Pajamas Media

105 Comments

1. John B:

Isn’t Franks up for re-election in 2010? I think the word is out on Franks and his partner in crime, Dodd. 2010 should be an interesting year,,, I can’t wait.

Apr 11, 2009 - 11:56 pm 2. Len:

I thought the article by Lind on cultural Marxism was very good and was about to share it till I almost threw up at the condescending remark: “The members of the Frankfurt School are Marxist, they are also, to a man, Jewish.”

So was Karl Marx but so is Milton Friedman! What does that have to do with anything?

Apr 12, 2009 - 12:08 am 3. PatriotUSA:

Barney the “queen” Frank is the worst politician we have right now. He has gotten away with outright theft and is responsible for
more damage to the housing mortagage market than any other person. It is quite interesting to watch the so called progressive multiculturalists liberals spout such bigotry and hatred. Now if a conservative or republican had uttered such words all political hell would have been unleashed. The gloves need to come off and come off now. The Frank’s, Pelosi’s and Rieds of the left need to be taken down and taken down hard. Being nice and dignified was great in the past for certain situations. Hate and bigotry need to called out as such and Ms. Frank needs to go down with his words of hatred and prejudice.

Apr 12, 2009 - 12:26 am 4. Debra:

John B: Here in Massachusetts, Franks’ arrogance and smugness is viewed as a positive trait. His constituency will send him back, no doubt. Depressing, isn’t it?

Apr 12, 2009 - 2:12 am 5. formwiz:

Right on the money. Barney Frank has been giving homosexuality a bad name for years and should be called on it. Like Obambi, he shows us the hypocrisy of PC.

Apr 12, 2009 - 3:24 am 6. David W. Lincoln:

Let Barney chew on this: homosexuality is a poor way to communicate the reality of men and women being different. So why should insecure people (who shy away from authority which is not attributable to human activity) -
why should they continue to clip the wings of folk who have room in their life for more than the activity of people.

Freedom of speech, in other words, isn’t only one way.

Apr 12, 2009 - 4:12 am 7. elvis:

He seems to be the FACE of the party. And yes he will be elected again.
But maybe he’ll get too much FACE time and America will grow weary of him.
He is disgusting.
Of course the president uses the same tactics that Frank does.

Apr 12, 2009 - 4:38 am 8. Sparks:

I’m continually shocked by the news that “polls indicate that Dodd may have a hard time holding on to his seat”.

Have a hard time? May lose his seat? Things he’s done could hurt him?

Give me a break! Like Frank in MA, I’m depressed that there could be a significant number of voters to make these guys holding on to their seat a possibility. It’s as if only a small minority of voters are actually paying attention, and the rest are just voting for the guy they always voted for.

Dodd, Frank, Pelosi, Reid etc need to go down hard. They have failed the American people in a big way.

Apr 12, 2009 - 4:47 am 9. Bruce:

It is absurd to think 2010 elections will resolve anything.

The Nelson Rockefeller Country Club Yalie GOP (NRCCYGOP) and the Libertarian or whatever-you-wish-to-call-it Party won’t do squat, just like both Georgie Porgies didn’t raise a pinky to attacks by the Bolshis during their tenure.

Because of these non-actors we will have another 70-year scourge of collectivism costing another 100+ million lives through Lenin’s dictum “death by the implements of their own trades” — pitchforks, axes and printing presses.

Lay the horror that’s coming at the feet of the NRCCYGOP.

Apr 12, 2009 - 4:56 am 10. JFP:

Scalia is a homophobe.

So are the blacks and Hispanics who voted against gay marriage in California.

And so are most Muslims.

Will Barney Frank call these groups homophobic? Almost certainly not. What a hypocrite.

Apr 12, 2009 - 5:13 am 11. Joe C.:

Franks is the poster child for not only corrupt government, but the heterophobia of the gay entitlement movement.

Apr 12, 2009 - 5:59 am 12. Oldguy:

When will America realize they are getting it up their rears from this guy?

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:13 am 13. David S:

Scalia is a homophobe. How is it cowardly to call out a Supreme Court justice for doing harm to our Republic?

Scalia has demonstrated that he is not an impartial arbiter of the law:

In a dissent in the 2003 case Lawrence v. Texas, in which the Court struck down an anti-sodomy law as unconstitutional, Scalia said the Court’s majority “signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.”

Clearly Scalia believes that the government should restrict the rights of homosexuals. This is not the position of a person who understands the proper role of government in a Constitutional Republic.

Attacking Frank may be all the rage these days, but in this instance, Barney has the formula right. Scalia needs to be constantly shown for the hateful and idiotic jurist that he is. His decisions are typically poorly reasoned, with tortured justifications being the norm. Since impeachment is a political quagmire, shaming the justice is the most practical way to show distaste for the contempt in which he holds his fellow citizens.

Peace.

DS

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:17 am 14. David Thomson:

Few Americans know that the Clinton administration literally forced lending institutions to provide mortgages to minorities possessing poor credit histories. The politically correct John McCain refused to touch this subject during the presidential campaign. It could be argued that it alone cost him the election. Barney Frank’s former boyfriend “earned” millions of dollars because of his support. The false charges of racism and homophobia intimidated Republicans like the Arizona U.S. senator. This madness must stop. Congressman Frank should be the poster boy of Democratic Party shenanigans. The Democrats, by all rights, should be worried sick about the 2010 elections.

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:18 am 15. legalese:

Scalia does seem to reflect his views in his opinions–in Lawrence v. Texas he did rail on the homosexual agenda and seemed to reveal his own personal beliefs about homosexuality being not what the mainstream considers to be morally correct.

On the other hand–He is very consistent about the positions he takes. In Lawrence he actually said that he has nothing against homosexuals or any other group advocating for their position but he wants them to do it in the political process, rather than have it be mandated by the judiciary for everyone when the general public might not want that.

Do I agree with his moral position? No. As a gay person, while I can see that some people have this view–I do not.

But I am open-minded enough to concede that the basis on which he makes his decisions are consistent with the methods of interpretation he predictably uses: formalism, originalism, and to process-based theory where he prefers that hotbutton issues go to the democratic process. Does his method of constitutional interpretation make him a homophobe? I don’t think so. Are they convenient in this particular case in reflecting his own moral views? Certainly.

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:23 am 16. Morry Rotenberg:

An absolutely great piece of writing that really says it all about the Left. It also points out how very weak the response on the Right has been to counter these tactics. GW never responded to any of the personal attacks on him or on his administration. That has set the tone of non-response from the Right. If that doesn’t change then we as a nation are cooked.
One last thing, don’t ever turn your back on Barney!

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:38 am 17. mbunaz:

The responsibility of Barney Franks continued employment lies at the feet of the people of Massachusetts. Whenever I see a person wearing a Red Sox cap I am reminded that the “B” stands for “Barney”. Wear your hat with pride man.

