Comments on: Barney Frank Defends his Name-Calling

By: The_Livewire

The_Livewire — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 23:21:54 +0000

Thus speaketh the Hound.

So I can confidently say “Calling Houndentenor an idiot isn’t a slur, it’s a fact,*” with the same standard of factchecking that he applies.

You can’t back up what you say Hound, yelling it over and over doesn’t make it true.

*appologies to any idiots reading for the comparison.

By: Houndentenor

Houndentenor — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 23:10:29 +0000

Calling Scalia a homophobe isn’t a slur. It’s just a fact.

By: North Dallas Thirty

North Dallas Thirty — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:48:57 +0000

And once again, the gay-sex liberal boob uses every spin in the book to avoid the fact that he refuses to call homophobes people who signed DADT, signed DOMA, who promoted the fact that they signed DOMA, people who claim marriage is a "sacred bond" that should be denied gays, people who support the FMA, people who support state constitutional amendments, and people who discriminate against and fire gay employees.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:37:03 +0000

filtered.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:36:00 +0000

oooh now i’m a “gay-sex liberal”…how fun!

1) clinton wanted to get rid of the ban on gays altogether. this measure was not legislatively possible, so he compromised with DADT.
2) farrakhan is a homophobe. i never said he wasn’t.
3) obama supports full legal rights and recognition for gay unions…basically the only thing he opposes is calling it “marriage”, and frankly, i’m okay with that. i don’t agree with him there, but i’m also smart enough to know that any politician that says he supports gay “marriage” will not win a single southern state. i’m confident that gay rights will advance much further with obama as president than under bush or mccain.
4) i’m not a huge harold ford fan. he may well be a homophobe…or at least pretend to be one since he tried to get elected in tennessee.
5) i’m not sure what you’re talking about with john kerry or howard dean, and somehow i think you’re making shit up.

By: Roberto

Roberto — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 19:24:43 +0000

As long as Barney is slurring, why doesnÂ´t he slur Ahmadinejad, as a homophobe. I wonder how it would be received by the Iranians?

By: North Dallas Thirty

North Dallas Thirty — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:42:09 +0000

how can you read this and not sniff homophobia?

Because, boob, gay-sex liberals like yourself claim that supporting DOMA and DADT did not make Clinton a homophobe, nor does opposing gay marriage make Barack Obama a homophobe, nor does claiming that homosexuals are “filthy” make Louis Farrakhan a homophobe, nor does firing gays who complain about discrimination make Howard Dean a homophobe, nor does supporting state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage make John Kerry a homophobe, nor does supporting the FMA make Harold Ford a homophobe…….

By: heliotrope

heliotrope — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:48:48 +0000

Livewire,

I see you are stupid. As a moron, I look up to you. Well done!

By: The_Livewire

The_Livewire — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:09:05 +0000

bob, I don’t know what you’re sniffing, but you’re the one who takes a ‘term’ and decides its such insight. I’m just applying to you the same standard.

How dare Scalia rely on established case law in his dissent, rather than feelings.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:40:11 +0000

from scalia’s dissent:

One of the most revealing statements in today’s opinion is the Court’s grim warning that the criminalization of homosexual conduct is “an invitation to subject homosexual persons to discrimination both in the public and in the private spheres.” Ante, at 14. It is clear from this that the Court has taken sides in the culture war, departing from its role of assuring, as neutral observer, that the democratic rules of engagement are observed. Many Americans do not want persons who openly engage in homosexual conduct as partners in their business, as scoutmasters for their children, as teachers in their children’s schools, or as boarders in their home. They view this as protecting themselves and their families from a lifestyle that they believe to be immoral and destructive. The Court views it as “discrimination” which it is the function of our judgments to deter. So imbued is the Court with the law profession’s anti-anti-homosexual culture, that it is seemingly unaware that the attitudes of that culture are not obviously “mainstream”; that in most States what the Court calls “discrimination” against those who engage in homosexual acts is perfectly legal; that proposals to ban such “discrimination” under Title VII have repeatedly been rejected by Congress, see Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 1994, S. 2238, 103d Cong., 2d Sess. (1994); Civil Rights Amendments, H. R. 5452, 94th Cong., 1st Sess. (1975); that in some cases such “discrimination” is mandated by federal statute, see 10 U.S.C. Â§ 654(b)(1) (mandating discharge from the armed forces of any service member who engages in or intends to engage in homosexual acts); and that in some cases such “discrimination” is a constitutional right, see Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000).

how can you read this and not sniff homophobia?

