Dennis Miller on Barney Frank

I don't watch political programs.

But, I came by to support your post with a view.

Thanks as always.

When you use liberals you automatically turn off everyone but those that think like you do. Perhaps O'Reilly has learned to watch his mough after to murder of the doctor who performed late term abortions

Baloney! Barney Frank is a liberal. Also O'Reilly did not praise the one who killed the doctor. Plus this had nothing to do with this topic, and Miller was right, Frank is a sourpuss. Plus O'Reilly is not worried, his ratings are still high.

And raitings are all he cares about.  the only difference between Miller and O'Reilly Miller is occasionally funny

I said in a previous post, I have stated that I am no fan of O'Reilly. I did laugh when Miller called Frank a sourpuss, and I lauged be cause I was thinking the same thing when I watch the interview.

If you think in labels you will understand nothing.

See that is all you can is yell labels. Frank is a liberal, and a sourpuss. And liberals do seek a utopia. This has nothing to do with labels.

Larry you think in labels.  The other day you called William Travis stupid. Seems you need to apply this label lecture to yourself.

Everyone thinks in labels, Larry.  That's why I get responses once in a while where a liberal commends me for showing human kindness.  :)  As if conservatives cannot do that?

Terry is right.  Frank is definitely a liberal and a sourpuss.  So is Pelosi.

These lectures on label is one of the detours tatics  now used by liberal. In any political post you find labels.   This issue about labels is a non-issue.

Marilyn I also  think this detour tatic about labels, is simply a way for liberals to become the victim again.

My statement above is correct.  See my comment (a long one) about stereotypes.  Are you defending thinking in labels?

If you examine my comments and posts (especially read my novel) you will find that I do very little thinking in labels.  As I believe Marilyn can tell you, I take a variety of positions which are unusual.  Neither liberals nor conservatives will find themselves safe from my criticisms.

I was not referring to your labeling of Frank.  He is a liberal by his own definition.  I have no problem with your referring to him as a liberal.  But that wasn't your only use of the term.

My comment was to attempt to get you to say something meaningful.  I know you are more intelligent, more knowledgable and more skilled in writing than your post above shows.  I was hoping to inspire a greater effort on your part.

Now what subject was I trying to detour around and distract the thread from considering?  Did your post have a theme other than as a summary of the Frank interview?  If so it was too subtle for me to identify it.  So just what am I trying to distract your readers from?

All the liberals I know think utopia is impossible.

William Travis behaved stupidly.  I don't care what his IQ would have been if they had such tests then but his actions were those of a stupid commander.  That's a fact.

You are not inspiring at all, and someone once  told you not to promote your novel on their threads.Right now I am telling you the same. I am not asking I am telling not to do it again. After you call Wiliam Travis stupid you lost any respect I could have for  you.

Also people who talk down to others, such as you have done me, have no influence on anyone at all. Your rambling and bragging is to arrogant for me to hear out.

Once again  dont promote your novel on my thread again. I could careless what its about. Now that's a fact.

Terry, just as you promote your political and economic ideas, so I promote mine. I will certainly try to remember to keep all mention of the novel off your posts. If I forget, please delete my comment. If you are asking me to avoid presenting my positions on issues on your posts I will be happy to avoid your posts altogether. I have many weaknesses and failings, some of which I am aware of but I also have some strengths and successes. Naturally I enjoy writing about the latter. I regret that you took offense because that indicates another of my failures. I should be more careful and less emotional in my comments. I believe you when you indicate that you don't care what is in my novel.

Terry is right.  You may not intend to do it Larry but you are not flexable in your opinons at all.  I should talk. LOL

Well you can give your opinions. I just simply stating what I saw on The Factor, and was laughing about  Miller calling him a sourpuss. I was laughing because I thinking the same thing.  Then I just shared some on the things he said. Thats it.

I thought it was going to be an exciting interview, and it was not. What Dennis Miller said afterwards was much more entertaining.

I am sure you are very smart, but sometimes you have to inspire people with more than intellect and lectures. Sometime it takes heart and compassion to inspire.

Oh I was replying to Larry's last comment, I see the Col. left one as well. My comment above was for Larry.

Message received.  I have never inspired.  I have no charisma.  (These statements indicate agreement with your conclusions.)  I do have heart and compassion.  Perhaps, too much.

Well I am sorry that it came to this. Just getting sick of the label lectures. I have got lectures from people who a guilty of doing the same. For me the label debate is so silly and seems that is all some want to talk about with so many problems we are facing today.

Another of my failings is a proclivity for lecturing.  (8 years as a college professor and over 30 years as a head coach will do that to most people.)  In this thread's lecture on labels at least I kept it short.  That, at least, is a mercy.