Apr 12, 2009 - 7:50 am 18. JFP:

Hey, David S., read my first post (#10). Are you going to call all those other people homophobes? I bet not.

War.

JFP

Apr 12, 2009 - 8:10 am 19. TexEd:

Barney, like many, many of his kind is normalphobic. Protection against normalphobia and normalphobes MUST be written into all anti-discrimination legislation!

Apr 12, 2009 - 8:22 am 20. JD:

Can anyone be against term limits, when their absence allows people like Barney Frank to hold power indefinitely?

http://trackacrat.com/category/barney-frank/

Apr 12, 2009 - 8:26 am 21. John B:

@ #4 Debra,

“John B: Here in Massachusetts, Franks’ arrogance and smugness is viewed as a positive trait. His constituency will send him back, no doubt. Depressing, isn’t it?”.

Extremely. I just find it hard to believe the good people from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are that deaf, dumb, and blind. If they are, so be it. They are the one’s who have to live with that shame.

Pray tell, what items of value does Massachusetts manufacture and export to the rest of the country. I’ve been boycotting anything French for a long time, perhaps it’s time to add Massachusetts to the list.

Apr 12, 2009 - 8:31 am 22. Ozzie:

Like most liberal positions, you always have to start with the assumption of a false premise to get started. Homosexuals have all the rights everyone else has. Their perversion is a vice or a character disorder, not a “ethnicity”, “race” or a naturally occuring subspecies of human. It is an adopted behavior, like eating too much, riding bicycles for fun and doing crossword puzzles.

This is the truth that the advocates cannot admit, lest their ball of lies and intimidation fall apart.

Apr 12, 2009 - 8:31 am 23. Bill Perron:

Can’t stand on principle, no problem, just play the race card, or better yet, the homophobe card, yep, that is the cowardly liberal way.

Apr 12, 2009 - 9:21 am 24. Bob:

I wanted Barney Frank GONE in 2010! SOMEBODY IN MASSACHUSETTS PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD VOTE THAT TRAITOROUS BUM OUT!!

Apr 12, 2009 - 9:27 am 25. kdman:

David S. – your OPINIONS are predictable, stale, biased and as usual…wrong.

Apr 12, 2009 - 9:30 am 26. RabelRabel:

Len said, “I thought the article by Lind on cultural Marxism was very good and was about to share it till I almost threw up at the condescending remark: “The members of the Frankfurt School are Marxist, they are also, to a man, Jewish.”

So was Karl Marx but so is Milton Friedman! What does that have to do with anything?”

Lind points out that they were Jewish as an explanation for their movement from Nazi Germany to the US in the early Thirties. Nothing at all condescending or nauseating in the remark and it is entirely pertinent to his historical narrative.

Apr 12, 2009 - 10:12 am 27. james:

Back when this whole “you’re a racist” thing started, someone I knew called me a “racist mo fo” because I told him I thought the Great Society was a crock. I bashed his face in and never heard another peep from him.
There are only two things cowardly tyrants like Frank understand: money and force. They are terrified of both.
Get off your heels, my friends.

Apr 12, 2009 - 10:49 am 28. Thomas:

#26 RabelRabel
Unless you substitute **** with Buddhists your post will be deleted.
Lind therefore considered as Ant-Buddhist, neo-Nazi, ignorant scumbag, a loser.

Apr 12, 2009 - 11:04 am 29. tanstaafl:

I don’t know why the people of Taxachusetts keep electing Barney.

Must be something in the water.

I think he smeared Justice Scalia because Scalia doesn’t find a right to gay marriage in the Constitution. (imagine that, the founding fathers didn’t address marriage, gay or otherwise)

I don’t know what the big deal is for Barney, he could get married in Taxachusetts, assuming someone would have him

His real disgrace as a Congressman (well, one of them) has been his persistent (& ridiculous) defense of the soundness of Fannie & Freddie, including, but not limited to, the years one of his boyfriends was a honcho in Fannie Mae.

Apr 12, 2009 - 11:17 am 30. TurfMonster:

Barney Frank, Al Franken, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barack Obama, the Democratic party ad nauseum is the home of the anti-liberal (in the classic sense of the word) leftists. We should point out just how they are opposed to all that is decent and good in this world every chance we get.

Apr 12, 2009 - 11:42 am 31. tanstaafl:

The Koran says you throw homosexuals off a cliff or cause a big building to fall on them* !

David S, The Leftoid Hall Monitor at PJM, should certainly start railing against Islam !

Homophobe…what an utterly dumb word that is, fear of man.

If someone is paying “Peace Dave” to copy & paste Leftoid Screed, you’re not getting your money’s worth !

*Too bad Yasir Arafat didn’t get the treatment, and other “exploiters” of young boys in the Muslim world.

Apr 12, 2009 - 11:50 am 32. Sebastian Shaw:

Barney Frank is so corrupt he cannot see his own corruption; therefore, he refuses to take responsibility for his actions into the mortgage meltdown. He needs to lose his job in the Senate, but I doubt the people will oust him.

I can’t stand to listen to him. He refuses to listen unless a sycophant(s) is there for him such as the MSM.

Apr 12, 2009 - 12:34 pm 33. KansasCityShakedown:

It’s ironic, when the Islamists reach our shores,
Barney and his like will be the first who will be missing their heads! It really never matered that the Repubs were the majority since 94 until 07, they never had 60 votes in the Senate, therefore children you liberals never allowed votes and blocked any and all regulation attempting to fix Fran and Fred….thank you Dodd, Frank, Markey, Schumer, Clinton, Waxman, Feingold, Rahm, Boxer, Feingold, Pelosi, Reid. Frank will never be voted out, he represents an area that is saturated with ultra jewish over educated stuck up liberals, who hate America hate their heritage and snicker at anything and anyone between the northeast and CA.

Apr 12, 2009 - 12:39 pm 34. aloysiusmiller:

No woowwies about Bouney’s oue-election. His whole distuict is just like him.

Apr 12, 2009 - 1:27 pm 35. JDubya:

This just shows how stupid most of Massachussets citizens are. This clown has been in office since 1972. Another defunct lawyer from Harvard (anyone beginning to see a pattern here?). These east coast Ivy leaguers are right at the front of the line of guilt and it is perhaps high time that these people pay for their wrongdoings.

Apr 12, 2009 - 1:49 pm 36. tanstaafl:

I think Barney Frank (like so many others) clings to the mantra of Political Correctness/identity politics out of desperation and because he’s only slightly smarter than a box of rocks.

Other reasons for the widespread addiction to Political Correctness (such as Cultural Marxism, in the linked essay) are more pernicious than little Barney.

That the Left postures as though it is on the side of social justice, but it is on the side of the greatest and most pernicious violators of social justice. And its hands are drenched in human blood in terms of the mass murdering ideologies and regimes it has supported and aided and abetted.