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:40:10 +0000

i think the only thing you “tried” there, livewire, is displaying your own stupidity.

By: The_Livewire

The_Livewire — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:20:43 +0000

*laugh* let me try Bob logic.

Bob admits he drinks beer here http://www.gaypatriot.net/?comments_popup=9894#comment-395715 since he drinks beer, invented by Germans, he must believe in sending gays and Jews and Rrom to death camps for the glory of the master race.

Wow, using irrational non-sequetors is fun!

By: Sean A

Sean A — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 04:39:07 +0000

So, Justice Scalia is a “homophobe” based on what Barney Frank assumes Scalia would do if the Defense of Marriage Act were challenged before the U.S. Supreme Court? Just curious: what does that make the Democratic President who signed the Act into law in the first place?

Funny how that fact seems to have gotten lost in Congresswoman Frank’s idiotic bitch-fit with herself.

By: Duffy - Native Intelligence

Duffy - Native Intelligence — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 03:23:18 +0000

Barney Frank settles the argument about homosexual equality. He is the mirror image of, and has achieved the summit of idiotic, heterosexual males on a power trip in Washington, D.C. And I agree, he has got to be the female in his relationships – reminds me of a radical feminist trapped in a guys body.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 03:00:00 +0000

actually i did talk about his dissent. he talks about the actions of homosexuals as if being gay is behavior instead of orientation. he also uses the phrase “homosexual agenda”, which is a phrase invented by homophobes.

By: lucy08

lucy08 — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 02:34:22 +0000

Itâ€™s fine for Barney Frank to say what he likes on this issue. First, itâ€™s legal, because we have freedom of speech in the United States. And not unwise for Barney Frank to say what he said because if a Supreme Court justice is prejudiced against gay people, we should not have to be quiet about it just to be â€œcivilâ€ or â€œrespectfulâ€ of the Supreme Court. It may not be a nice word, but what if itâ€™s true? If heâ€™s prejudiced, he shouldnâ€™t be a judge, who has a duty to treat everyone equally. We should listen to why Barney Frank said what he said. The people who object to what Frank said should read Scaliaâ€™s opinions that Frank talks about before they assume that a Supreme Court justice couldnâ€™t be a homophobe. It is completely within Frankâ€™s rights to express his opinions about Scalia and it our decision as citizens and that of the Supreme Court to decide whether or not his accusations hold any truth.

By: The_Livewire

The_Livewire — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 01:57:53 +0000

bob won’t even address the text of the dissent. He should be taken seriously why?

I remember an interview with Justice Scalia about the flag buring decision. He was talking about how his wife was mad at him. He thought that burning the flag was contemptable, but protected. Again showing that he puts his job above his personal feelings.

By: heliotrope

heliotrope — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 01:51:35 +0000

bob declares Scalia to be an ignorant moron. I wonder if bob could point us toward a well educated moron as a point of comparison.

How does an ignorant moron get by all the Senate vetting? Does he trick them? No. That would ruin his standing as being ignorant.

Well, I guess I am too great a moron myself to be able to understand the clever nuance of thelittleletterpersonbob. Now brain itches.

By: Sean A

Sean A — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 01:47:00 +0000

#20: Thank you, bob. As always, we can count on you to define ignorance.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 00:36:28 +0000

the whole “love the sinner, hate the sin” concept is ignorance defined. scalia isn’t a homophobe, he’s an ignorant moron. he thinks, as clearly evidenced by his dissent, that homosexuality is a “behavior” and not an orientation.