I fear I will have to avoid commenting on your threads since my comments turn into lectures almost before I know it.  :-(

I dont mind your comments or disagreement. Its just this label issue is just plain silly. A liberal is a liberal, a conservative is a conservative. A duck is a duck. Calling someone stupid is an opinion and is a label. All this label talk is a waste of time. That is all I am trying to say. Pointing fingers about using labels is talking nonsense.

Terry, you sorely tempt me to comment about labels again.  Perhaps if I just say that both liberals and conservatives are diverse lots with a great deal of variation in beliefs, attitudes, and opinions in both groups.  I would also assert that there are lots of people (myself included) for whom neither label fits at all.  In fact, there is nothing that I can think of which is true of everyone called conservative or of everyone called liberal.  That is why, to me, the term is just a label and carries little or no meaning.  That is, a "label" is arbitrary.

On the other hand, there are terms which are descriptive which are not arbitrary.  If I describe some shirt as being "blue" I am using a word which is not merely a label.  It actually provides information about the item so described.

Thus if I called Travis a "liberal" or a conservative I would be labeling him since the terms have no particular meaning.  I would not know his position on any issue. I would not know how he would be expected to vote on a particular candidate.  But if I use a term which has a definite meaning, such as "brave," I am providing information about Travis.  I am not labeling, I am describing.

Now if there were two political parties, one named "Liberal" and the other named "Conservative," then to say that Joe is a Liberal would be descriptive while to say Joe is a liberal would be labeling.

This is how I use the word "label" when I say that if one thinks in labels one will understand nothing.  I think you can see why that statement is true given what I mean by the term "label."

Please delete this comment if you perfer that I not comment about labels.  I had my fun in writing it.  I hope you don't find it to be nonsense.

I will not delete  it. I didnt even read all of it myself. Now you play with words like labeling and describing. Really it can be seen as the same. Calling Travis stupid was a label. Me calling Frank a sourpuss is a label. BIG DEAL!!!! No crime has been committed. Anyway WHO CARES!!!!

When talking American Politics, anyone who has any sense, knows what one is talking about when using the terms liberals and conservatives. Only idiot would not understand this.

 Now let me give you a lecture. I realze they have different meanings in other countries and in other times. But I was talking about current   America. Barney Frank is an American, he is a member of the House of Repersenative, which is part of the legislative body.
 
By American terms Barney Frank is a liberal.  Proof of this can be found on any Congressional Scoreboard. Plain and simple. Nothing to analyze. This is not rocket science.  My fifth grader can understand this.

Just one more thing. It is really sad that an educated man can take so much time in something of such nonsense. You can continue to comment. But as for me I have nothing to say on this worthless debate on such a non-issue.

Goodbye.

Farewell!

I am not sure that I heard Barney Frank correctly but did he say he was not for gay marriage being legalized? It sure sounded like that was what he was saying. I do not know what to make of that other than that he is one confused, complicated and crafty politician.

Sometimes I cannot figure out what he is trying to say. I think he is just a grumpy man who is mad a the world. Plus he will never say a word against Obama.

I have at least come to one conclusion for listening to him and that is,"He is a physocpathic liar". He can lie with the straightest face and make you believe he thinks he is telling the truth. He completely contradicted what he has said in the past on the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac situations.

He is just a pathetic person.

I think the definition of politics it to say contradictory things out of both sides of your mouth, and leave people confused, but believing you are sincere, and them walking away believing the politician said what the person wanted to hear. That's a good politician..... If maybe half of the people in politics were concerned more concerned with the good of the country, rather than personal power, and which side gets more points,  we wouldn't have so many problems in the country.

*This is the case with most liberals

So very sad. :(

This is totally strange, but when I first read the title of your article in my mailbox, I thought it was about Barney Miller....x_X

A lot of men seldome smile.  I am one,  Calvin Cooledge was another.  It's not be sour puss or being sad.  It is just the way we are.  I had a boss once who didn't even laugh at a good joke.  His lips would quickly turn up and then back down.  People thought he was a grump.  Actually he was a funny man.   Just not one whou laughed or smiled.

That is true, but Barney Frank said he was never happy. I thought what a sour person he is.

Isn't Barney Frank a politician?  How happy would you be if you lied to people 24/7.

True.

Barney and O'Reilly probably came to some sort of agreement before hand...Neither tolerate dissent and with Barney being an "elected representative" from Taxachusetts, that is trully wrong.

Barney Frank has always been a sourpuss.  I guess it's because he doesn't like  criticism of him on any aspect.  He absolutely refuses to belief he was in anyway responsible for the mess he caused with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  He comes across as a sourpuss no matter what program he is on.  But he speaks to people as if they are  inferior to him.  What can one expect from an elected politician from Massachusetts?  They all think they are superior to anyone else and resent being questioned on any subject, and of course, it is never their fault no matter what the subject.  Someone else is always to blame.  Barney Frank is an impossible person to respect in any manner shape or form.  I just wish the people in his district will wake up and send him packing as with a few other members of the Massachusetts Delegation in Washington for all our sakes.