~Jamie Glazov, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror

Apr 12, 2009 - 1:57 pm 37. Horace Wells:

I guess this is the way gay haters can make themselves feel good about themselves by labeling Frank a hater so they can feign outrage and moral superiority. Once again Mr. Chapin serves up some rancid red meat for the dogs.

Apr 12, 2009 - 2:07 pm 38. Horace Wells:

james
maybe you aren’t a racist, but you certainly are a brutal stupid bully!

Apr 12, 2009 - 2:09 pm 39. Obamacide:

Heterphobe Barney Frank should shut big mouth.This guy is one of the most corrupt cons in the history of corruption.

Apr 12, 2009 - 2:45 pm 40. Cybergeezer:

David S only sees the world through his colored glasses of the day; Talks like a fertilizer salesman with a mouth full of samples.

Apr 12, 2009 - 2:54 pm 41. Garey Trudoe:

Bigots and haters routinely label and accuse their targets of being bigots. Mr. Chapin’s piece indirectly demonstrates this!

Apr 12, 2009 - 3:01 pm 42. just passing through:

21. John B: said

@ #4 Debra,

“…I just find it hard to believe the good people from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts are that deaf, dumb, and blind…”

Remember that Frank is a House member, not a Senator. He would not be on the statewide ballot in Massachusetts, just his district. I believe that is centered on Cambridge, Ma, – sometimes called the People’s Republic of Cambridge – though I’d expect there would be other towns in the mix. Point being that his seat is probably safe. He’s not going to be voted out by people more concerned about toeing the PC line than effective and honest governance.

But…that is not all of Massachusetts and outside that PC enclave he might be judged on his merits rather than his sexuality and fare differently.

And to preemptively defuse the trolls, that is NOT to say that other districts in Massachusetts are homophobic (nor is Justice Scalia despite Frank’s and David S’s tortured logic). It is to say that Fran’s sexuality would not be the defining positive factor, as it is in the minds of many Cambridge voters.

Apr 12, 2009 - 3:41 pm 43. nadadhimmi:

Franks, Dodd et al will be re-elected because some electorates are so addicted to welfare and pork they will vote for anyone that promises and delivers free money. Abortion, disease, etc don’t matter to these brutal monsters of the electorate. They are very willing to murder and observe murder in the most vile ways if it means continuance of their free money. They would gladly, and in fact do, countenance slaughter of the innocent in return for their blood money. Yes, I’m saying liberals and welfare recipients are the lowest form of brutality known to man. I promise, next time I won’t sugar coat it like that.

Apr 12, 2009 - 4:04 pm 44. Dave:

Those that attack Scalia for not signing onto the lefts agenda to replace the constitution with any contorted logic that gets them what they want are themselves the bigots and fools and are leading this nation into decline.

Apr 12, 2009 - 4:20 pm 45. Horace Wells:

How exactly does calling someone a homophobe, no matter how inaccurate, is either menacing or silencing. Is Mr. Frank threatening to kill Scalia if Scalia speaks out? Meanwhile, trash on the right routinely call the people they disagree with communists and traitors and the same ilk has the gall to get outraged?

Apr 12, 2009 - 4:40 pm 46. tommyd:

Come on people, do you really think more than 1/3rd of the population is aware enough about what really is going on to even begin to make a difference?
The majority are too busy watching American Idol or Lost to even vaguely understand what has already happened to them.

a decade or two from now the useful idiots of today will be reduced to scratching their heads and wondering how it all happened.

Apr 12, 2009 - 4:42 pm 47. Horace Wells:

tommyd,
people who care and really know what is happening usually don’t focus on trivia like this.

Apr 12, 2009 - 4:59 pm 48. steveg:

I am not sure, but I believe Barney plans to run in 2010 for the Senate seat opening up by Kennedy’s retirement. Who would have predicted a couple of years ago that the likes of Al Franken and Barney Franks would be U.S. Senators?

There are plenty of politicians I cannot stomach watching and most of them reside in Massachusetts.

Apr 12, 2009 - 5:31 pm 49. Stephen:

David S: Have you read Scalia’s opinions? How on earth do you conclude from them that he is a homophobe? Don’t take it from me, check Althouse who has the cred’s to comment. She’s far from alone. Shorn of reason, your position is basically a tautology: he’s a homophobe because he’s a homophobe. I’ve noticed that as time passes, you are getting bolder and bolder in your accusations. Tsk, tsk . . . an uglier and uglier visage peeks from behind that mask of “Peace”.

Apr 12, 2009 - 5:32 pm 50. coraku:

Honest Question. Like 90% of people I suspect, I find the prospect of sex with a member of my own group (in my case men) to be not only undesirable but positively repugnant, and like Queen Victoria about the concept of female homosexuality, as to me I instinctively regard such a practice as to men as impossible (perhaps as to me only) even after being informed many times otherwise. Sex between women, of course, does not bother me at all, either visually or conceptually.

Further I believe most people, on both sides of the divide, find the prospect of sex with the group they are not attracted to as repugnant, unless that natural repugnance has been worn down by whatever exposure is required to develop an “acquired taste” — sort of like smoking. I understand that this repugnance is natural and serves some very specific biological and therapeutic purposes.

That being said, I have many homosexual friends that I would say none of this to, and as asexual friends, I have never found any of them to be repugnant at all, as long as none of them expect or seek sexual favors from me. Also, I just did my taxes and found it unfortunate that gays committed to long term relationships cannot claim the benefits of filing jointly, or of claiming their mate as a dependent. I would happily help celebrate the ceremonial joining of two gays to such a life-long commitment, and I do believe it is protected right, entitled to the same rights as marriage, in the contract clause of the US Constitution, where the Government must respect and enforce all contracts honestly entered into. But I would not call such a civil union marriage, which traditionally relates to the celebration of two people seeking to build a family by making babies, and thereby preserving the race, something homosexuality is really not equipped to do.

So does that make me a homophobe? I really want to know from any Gays most sensitive to the issue. I truly don’t know, as how you percieve my true views, but I truly want to know. The natural repugnance most feel to homosexual practices between their own kind is what I fear many people see as homophobia, though it may not be that at all, only fear of self.

I of course would deny it to anyone that I am a homophobe, in part because my brother was gay, though he never told me he was, and I loved him and still love more than you can know, even though he is no longer with us. God Bless you, Bro! I know you would never see any phobia in me.

Apr 12, 2009 - 5:35 pm 51. Khiri:

Hey, hey, please understand that Massachusetts is a one-party state. The votes of we conservatives and libertarians simply do not count. Some of us absolutely loathe Frank and pols like him.

It’s bad enough living with these arrogant, condescending self-righteous, hypocritical elitists. Please don’t paint all Mass residents with the same brush.

Apr 12, 2009 - 5:38 pm 52. Angry White Dude:

The Tea Party movement is nothing if conservatives do not organize and rally against the liberal tide that has grown like a cancer throughout our country. If conservatives do not lead the Republican party and retake the House in 2010, all is for naught and I truly fear for the future of my country.

