Barney Frank, Democrat Congressman of Massachusetts 4th District, in an interview with with the website 365.gay.com, did not hesitate in calling Justice Anton Scalia a “homophobe” in reference to gay marriage as a constitutional issue. Why would Frank paint Scalia as a bigot? Scalia has made no remarks that would lend one to believe he is, as Frank claims, a homophobe – rather, Scalia, true to his nature is interpreting the Constitution, a document Frank doesn’t necessarily understand. In referencing issues such as gay marriage and abortion, Scalia rightly points out that the constitution does not mention questions of morality, rather questions of law – a point not taken by Frank. The quote: "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," underscores Frank’s understanding that the court is a bit more conservative than he feels necessary, preferring the Massachusetts Supreme Court model, whereby any constitution is considered ripe for legislation rather than interpretation. Instead of pointing to the differences between how Frank and Scalia view the document in question, Frank, in his usual form, throws out unsubstantiated and unseemly adjectives.
Frank, who is campaigning for reelection in 2010 in a district which includes New Bedford and Fall River and Taunton, all, for the most part, heavily affiliated as Catholic; yet, support for Frank, who is a pro-choice has not waivered allowing the man to serve the 4th since 1981. In the last election cycle, Frank did face an underfunded opponent, Earl Sholley. Sholley is positioning to run against Frank again in 2010. Frank, who has several unsavory ties to the Freddie and Fannie disaster highlighted here at Anybody But Barney.com, would, one might think, be a rather easy target. Yet, the Massachusetts 4th, which relies heavily on the fishing industry, receives considerable ”bacon” from Frank. That aside, not everyone in the 4th is enamored of Mr. Frank, and should a strong candidate emerge, Mr. Frank could face retirement in 2010. For more on Earl Sholley, visit Sholley for Congress.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Unfortunately, your description is correct with regard to constitutional issues. More unfortunately, it applies to almost all liberals and this is proven with their most recent efforts to extort money from AIG employees regardless of contract law. Barney Frank in fact knew about it as well as the treasury secretary but now both feign outrage in order to further their socialistic agenda.
These are the same people who decried Bush for "civil liberties" violations but who now don't give a dam about confiscating property, limiting speech, and strangling the private sector with regulations and government debt that will never be paid.
As far as I am concerned Frank is a traitor to the ideals of this nation and those who vote for him are either stupid, fearful, equally marxist or all of the above.
The republican candidate should attack him aggressively and ask every citizen in that district if they really want to vote for a Castro or Chavez wannabe. He should also attack his heterophobia based on his remarks.
Hi Ralph! Having lived in this particular State for lo so many years, nothing suprises me about long-winded politicians retaining their seats based on no-merit. Would the RNC put a concerted effort into several districts as well as take a shot at the Governors office in 2009/2010, there would be change - Massachusetts is too often abandoned. One need only to look at the cast of charactors we've elected (although I personally take no blame, preferring to write in a Warner Brothers Character rather than cast a vote in a manner that would compromise my principals), over and over again and it is almost as if we are being used as fodder for a larger national agenda - ie: You too could end up like "Massachusetts". The best campaign tactic anyone could use against any number of Democrats from Massachsuetts, including Frank would be to simply state the facts - it would work.
Tina, I agree with your analysis and much of it stems from the "buddy system" that infects much of our political dialogue these days most especially at the national level. Perhaps that is due to the money that rolls in and out of Washington and the reluctance of so called "conservatives" to absolutely demonize the opposition, who knows. The democrats have no reservations of doing the demonizing.
One thing I have noticed over the years, everyone I have met from Mass. or Conn., from the time I left Pa., while I was in Va., and now finally in South Carolina were all main stream conservative types who detest the socialization of the country. So the votes are there if they are galvanized and therefore able to wake up the rest or at least a majority of them.
I hope Steele makes a difference but he will have to become a hatchet man to get people's attention.
Great blog btw, I enjoy your entries.
Hope springs eternal!
Post a Comment