Are Democrats proud of their party leader Barney Frank?

Doesn’t he seem to embody all of the Democratic ideals?|||I am proud of any American who tried to help fellow Americans out as much as he has.|||He is a Gweat Amewican Hewo....|||hehehehehe.|||Last I heard he was not the party leader, and he doesn't represent all Democrats. Just like Rush doesn't represent all Reublicans.|||hahahahahahaha, funny, love a good laugh. I guess you had to come up with something to offset the Limbaugh thing.... good one though|||Apparently he remains in office and Chairman of the Banking committee. How scary this from the man in 2003 that said Freddie and Fannie were "Fine and blocked efforts to reform these two money holes.|||some poster named bugsy thinks he's "a great american, and doing a good job" what's so great about a gay prostitution ring, or crashing the banks?|||yes|||Of course...they love all gay people.|||C'mon John. You know better than almost anyone that Frank isn't the Dem leader. This sounds an awfully like an attempt to get back at those that say Rush is the GOP leader.





I know you can do better than this. You're one of my favorite GOP'ers on here.|||What the stuttering idiot.... If i was a Liberal,i would be ashamed of him. Funny how the Media fails to report nine years ago,they caught him in a closet with his male lover. Could you Imagine the Front page news if a Republican did that.|||As long as they don't find out what goes on in his basement.|||Shhhhhh..you can't go after Bwaney Fwank. He's a fwuit.





You'll be demonized as a homophobe.|||Why should I listen to you?





You can't even spell your Avatar correctly.





Duh is spelled with a "u".|||BAWNEY- KUCINICH 2016!








I pretty much approove of Rep. Frank. I would have preferred him as treasury or commerce sect.|||Poor Barney told Congress that Freddie and Fannie were ok





THEN





BUSH DID THIS, to add to their instability





in the middle of a housing bubble?





More Americans than ever own their own homes, but we must continue to work hard so that every family has an opportunity to realize the American Dream. In 2002, I announced a goal to add 5.5 million new minority homeowners by the end of the decade. Since then, we have added 2.3 million new minority households. My Administration has also set a goal of adding 7 million new affordable homes to the market within the next 10 years. In my FY 2006 budget, I proposed a single family housing tax credit and two mortgage programs -- the Zero Downpayment mortgage and the Payment Incentives program -- to help more families achieve homeownership. In 2003, I signed the American Dream Downpayment Act, and I have proposed more than $200 million to continue the American Dream Downpayment Initiative to provide downpayment assistance to thousands of American families. By promoting initiatives such as financial literacy, tax incentives for building affordable homes, voucher programs, and Individual Development Accounts, we are strengthening our communities and improving citizens' lives.





NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2005 as National Homeownership Month. I call upon the people of the United States to observe this month with appropriate ceremonies and activities recognizing the importance of homeownership.





http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/…








WHITEHOUSE WATCHING DOESN'T WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW THIS !!!





or he would have to shut up about barneyism's in 03


and own what Bush did in 05|||yes, infact they are lining up to kiss his....(use imagination)|||The last time I checked it was OBAMA the president of the US.


But how is the GOP fairing with Rush at the helm?|||Is he still trying to convince the American people that Fannie and Freddie are doing fine?|||Democrats are proud of everything and everyone liberal. Including the uncanny knack to be complete idiots.|||Maybe but they shouldn't be. He stands for everything that's wrong with the democratic party and American liberalism today.


His relations with Wall Street’s largest banks and finance houses have stood him in good stead. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, he pulled in $1.8 million in campaign contributions in the run-up to the 2006 election. He is well on his way to substantially topping that figure in the present campaign season, recording $1.2 million in contributions by the end of March. Securities and Investment firms were responsible for $164,600 of that money, real estate interests for $156,401, law firms for $130,768, insurance companies for $117,674 and commercial banks for $74,350.


In return, he has dutifully defended these massive financial interests, acting as a key architect of the government bailout of Bear Stearns earlier this year and now the plan to prop up the mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with unlimited cash from the federal Treasury.


But even given these financial-political relations, Frank’s blunt defense of inequality is a significant testimony to the state of the Democratic Party and American liberalism.


“Equality is not a good thing.” Such a statement stands in diametrical opposition to a long and central tradition in American political thought that—however much it was violated in practice by chattel slavery and the workings of the capitalist system—held equality to indeed be a “good thing.”


For Thomas Jefferson and the other founders of the American republic, inspired by the revolutionary spirit of the Enlightenment, the equality of man was not just a “good thing” but, as Jefferson wrote in the Declaration of Independence, a self-evident truth.


Abraham Lincoln went further, taking equality not only as a self-evident truth, but as a proposition that had to be proven in bloody struggle, a transcendental goal to be realized by American society in a “new birth of freedom.”


In the depths of a Great Depression, Franklin Delano Roosevelt delivered his “rendezvous with destiny” speech to the 1936 Democratic convention, again invoking these profound political traditions, while flaying the “economic royalists” of Wall Street as the reincarnation of King George III.


“For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality,” Roosevelt said. “A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people’s property, other people’s money, other people’s labor—other people’s lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness.”


Roosevelt spoke as a highly class-conscious representative of the American capitalist class, who sought to save the system from the threat of social revolution by implementing social reforms and imposing certain restrictions on the predations of his own class. That was in a period when, even in the midst of the greatest collapse of capitalism to that point in history, American capitalism retained immense financial reserves and benefited from the most advanced and powerful industrial base in the world. The decayed state of American capitalism today, with its massive deficits and shrunken industry, is a far cry from that of Roosevelt’s day. This immense decline in the objective position of American capitalism is the most important factor in the repudiation by American liberalism of any reform agenda.


The inequality outlined by Roosevelt more than 70 years ago has today become even more extreme. It has indeed proven a “good thing” for those at top of the economic ladder, who have amassed obscene fortunes through a vast transfer of wealth from American working people, the overwhelming majority of society.


The share of the national income monopolized by the top 1 percent is now higher than at any time since 1928, not only before Roosevelt, but before Herbert Hoover. Since the end of the 1970s, the top 1 percent has seen its income rise on average by nearly 240 percent, while the majority of the population has seen its real income stagnate or decline.


Yet neither Frank nor any other leading Democrat is sounding an alarm against today’s “economic royalists” or “malefactors of great wealth.” Instead, they present themselves unabashedly as their representatives and defenders.


Frank’s embrace of inequality as a positive good under conditions in which millions are being thrown out of foreclosed homes, seeing their incomes ravaged by soaring gas and food prices and facing the threat of employment is the end product of a protracted and deep decay of American liberalism.


The immense growth of social inequality is at the root of this process. It is to the top 1 percent that Frank and the other leading Democrats are politically oriented. They speak for the privileged social layers—of which they are a part—which have seen their personal wealth balloon at the expense of society as as a whole.|||He's not the Dem's leader.|||Yes, he is a good man. Everytime I hear a limbaugh speak of him I am thankful for they show they believe Fixed news %26amp; such when they blame Barney on something that they have no at all investigated for themself. This is why half their party has walked away for them %26amp; are now supporting the President %26amp; the USA. So Barney gets used %26amp; we appreciate the sacrifice he has made in having his name used to proof how much some people don't know.|||Barney Fife is more like it.