Get out and get loud conservatives! We will be labeled as racists, haters, knuckle dragging reactionaries, etc. but SO WHAT? We are called those stupid names anyway. The conservative sleeping giant is awake! And hungry!

Angry White Dude

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:31 pm 53. Politicians behaving like children on a sugar rush:

Horace – I disagree, when this corrupt hack starts this rants you know damn well it is just a distraction from his part in the sub prime mortgage crisis. He can try to change the subject but we’re on to him.

Gynephobic Barney Franks should be impeached and in a prison cell with Bernie Madoff!

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:36 pm 54. Sassy:

“Despite stiff competition, Representative Barney Frank may be the most incompetent and corrupt member of Congress.”

LOL! That is the best and truest statement ever made.

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:39 pm 55. Oscar the Grump:

KansasCityShakedown
I’d like you to explain your ultra jewish crack.

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:40 pm 56. Blue Collar Todd:

Is a dangerous thing for American Democracy that Frank is playing such in integral role in the legislation coming out of Congress. The ascension of gay rights cannot but have serious consequences for those of us holding to traditional values.

Apr 12, 2009 - 6:53 pm 57. Thomas:

#45 Horace Wells,
You are amazing: you name those who call the self avowed Marxists (Leninist) Communist – trash. Don’t they protest under the red flags and hammer and sickle? What is A.N.S.W.E.R? Aren’t you proud to be part of the World’s Proletariat Struggle against the Imperialist America?
It’s funny: Communists found “trashy” and “offensive” to be called Communist.
What gives, Comrade?
My gulag prisoner # was EA2140 so I am professional Commie Eater par excellence.

Apr 12, 2009 - 7:04 pm 58. jw:

(1) Judge Scalia’s dissent in Lawrence v. Texas (2003) was based on the view that the anti-sodomy statute in Texas was not unconstitutional, as the majority held, because there is nothing in the Constitution about homosexuality (or any other sexual behavior). The issue was up to the legislature in Texas, not the courts.
Representative Barney Frank is a Constitution-phobe.
(2) Representative Barney Frank is dishonorable. He lived with another man who ran a male-prostitute ring from the home they shared. He also had an affair with a high-up in either Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, to which he gave special favors. He should have been thrown out of Congress.
(3) On Lind: Karl Marx was not a Jew. He was born a Jew, but he and his family converted to Lutheranism when he was five. He was anti-semitic, and wrote an antisemitic essay, “On the Jewish Question.” He said that the God of the Jews was money, and that the love of money was what was so terrible in Europe. He loved money himself, of course; and it was his father who converted to Christianity in order to earn money as a lawyer. Jews who remained Jews did so at their peril.

Apr 12, 2009 - 7:20 pm 59. steveg:

I believe that gay/lesbians are the most powerful and protected special interest group in America with African Americans being a close second. I recall the former NBA star who stated on a radio program that he hated gays. The gay community were offended by this remark and went after him hard, but being that he was retired and financially secure he would not apologize. This may be the only instance I can remember when they were not successful in taking someone down for a perceived offensive remark.

Apr 12, 2009 - 7:25 pm 60. David S:

@49. Stephen:

Have you read Scalia’s opinions? How on earth do you conclude from them that he is a homophobe?

The part where he dissents on the basis of “the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct” was pretty clear to me. He’s simply a bigot. He a homophobe because he supports discrimination – because his legal opinions are based on his preconceptions, rather than the law. Reminds me of his rather disturbing arguments in Bush v. Gore. Scalia as a jurist has been a disaster.

Perhaps I missed an opinion where Scalia affirmed the rights of homosexuals? I’d appreciate a rebuttal that includes evidence that Scalia is not a homophobe, rather than just bad-mouthing me.

Peace.

DS

Apr 12, 2009 - 7:36 pm 61. David S:

By the way, Scalia’s advocacy and interest in the anti-gay movement is well documented.

If not for the unique protections that SCOTUS provides itself, such conduct would clearly violate the judicial code.

Scalia has gone out of his way to make it clear that he is on board with the homophobe agenda.

Peace.

DS

Apr 12, 2009 - 7:42 pm 62. scootmandubious:

Barney Frank was exactly right in calling Antonin Scalia a homophobe. He defended why he said it, which this site conveniently ignores.

If you were being honest, you would note that Frank refused to name Clarence Thomas a homophobe, because he said Thomas’ positions were couched in legal rhetoric, not in an announcing a basic distaste for gays in general. Scalia made very clear in his decisions that consexual gay sex should not be allowed. Thomas never went that far. Bascially saying that a persons essential sexual orientation should be repressed means you are anti that group. Scalia is most definitely anti-gay, well beyond the legal sense. It is personal for him.

As for the African-Americans in California who allowed Proposition 8 to pass, I feel the majority of those who cast their vote were probably homophobic. there is a lot of that in the African American community. It is often deeply rooted in the culture of many Carribean nations, for example. However, many people voted for Proposition 8 because of a fraudulent television campaign that totally misconstrued what the initiative was about.
If somebody voted for it, totally due to misinformation, than maybe their vote was not homophobic.

Can the GOP do anything but be nasty and divisive? For once, can you folks recognize that the public has had enough of the hatred and condescension that oozes from your pores?

Can you try being inclusive about anything?

Right now you all just sound, hateful, angry and bitter. Do you think this attracts any Independents at all?

Think again. Moderates have left your party in droves. If you want to lose all future elections, keep this up.

Apr 12, 2009 - 8:05 pm 63. Bilgeman:

#13 David S.:
“Scalia is a homophobe. How is it cowardly to call out a Supreme Court justice for doing harm to our Republic?”

Okay, so Scalia is a homophobe, although how that harms our Republic escapes me.

But if Scalia is a homophobe, then Barney Frank is fat old bitch.

Apr 12, 2009 - 8:30 pm 64. tanstaafl:

…and I do believe it (civil union) is protected right, entitled to the same rights as marriage, in the contract clause of the US Constitution, where the Government must respect and enforce all contracts honestly entered into.

The “contracts clause” Article I, section 10 is about preventing individual states from entering into certain treaties & alliances, in short, from usurping powers reserved to the federal government. There is also a list of things states cannot do without consent of Congress.

Article VI mentions treaties entered into the US gov’t as the supreme law of the land.

Nothing about contracts between civilians, types of unions between human beings or the marriage contract in the document devised to lay out the structure and operation of government, imagine that.

Apr 12, 2009 - 8:31 pm 65. tanstaafl:

…please understand that Massachusetts is a one-party state. The votes of we conservatives and libertarians simply do not count.

Got it.

Kinda like Nancy & Harry’s Congress these days.

Apr 12, 2009 - 8:41 pm 66. tanstaafl:

According to the above, Barney was being interviewed on a gay website when he made his asinine and unprofessional claim about a Supreme Court Justice.

In making that remark, The Banking Queen demeaned his position as a US Congressman and was, quite possibly, trolling.

