lose cred.

[Kathianne]

convince me that you actually care about the truth and i might provide evidence.

t*r*o*l*l*

[stephanie]

I still say, paid t*r*o*l*l* for media matters which people need to know, is a propaganda arm of the Democrat party..:thumb:

[actsnoblemartin]

:clap: :clap: :clap:


Convince me you actually understand what's going on in this conversation by actually posting support for your claims and not going off on some tangent that has nothing to do with this conversation.

[Yurt]

i think jagger is awesome...anybody that comes to this site and view posts between conservatives and liberals will see that liberals like jagger are complete morons

example of a debate with jagger:

poster: obama said he would not raise taxes, no new taxes...evidence/link provided

jagger: obama never said that, nuh uh, you're wrong, i met chuck norris and kicked his ass, so there

[actsnoblemartin]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeronimo/450511247/

[actsnoblemartin]

i think jagger is awesome...anybody that comes to this site and view posts between conservatives and liberals will see that liberals like jagger are complete morons

example of a debate with jagger:

poster: obama said he would not raise taxes, no new taxes...evidence/link provided

jagger: obama never said that, nuh uh, you're wrong, i met chuck norris and kicked his ass, so there

:coffee: that is classic

[glockmail]

i think jagger is awesome...anybody that comes to this site and view posts between conservatives and liberals will see that liberals like jagger are complete morons

example of a debate with jagger:

poster: obama said he would not raise taxes, no new taxes...evidence/link provided

jagger: obama never said that, nuh uh, you're wrong, i met chuck norris and kicked his ass, so there :lol: Isn't he the guy who claimed that Navy SEALs were wimps?

[actsnoblemartin]

:lol: Isn't he the guy who claimed that Navy SEALs were wimps?

are you serious

:lol:

[Jagger]

:lol: Isn't he the guy who claimed that Navy SEALs were wimps? Compared to me, they are. Compared to you, they're Super Men.

Remeber, I'm the guy who killed Super Man.

[actsnoblemartin]

how do you figure?


Compared to me, they are. Compared to you, they're Super Men.

Remeber, I'm the guy who killed Super Man.

[Jagger]

I'm asking now. Or lose cred.

You're assuming that I actually care what you think, dude.

[actsnoblemartin]

You're assuming that I actually care what you think, dude.


dont you want cred with the board though?

[Jagger]

how do you figure? I use mathematics, dude. Did I ever tell you about the French Special Forces I worked with?

[Jagger]

dont you want cred with the board though? Not really, dude.

[actsnoblemartin]

I use mathematics, dude. Did I ever tell you about the French Special Forces I worked with?

no, do tell

[actsnoblemartin]

Not really, dude.

but, then...

why you here.

dont you want people to believe you?

everyone on the board has a certain level of credibility here

and personally, I may not agree with everyone but I want them to respect me and know that I wont lie, and will always tell the truth

why wouldnt you want that?

[Yurt]

I use mathematics, dude. Did I ever tell you about the French Special Forces I worked with?

say hi to chuck norris for me

[glockmail]

You're assuming that I actually care what you think, dude.Its not just me, its all the other members of the board as well. And if you don't care about that, then why post at all?

[actsnoblemartin]

thats what confuses me.

I can only speak for myself, but i give liberals a fair shake, and i believe most conservatives on this board want open, honest, civil debate.

I'd even go as far to say, that pull away the heated rhetoric of both sides, and most on this board truly see their fellow board members as americans first liberal conservatives second.

*gets off soapbox*



Its not just me, its all the other members of the board as well. And if you don't care about that, then why post at all?

[Yurt]

Its not just me, its all the other members of the board as well. And if you don't care about that, then why post at all?

its a free board, he can post if he wants

[sgtdmski]

Scalia doesn't even buy into all the fundamental principles laid down in the Declaration of Independence. For that reason alone he should be removed from the bench.

Which fundamental principles? Are we talking about

Life? In Casey he sided with the minority adding that the Roe v Wade decision should be overturned, in which case that would mean he was buying into the principle of life.

Liberty? In Johnson he sided with the majority overturning the laws that made flag burning a crime, instead claiming that it was protected political speech in which case that would me he was buying into the principle of liberty.

Pursuit of Happiness? In Lawrence again he sided with the majority overturning the Sodomy laws in Texas as he saw them designed to punish and make criminal one segment of the population. In the case it would seem that he was buying into both the principles of liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Opinions are like armpits, everyone has them and most of them stink.

dmk

[sgtdmski]

I use mathematics, dude. Did I ever tell you about the French Special Forces I worked with?

Tell me when was the last time the French won a war????

Last time I checked it was back in the 19th Century.

dmk

[Jagger]

Which fundamental principles? Are we talking about
Scalia doesn't believe that governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed. He believes government derives it's authority from God.

[Jagger]

...when was the last time the French won a war? Beats me, dude. All I know is that 75% of the men who forced Cornwallis to surrender at Yorktown were wearing French uniforms.

[glockmail]

Scalia doesn't believe that governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed. He believes government derives it's authority from God. No the People derive their power from God, then grant limited authority to the government.

[Jagger]

how do you figure? I fought five Seals and one time and I won the fight. That's how I figure.

[PostmodernProphet]

Beats me, dude. All I know is that 75% of the men who forced Cornwallis to surrender at Yorktown were wearing French uniforms.

shucks.....I knew they were good seamstresses...did we ever pay them for the uniforms?.....

[sgtdmski]

Scalia doesn't believe that governments derive their authority from the consent of the governed. He believes government derives it's authority from God.

Really, and where has he stated that????? Cite something that he wrote to prove it please!!!! Or are you confusing the fact that Scalia believes in natural rights, meaning that the people get their rights not from the government but rather from God.

dmk

[sgtdmski]

I fought five Seals and one time and I won the fight. That's how I figure.

Really, that must have been some dream, tell me after you won the fight, did you end up banging Pam Anderson???

dmk

[sgtdmski]

Beats me, dude. All I know is that 75% of the men who forced Cornwallis to surrender at Yorktown were wearing French uniforms.

Wow, it must have been the 18th Century then!!!

dmk