Apr 12, 2009 - 9:11 pm 67. one of my own:

63. Bilgeman: . . . “Okay so Scalia is a homophobe, although how that harms our Republic escapes me.”

The same way gay marriage threatens our Republic. Duh.

Apr 12, 2009 - 10:21 pm 68. Bully for Barney:

Well, well! Who, pray, *is* this mornin’s Hero of Hate Detection®, “despite stiff competetion,” perhaps the most pajamatoid of all the gurus and guruettes of darkest Pajamastán?

Could Neocomrade “B[ernard] Chapin” possibly be their old ideobuddy Don Juan Federalista, the Scourge of Puerto Rico™ [1], freshly tarted up in a new factional drag calculated to be more likely to find a niche for itself in the free markets of Rio Limbaugh and Wingnut City now that the Big Party base and vile have mostly switched, pro-tem or permanently, from bein’ anti-Globoterror to bein’ pro-Tea? Who but D. F. would insist on stickin’ “to clueless politicians what Mexico is to responsible government” into a stand-up comedy _shtyk_ about Representative Frank of Massachusetts? (”That’s funny, Congressman: you certainly don’t *look* much like Pancho Villa….”)

Well, but words are only words, after all. It little matters how the specimen was labeled before it was labelled “B. Chapin.” The question for serious analysts of Kiddie Konservatism and the Spirit of Pajamastán must be what label such a specimen ideally deserves.

In making her over-all determination and classification, the student will not ignore incidental flare-ups of wetback-bashin’, but she will not overrate this or any one variety of degenerative symptom in isolation.

The BC specimen’s resemblance to the late (?) Neocomrade D. Feder is of diagnostic use only on the negative side: BC cannot be the _Wall Street Jingo_ sort of neocomradely specimen, thinkin’ that its holy Homeland™ requires open borders for the convenience of Silicon Valley whizkids (specialisin’ in Bangalore’s best and brightest) and economic OnePercenters on the island of Manhattan (who demand nannies and maids and gardeners from Pancho Villa country proper, after the fashion of Neocomrade Governor M. Romney of MA _et al._). Though the evidence is dispositive on this point, disposition was scarcely necessary: _Jingo_-style wingnuttiness is far too up-market for Pajamastán. The Bnê Murdoch may turn up around here occasionally as isolated flukes and flakes–my regards to Princess Neoterica!–but obviously they do not set the tone. Non-xenophobes around here ought to be referred to Dr. Nourini, the celebrated inventor (or discoverer) of Black Swan Therapy.

The BC specimen thinks it worthwhile to make some show of boostin’ as well as knockin’, and thus it rather remarkably undertakes to defend “Their Ántonino,” Neocomrade Justice Scalia (”one of the nation’s most brilliant judicial minds” in Party Chinese), from the aspersions of the abominable Barney. These aspersions apparently consist in one single word (‘slur’ in Party Chinese), namely ‘homophobe’. Not very gracious to phrase one’s criticism like that, so subtract five points from Mr. Frank’s score, please! However, any competent student outside the asylum looking in must notice first that the substance of ‘homophobe’ is accurate enough; that the Congressman cultivates a rough-diamond _persona_, so to call it, even at the risk of infringing Wingnut City’s self-bestowed monopoly on rudeness about opponents [2]; and finally that when one sifts the matter thoroughly, it turns out that the BC specimen isn’t really boostin’ no matter what it may pretend, for defence of heterosexual chauvinism is strategically a form of knockin’.

Once it stops pretendin’, the BC specimen improves from a literary point of view: “flippant and illogical term” and “long history of cowardice and mindless aggression” are not bad knockin’ at all. The self-referentiality of its abuse is of course a plus by (pre-wombschoolin’) English Department criteria. The academically fashionable novelist who digresses all over the lot has, or used to have, a positive *duty* to thunder against folks who cannot keep their eyes on the ball. ’Tis an old joke, but there is some mileage in it still.

The subsequent lapse into Party Chinese boilerplate about “[p]ractitioners of PC” is equally self-referrin’, obviously, though not so much fun for the customer. At this point the student ought, I think, to switch back to the BC specimen’s matter from its form. Materially considered, this passage may contain a clue as to what the neocomradely mindset as such basically craves, framed as objection to the exact same _modus operandi_ when “a PCnik like Frank” ventures to engage in it. *Extremely* vigilant about protectin’ their self-bestowed monopolies are wingnuts and wingnutettes!

One would, however, have to tone down the BC specimen’s language several decibels to arrive at anything like a balanced and fair assessement. Neocomrades of the Party of Grant and the AEIdeology undoubtedly crave a Pajama World wherein no discouragin’ words are heard and the sky is never cloudy even for ten seconds, yet it would be a marked exaggeration to accuse them of a “hope to humiliate and paralyze critics.” A little figurative duct tape ought to suffice to shut their critics up, surely, with no real need for anybody to feel humiliated or paralysed! Furthermore, the neocomrades have not yet, I daresay, distanced themselves so far from Western Sieve™ as to forego all charitable dreams of one day actually convertin’ many decent political adults to Kiddie Konservatism. If the various factions and factionettes of KK were once to acquire a reputation for inflictin’ humiliation and paralysis, would not that project be gravely hindered? [3] (Yes, of course it would!)

Meanwhile, back in the Comp. Lit. Dept., notice how the BC specimen has somehow allowed itself to be distracted from denigration of Congressman Frank in particular into vague and shopworn generalities. When it eventually gets itself back on track by way of Mr. Speakeress Pelosi and Neocomrade Dr. R. Limbaugh and Neocomrade P. Shanklin, the BC specimen jests that “In three mere minutes, Rep. Frank implied that his rival was mentally ill, hailed from a dysfunctional geographic area, and was stupid, an achievement that could place him in the Aberrant Hall of Fame.” At this point the BC specimen “acquiesces to” a number ot literary and logical and grammatical infelicities, which one does not, naturally, take to be of any great importance separately, but which may be of some diagnostic significance by virtue of sheer quantity. The specimen is bein’ unilaterally and preëmptively inattentive, as it were, to what its patient or victim actually said. [4]

Its peroration is great fun for anybody who thinks, as I do, that wingnutettes and wingnuts are cuter when they get mad and start disappearin’ out of sight around the bend:

“In the future, we must respond vigorously to defamation. We must refute radicals and shower them with the same kind of disrespect they direct at us. Continuing to treat those who dishonor you with dignity is a habit that leads to extinction.”

Ah, so it is now to be “No more Mr. Nice Guy!” time at the Rio Limbaugh Corral, is it?

Perhaps I am no fit judge, though. It appears that I have somehow manage to sleep through all the ‘dignity’ hitherto extended by the sweet puppies of the Right to us jackasses of America’s party without ever clearly and distinctly noticing it. [5]

_Mais que-sçay-je?_ Happy days.

___
[1] http://www.allamericanspeakers.com/speakers/Don-Feder/3675

[2] The neocomradely connoisseurship of Danish cartoons and cartoonists comes to mind at once.

[3] Neocomrade K. Rove did, more or less, imply a “hope to humiliate and paralyze” in that key passage, infinitely requotable,

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html

of his about the Neocomradely Mind:

“‘That’s not the way the world really works anymore … WE are an empire now, and when WE act, WE create OUR own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — WE will act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. WE are history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what WE do.’

The desire to humiliate Mr. Suskind was clear enough. On the paralysis front, though, His Imperial Highness appears to have taken for granted that it had somehow happened already and that therefore there was no need for the Big Management Party to engage in a new campaign of stingin’ an’ bitin’. But God knows best what militant extremist Republicans are up to, exactly.

[4] There is a distinct _Parteikaiserlich_ whiff here, in the sense that “B. Chapin,” like Grandduke Karl of Rove, takes for granted that its prey has been paralysed and humiliated already. Mr. Frank is _ex officio_ or _ex definitione_ an object of contempt, so who cares to waste time attendin’ closely to the contemptible noises he emits?

That plan is all very well and good, provided the BC specimen aims only at fortifyin’ the Pajama Folk in their existin’ zealotry. One is a loss to conjecture, however, what use it can be for the purpose of recruitin’ anybody fresh to the Despisers of Barney Club.

[5] Admittedly, the _dignitas humana_ _shtyk_ is rather thrown away on me in general. Dr. Ratzinger and the VC gentry have been showering me (and everybody else) with ‘dignity’ for almost fifty years now, and I have yet to detect anything in that much ballyhooed neoproduct of theirs other than an outrageous attempt to rewrite the intellectual history of Greater Europe so as to make the Roman Church the _fons et origo_ of liberalism. (_Cuius contrarium est verum_, don’t you know?)

If that be what the BC specimen means by ‘dignity’, why, everybody will be better off without any! However, considering that the specimen is unmistakably illiberal and antidemocratic, odds are high that whatever tripe and baloney it was thinkin’ of had nothin’ to do with Papism, old or new.

Judging strictly from the evidence at hand, a guesser might well guess that the BC specimen supposes that to address anybody–anybody outside its own factional monkey house–without a deliberate intention to give offense involves some recognition of ‘dignity’ in the person or persons addressed. Less superficial inquirers will save the appearances in this case by appealing to one’s own strategy and operations and tactics rather than to the ‘dignity’ of others.

It is perhaps needless to say that the present keyboard is all for Wingnut City and Hooverville and Rio Limbaugh and darkest Pajamastán adoptin’ a policy of omnidirectional bad manners _in hoc discrimine rerum_: few steps would go farther to help keep them insignificant on Capitol Hill as well as locked out of the Unitary-Executive Branch altogether.

“Go to it, guys!”

Apr 13, 2009 - 3:46 am 69. Pastor of Muppets:

Oh, I see, so it’s totally acceptable to call everyone you disagree with a “Marxist/Socialist/Totalitatian/Fascist”, but calling someone a homophobe is off-limits.

What a bunch of hypocritical morons.

If you want to reserve the right to call lefties “Socialists” and “Fascists”, then you need to stop whining like babies when we call you racist, homophobic, ignorant, slack-jawed, illiterate, bible-thumping, science-rejecting wingnuts.

Apr 13, 2009 - 7:18 am 70. Saltherring:

Horace Wells: Got change for a three?

Apr 13, 2009 - 7:21 am 71. Bilgeman:

#69 PoM:
“Oh, I see, so it’s totally acceptable to call everyone you disagree with a “Marxist/Socialist/Totalitatian/Fascist”, but calling someone a homophobe is off-limits.”

I called him a fat old bitch, because he is fat, he is old, and he’s a bitch.

Got a problem with facts?

Apr 13, 2009 - 7:37 am 72. OEF Vet:

Ah, Masterbater of Puppets….more ramblings that belong on Huffington? Good to see your vociferous leftist mongering has not lost any of its paranoid flavor. Lefties are by definition (political)strongly related to Marxists and fascists…now, they may be homophiles, traitors, cowardly-pacifists as well as embittered/cynical secular-progressives that believe in homosexual marriage and a government funded abortion for every womb..but that doesn’t mean they are not nice people. Nice troll-like people whose opinions are not desired on sites like this, so please go re-read your “little Red Book” and fantasize about Bowie Fwank to your heart’s content somewhere else.

Apr 13, 2009 - 8:57 am 73. YourShrink:

BULLY FOR BARNEY:

There are some viable medication (the most recent pharmacological regimens have much less extra-pyramidal complications too) options for your disjointed thought processes, tangential logic and rambling cognitive style. Call 1-800-HelpNow.

Apr 13, 2009 - 9:04 am 74. tanstaafl:

In the spirit of “The PC thing” and phasing out all that “coarse terminology of the past”…

Obama’s new terminology has started a trend

Apr 13, 2009 - 9:07 am 75. Thomas:

As a person who spent years in Marxist/Leninist gulag as prisoner #EA2140 I cannot understand why some – apearently hardcore Commie – posters feel insulted when thy are being named as “Socialists”. Aren’t they proud of their “Progressive” “Marxist” creeds? My jailers were just like #69 or Comrade Horace W. but they were proud of the Red Star on their hat.
So did Alinsky, and Axe**d and couple more around the Messiah.

Care someone elucidate us, “racist, homophobic, ignorant, slack-jawed, illiterate, bible-thumping, science-rejecting wingnuts why is so infuriating when you are called what you are and what you purvey and display everywhere…being Socialist isn’t a badge of honor?
You are the Übermensch of the New World, aren’t you proud of it?

Apr 13, 2009 - 9:29 am 76. James Withers:

Proud lefty here. Think Justice Scalia is a brilliant man, but have no problem saying when it comes to gays and lesbians his comments are loopy.

Sincerely,

James

Apr 13, 2009 - 9:47 am 77. JOHN:

Thanks for the lunch time entertainment every body.
P.S I agree with Bilgeman, Barney Franks is a “fat old bitch”. Thay’s a fact.

#33. KansasCityShakedown says “It’s ironic, when the Islamists reach our shores,
Barney and his like will be the first who will be missing their heads”!

They’ll keep their heads. That’s how the rope stays on.

Apr 13, 2009 - 9:55 am 78. tanstaafl:

Decimating any and all standards in all areas of human activity has been a hallmark of The Left/Postmodernists/Cultural Marxists for a long time.

A few years ago (at the height of the priests diddling little boys brouhaha) I was called “homophobic” for saying I would not want little kids in my care to be around those priests.

You can read Scalia’s entire (not so “loopy”) dissent here and report back.

Justice Scalia, with whom The Chief Justice and Justice Thomas join, dissenting

Apr 13, 2009 - 10:17 am 79. KanasCityShakeDown:

To OscartheGrump #55. Very simple, Frank is a nice Jewish boy from New Jersey who settled into Newton. Newton and Brookline are the corner stone(s) of Frank’s voting block and district. These communities have been voting him in and bankrolling him for years. It is a very elusive, rich area that also happens to be predominantly Jewish, ultra liberal, pro abortion, anti military, anti war, ivy league elitist snobs. Although these types cry for diversity, no black or Hispanics live in their neighborhoods….they import them as Metco students then bus them back home to Mattapan and Dorchester once the school day is through. Typical liberal hypocrites. Frank will never be voted out, never. What’s your problem, you are offended that I pointed out the ethnicity and leaning of Frank and the area he represents. Boohoo.

Apr 13, 2009 - 11:20 am 80. Aleena:

Scalia is telling the truth unless someone can explain how sodomy and other homosexual pratices are healthy; the lifestyle is dysfunctional. This is never discussed just casually overlooked. Scalia is not a homophobe. He’s simply telling it like it is, but the truth is something the left can’t handle. The truth in their world is elastic.

Apr 13, 2009 - 11:28 am 81. Sebastian Shaw:

Thomas (#75), Socialists are like vampires when exposed to sunlight, garlic, & a holy object: They retreat & attack. They cannot stand the truth. It’s partially why liberals have changed into “progressives.” The name is different, but it means the same thing.

Even Obama shuns the idea he’s a Socialist. He knows the truth. And so do we.

I believe the Communists have infiltrated the Democratic Party as early as the 1960’s & have grown more & more liberal over time. They are indeed Socialists/Communists/Fascists…

Apr 13, 2009 - 1:47 pm 82. Oscar the Grump:

KansasCityShakeDown
You sound just like a beer sucking tobacco chewing asshole you are. Did you make it through high school? Jealous of anyone with an education and makes more than minimum wage? You must be a pig breeder by profession. You wouldn’t be so quick with your little comments if I were around. Yah, you offend me!

Apr 13, 2009 - 2:06 pm 83. Someone75:

Sebastian (#81)

Equating socialism with fascism shows how little you understand these big ideas that you so carelessly toss around.

You assert that you have “truth” on your side and that socialists are somehow delusional. It’s a different perspective. If you believe that your opinion is the only opinion that is true, then you’re just as delusional.

Sweeping generalizations are the logical crutch of a weak mind.

Apr 13, 2009 - 2:39 pm 84. Cybergeezer:

I love it when these BUTT WIPE LIBERALScall HATE SPEECH; Common sense escapes them like flies off a pile of crap. No possibility of thinking for themselves.

Apr 13, 2009 - 3:50 pm 85. Sebastian Shaw:

Someone &5, if Fascism is such a panacea then why did it fall with the Nazi’s defeat in WWII? I am not going to split hairs with you between the minute differences of Fascism, Communism, & Socialism. They are all related with BIG GOVERNMENT.

Apr 13, 2009 - 4:10 pm 86. johnjack:

BARNEY FRANK !!! THE TRUE CLASS IDIOT !!! CHRIS DUDD !!! HIS PARTNER IN CRIME!!!!!!

Apr 13, 2009 - 4:58 pm 87. Donna V.:

Someone75: conservatives are about small government, and liberty (although our idea of freedom is a bit different from the Left’s. As P.J. O’Rourke said the leftist idea of freedom is the freedom to say naughty words in public and stick strange objects in their orifices. A toddler’s – and probably Barney Frank’s – notion of freedom). We also like individualism, as opposed to multi-cultie group think.

Please tell me how fascism exalted small government, liberty and individualism. As I recall, the Nazis also practiced tribal politics – and they knew exactly what to do with the tribes they didn’t like.

I agree with Mark Levin that the most accurate description might be statists vs. conservatives. The Nazis were statists and were the Communists – and today’s Left.

Apr 13, 2009 - 5:31 pm 88. Thomas:

@#83 Someone 75
and the rest of the Red Brigade:
As an Eastern European at birth I have the misfortune to had lived in every form of your beloved Socialism: from the bloodiest Stalinist all the way to the Italians promoted “Socialism with Human face” and the Chinese “Let every flower blossom” type and an array of other form of fine-tuning attempt in between …

The end result of 70 years of capricious craze was 100 million death, economical, cultural devastation and a unforgiving vituperative hatred against all type of Bolsheviks – regardless how they “officially” call themselves today As long survivors of the Red Terror still alive, no effort shall silence us and we will tell the truth like A. Solzhenitsyn did.

Socialism, and all what it implies, the terror, the gulag, (my prison #was EA2140) dictatorial rule of small group of people from Frank’s social class can only be resold in America where people still 50 years behind from their final destination.

Get ready for the first sign of the Marxist terror which is inevitable future development: laws will be implemented to stifle opposing opinions and start to familiarize with the term: “enemy of the people, class enemy, etc.”

Take a closer look at the (Western)EU legal system where there is no more freedom of speech.

Apr 13, 2009 - 6:21 pm 89. Leatherneck:

When one kneels and bobs, one gets a screwed up mind.

No pun intended. Well, OK, pun was intended!

Apr 13, 2009 - 7:10 pm 90. Stephen:

David S: You’re simply wrong about the basis of Scalia’s opinion in Lawrence v Texas. jw in #58 has it basically right in his point 1). Read the opinion again. Read commentary about the opinion. I’ve even listened to Scalia discuss this point. If you doubt the interpretation. I challenge you to go on Ann Althouse’s web site, make your allegations about the Lawrence v Texas opinion and convince her of your point. She knows the opinion and the jurisprudence better than me and clearly far better than you. Do it. Make your allegations there: if you want to be made a fool.

Bush v Gore? Good Lord! You’re grasping now. And you demand of me proof that Scalia is _not_ a homophobe?! Ok. I think I can play that game. You prove to all of us on this thread that you are _not_ a pedophile. Good grief. You demand a rebuttal? Based on what you’ve written in reaction to Chapin’s post, it’s hard for me to take you seriously.

Oh yeah, lest I forget.

Peace bro.

Apr 13, 2009 - 8:50 pm 91. KansasCityShakeDown:

Poor little Oscar the sock puppet.
Oh we got a real tough guy here. I’m none of the things you claim asswipe. No you’re not around but I can smell you from 1000 miles away, climb down from your Berkley protest tree house, take a bath and join the real world you
moron.

Apr 13, 2009 - 9:43 pm 92. Noesis Noeseos:

Believe what you will about homosexuality, but Franks is just another corrupt pol who has let power engorge his head. He is a socialist raptor, and whatever you may think about sodomy in the bedroom, he is reaming the economy most mercilessly in plain, public view.

Apr 13, 2009 - 9:44 pm 93. David S:

@90. Stephen:

Scalia’s understanding of Constitutional rights is flawed. Adults have the right to consensual sex, and the state has no authority to outlaw sodomy. Scalia believes that homosexual conduct is immoral – this is his private opinion, but unfortunately it has become part of his professional product as well. There is no place for such distortion in our justice system.

I’ll be happy to rebut your argument on pedophilia once you offer some evidence. I’ve offered evidence that Scalia is a homophobe – I think rather convincing evidence, if you take a look at the link in #61. Based on what Scalia has written and said about homosexuals, it is hard for me to take him seriously. His actions demonstrate that he is not only a homophobe, but also lacking an understanding of the rights that belong to the People. Scalia will be remembered as one of the worst jurists to serve on SCOTUS, and Bush v. Gore will be one of the central exhibits.

I think calling Barney Frank a cowardly hater is just pathetic. His remark was well-supported by the evidence, and perfectly appropriate. The GOP has stacked the supreme court with ideological advocates, rather than impartial justices, which has created a true constitutional crisis. We are in danger of losing many rights if the court is left so unbalanced.

Peace.

DS

Apr 14, 2009 - 5:42 am 94. james:

Thomas, all leftists deny being leftists. It’s not that they’re ashamed of what they are; it’s how they’re trained, because no one would vote for – or even listen to – them if they said what they actually believe. Orwell called it Newspeak over sixty years ago and it is still the way they operate. And who can blame them? It’s been successful. War is Peace. Slavery is Freedom. Hatred is Compassion.
As for me, gimme back my bullets.

Apr 14, 2009 - 6:24 am 95. WriterX:

Let’s hope that voters send Franks and Dodd into the real world after the next election. Let’s see how they fare when they have to get real jobs instead of the ones they have now where they treat everybody’s money like Monopoly money.

Apr 14, 2009 - 7:26 am 96. Will:

The way I see it,there are different types of liberals.Some are instigaters,others are followers,and some just don’t care how our country is brought down to a third world country. All are part of the problem.

Apr 14, 2009 - 11:58 am 97. Oscar the Grump:

KansasCityShakeDown
Asswipe huh? Hey dumbass, I’m from Omaha, you idiot. That piss and crap we dumped into the river wound up in your drinking water.

You are so f*cking out of it, you don’t even begin to realize what the hell you are saying. You’re still a pork eating b*stard no matter what you make yourself out to be. I grew up around your types, and did business with them and yes I can smell you 1000 miles from here.

I’d love it if every Jew would just jerk their money out of your shit hole Kansas City, on the wrong side of the river. Then you would appreciate the Jews around you. They got more talent and intelligence in one finger than you have in your whole body. I’d love to be around you when you use the word Jew next time. You are exactly what has given the Republican party a bad name. With your type and your attitude you keep driving my people away. You’re such an ass!
Go F… yourself!

Apr 14, 2009 - 3:03 pm 98. Thomas:

@91. KansasCityShakeDown:

Don’t you know that you are not permitted to criticize the Communist Buddhist tribe lest you will be banned?
One expects more humility from you when you see Buddhists working on the destruction of this country.

Apr 14, 2009 - 4:35 pm 99. Blackhorse Doc:

As one of the principle wreckers of the economy, Barnie Frank belongs in prison. Being a homosexual might be his whine to stay out of jail. But, be that as it may, the moron belongs behind bars. O’Rielly is dead right about this guy. Barnie and Bernie belong in the same cell.

Apr 14, 2009 - 9:58 pm 100. KansasCityShakeDown:

To Oscar the Gay Jewish Grump.

Yummy…I love pork and lobster and shrimp and oysters…you have a problem with people who eat those things, you racist hater.

Ok so you’re from Omaha, BFD, talk about a pisshole. Put down the NOW sign and listen you f**cking child. All you are and will ever be is a big mouth. Troll over to the Daily Kommunist and Puffing Post. Better yet, the Israeli army openly accepts gays. Why don’t you put your money where your big mouth is and fight for your mother country because after your Israeli brethren attempt to bomb the Iran nuke facility you’re going to become a human shield to millions of Iranian jacket wearing suicide bombers pouring in from Syria. Your savior Obama surely won’t save your country, he and Hillary could care less. Even still, in 40 years the Arab minority will become the majority and you’ll loose your country anyway.

And you would love it if every Jew would pull out their money in Kansas…if they had any money left. You see the talent you speak of is greed. They screwed their own in the tune of a 60 BIL Ponzi scheme and the take down of Wall Street thanks to your boy Barney. Stick you Johnson in your Oscar sock puppet and f**ck yourself.

Thomas : thanks for the support. I agree with you the Communist Buddhist tribe is tearing this country apart. Victimhood at every turn. Every major city is run by them, in the red, high unemployment, crap schools. Maybe that Russian Social Scientist is right, the US will spit up into 3 separate countries.

Apr 15, 2009 - 9:43 am 101. Oscar the Grump:

KansasCityShakeDown
Listen they’re censoring me (my last three attempts). I’m having too much fun to quit. I suppose what I told PJM to do might have upset the folks a bit. Hey look for me at other PJM blogs so that we can continue our love fest. In the mean time eat s…..

Apr 15, 2009 - 4:18 pm 102. Thomas:

@100. KansasCityShakeDown:

Closing argument:
They did the same in Eastern Europe and Russia since 1917 so now they moved to the US and they will crush this country too.
You have no idea how brutal and violent they can be in order to achieve their ideological goal. You will see it in due time.
Regards, ex gulag prisoner #EA2140

Apr 15, 2009 - 5:09 pm 103. Oscar the Grump:

Thomas
You’re still an a*hole, look for me on other PJM blogs. I hope they don’t censor this.

Apr 15, 2009 - 8:22 pm 104. Thomas:

@103. Oscar the Grump:

To look for you? Sane people try to stay far away from the CHEKA and the Buddhist Bolsheviks…luckily Easterners got rid of your ilk.
Read more Solzhenitsyn: “Two Hundred years together” – the history of genocide and mass murder by the “Buddhists”.
Regards, ex gulag prisoner #EA2140

Apr 15, 2009 - 9:34 pm 105. Stephen:

DAvid S:

Well, you’ve missed the point of my earlier note. You effectively asked that evidence be given to support the absence of homophobia when the definition you’ve given for “homophobe” so denatures the term as to render any opposition to what you determine to be support for gay rights as meriting what an epithet on the order of racist. Now homophobia is probably best characterized as an irrational fear, aversion to, and discrimination against homosexuals or homosexuality. The very opinions you cite as evidence, I have suggested prove the opposite of what you think and claim, and I’m far from alone in believing this. You want my evidence: you have the opinions. Extraordinary accusations such that which you’ve leveled at Scalia demand extraordinary evidence. You haven’t come close to giving it. Yours is a cheap, and unfortunately overused, rhetorical device used to dismiss the arguments and reasoning of person without ever addressing them. For that reason – and the evidence is on this thread – I can not, as I wrote before, take you, or your reasoning, seriously. And conversation by this or any other means is a fools errand.

Apr 18, 2009 - 7:23 am

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: