Barney Frank needs to get his ass kicked in the primary...

He still hasn't been punished for sponsoring the DMCA. There are plenty of good liberals in MA who aren't whores for Big Entertainment and against cyber liberties.

Why pick on him?

I could care less. Neither pro or con.

....while I may not always agree with him on a specific issue and the fact he not my particular representative, I still like the idea of having some voice in politics from my particular sector of society.

Sharpton because he is black? Double support for Mosley Braun because she is a black woman?

Would she deserve triple support if she was a lesbian?

How about supporting candidates because of where they stand on the issues?

Is this something to do with getting music off the internet? Is that important enough to anyone to get their shorts in a twirl about and risk losing a good liberal over?

. . . and his sister, Ann Lewis. Both are great spokesmen for our party.

You may disagree with him on the DMCA, but that hardly makes him a shill. Plus, he is one of the very few openly gay people we have in Congress.

It's about a lot more than just downloading music. It's about our cyber liberties in general. Fritz Hollings is probably even worse about this then Barney Frank...lol

...if Fritz Hollings is even worse?

I think the biggest mistake you are making is that you post vagueries and expect everyone to completely understand why you are upset.

This is the second anti-Frank post I have seen this week, but little in the way of educating us about what parts of DMCA has got your dander up.

And what form of punishment are you suggesting? Do you think maybe replacing him with a conservative republican would satisfy the requirements of the punishment you are advocating? That would be the equivalent of cutting off your nose to spite your face.

You have an opportunity to educate if you are willing to make the effort. You can't expect other's to champion your cause.

If he has done something out of line, just as anyone else in the party he is fair target for registering a complaint. Don't let his orientation get in the way of the message.

. . . it is curious that Frank (not a major sponsor, but just a co-sponsor) would receive, ehrm, "special condemnation."

The DMCA is not the big deal everyone makes it out to be. The only problem with it is the ban on reverse-engineering copy protection and breaking copy protection. That's the ONLY problem.

Most of the people who oppose the DMCA aren't geeks who want to reverse-engineer software -- they're theives who want to steal copyrighted music and movies on the internet and think they should get them for free. I think that's pretty weak, IMO, as someone who has had his copyrighted work stolen in the past.

But this is the first thread I've seen where someone had a issue to bring up and instead of the issue being discussed, the poster was attacked for the person he was complaining about. Franks, IMHO, does an outstanding job. It does tweak me though when a gay person has to have to troops rallied around him instead of just handleing the topic itself. To me, thats backdoor discrimination. (no pun intended).

We get attacked so often over bogus stuff -- including this. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're NOT out to get you. ;)

If the poster was concerned about the DMCA, he'd go after Hollings. Barney Frank was one of at least nine co-sponsors, and he was acting to protect the substantial intellectual property developed in his district from being stolen.

Yet he's the ONLY person getting attacked. . . hrmmmm. . . while it's true that we GLBT sometimes see bogeymen where there aren't, more often, it's right on the nose. It's curious that only Frank is getting attacked here, despite his relatively minor role.

He made a legitimate thread to be discussed and the person which happened to be Franks, that he had the issue with. He seemed to be attacked for having the nerve to use the name of Franks in a legitimate issue. Maybe I'm being a little Utopian, but I'd like people to be seen as just people, not race, religion or sexual orientation. When someone rabidly defends him just because he is gay, it highlights the fact he is gay and not his accomplishments.

... it's always on the table when a gay person is involved. That's the nature of this country. That's the nature of the one last commonly and truly acceptable and universally "appropriate" prejudice allowed.

You can't say nigger. But, you sure can say faggot all you want with little or no recrimination.

...same thing. I just didn't have the balls to state it not wanting to suffer the charge of being overly sensitive to the gay issue.

I wondered why anyone, even remotely conversant with Barney's history, abilities, credibility, and value to this party would suggest such a thing as removal over this one issue.

Didn't make sense, unless as you state "hmmmmmm...."

BTW, Jiang. There ain't NO WAY Barney would be susceptible to a primary battle for one BIG reason: he services his constituency among the best in Congress. Although representing a district which probably has fewer gay people than other districts, they LOOOVE him for the way his various district offices handle their needs.

So as we say, the hopes of replacing Barney are "shit out of luck" from the get-go. No matter what the true motivation might be.

The troops are rallying because of Mr. Frank's ability, his intelligence, and his being more of a true, passionate liberal than three quarters of the four-digit wonders on this board.

Point of reference: check my earlier first post below referencing "Sacred Cows." It mentioned nothing about Barney's sexual orientation.

As to the argument and the attack: please note that the original postor did NOT frame this argument in terms of the DMCA. HE framed it in terms of the removal of a veritable progressive icon over this one issue.

That's why the responses have been so strong. And that's why they have been focused on the point of the original postor's thesis: the removal of Mr. Frank. NOT the DMCA.

Glad to have cleared that up for you.

..with DMCA and with Frank in particular and asked him to use the opportunity to educate instead of expecting us to just blindly go along, and you perceive that I am only defending him because he is gay?

That's quite a stretch.

I just looked it up on google and it seems like a copyright protection law.

Looks to me like it's aimed at people who are ripping off the entertainment industry.

I'm a socialist and don't care if people do rip them off. Although I do think it's unfair to artists who aren't named Britney or movie producers who make movies that don't think that art equals zillion dollar budgets and special effects.

As for risking losing a good liberal like Barney Frank because a bunch of people don't want to cough up the dough to buy something is a bit of stretch.

The ONE and ONLY problem with it is its ban on "cracking" copy-protection systems. Why shouldn't I be able to copy a DVD for backup purposes? DVDs die over time and I shouldn't have to pay $$$s to buy a whole new copy just because of the crappy optical media quality.

Otherwise, the brouhaha over the DMCA is no big deal.

Fritz Holling's advocacy of copy chips in every computer system are not related to the DMCA, but are an independent issue he's promoting himself, along with the notion that Hollywood should be able to hack into your computer. To my knowledge, Congressman Frank does not support either proposal by Hollings.

Has more brains in his pinky than most anyone in the House has in their total body. And that includes over 50% of the Democrats.

I would vote for him for President any day of the week.

You mean theft of intellectual property, don't you?

The law that says you can't steal music, books, or movies?

The law is flawed, as most laws are, and that will hopefully work itself out in the future. However, it does recognize the conflict between the free marketplace of ideas and the curious notion that theft of a copyrighted work is no different than walking into a store and boosting a coat you happen to like but can't afford.

It is, however, probably less flawed than Sonny Bono's "Thank You Disney" copyright extension, which was the real travesty that makes this law all the more miserable for many.

Barney Frank is more than a good liberal. He is among the best. Do you have other issues against him or is this the one?

... but, if EVER there were one in our own party, for whom I would probably tolerate a good half dozen fuck-ups (btw to date, I know of none, whatsoever, after following him for dozens of years), it would be Representative Frank.

I won't devote time to enumerate the HUNDREDS of positive things to say about Mr. Frank; I'm sure that it will be done very well within the context of this thread... So, Ditto for every positive mention above this post and for those to appear below it - and for everyone that takes this thread to task for its preposterous suggestion.

Boy, have you picked on the absolutely wrong CongressCritter here and you have done so predicated upon a single issue - an issue about which there is MUCH legitimate controversy and debate.

But it was a centerpiece of the Clinton administration. Should Clinton have been impeached too?

I have no idea what you're talking about with DMCA.

But Barney Frank is the Greatest!

He is the most intelligent, articulate, savy, gutsy man in the whole United States Congress.

And by the way, the chance of his losing his home district is slim to none.

Democrat in Congress. Barney Frank is the one liberal NO conservative wants to go up against in a debate.

But he won't let me have whatever I want, so to the dogs with him.

You're hopelessly misguided.

Is that Frank is not a primary sponsor of the DMCA, and Bill Clinton was a major advocate and signer of the DMCA. He campaigned on it, as a matter of fact.

I've pointed out the real flaws in the DMCA earlier, but I've found most of the people who want the DMCA repealed are people who want to be able to steal other people's work on the Internet and not be called to count. Very uncool.

we can all work in factories again!

There are no factories anymore.

Oh, well, I guess there's always McDonald's. . . :(

Richard Stallman, the godfather of Free Software (as in "intellectual freedom", not "free beer") is against the DMCA. So is the Electronic Frontier Foundation. So are many other recording artists, movie directors and others who believe our current intellectual property laws are written to protect big corporations, and not the producers of IP itself.

The law basically allows the government carte blanche power to search your computer for anything it wants and DESTROY it if it finds something it thinks is "illegal".

The DMCA goes directly against the "fair use" standard and prevents law-abiding citizens from using IP they have LEGALLY purchased/licensed in a legal manner. It also prevents software engineers from reverse-engineering computer code for their own educational purposes, lest they risk incurring severe legal penalties from the government.

The DMCA was created for the benefit of the Microsofts, Universals and Disneys of the world to keep control of the marketplace for ideas and stifle any kind of independent innovation. Where the problem of "bootlegging" called for a flyswatter, the DMCA is a sledgehammer. It gives big business too much power over individual users and does not allow them redress, either.

I myself hold a number of copyrights for recorded performances, musical compositions, and even some computer code, so I do speak from personal experience. The DMCA makes it harder for small-time artists like me to distribute/share my creations, as it gives the government power to shut down "alternate" channels of distribution like sites on the internet.

=================================

So no, I don't support the DMCA, and I definately would not call it one of Clinton's better moments (it was clearly an attempt to appease the big money Hollywood studios and media moguls who helped elect him).

However, Barney Frank DID NOT play a major role in its passage. In fact, he probably signed on because of the hi-tech companies in his district who were supporting it. It would make sense for him to back it because of this.

If you're going to nail Barney Frank, at least try to come up with a good reason. Frank is definately one of the better members of Congress. I say we keep him.

He's an asset to this party. He'd be well served to run for senate when/if Kerry or Kennedy step down.

he sounds like he's got too much spit in his mouth whenever he talks. Seriously, I can barely understand what the hell he's saying

...or a job at Camelot Music, Best Buy or Circuit City..got my music etc at cost at CCity..:shrug:

Barney's one of the sharpest tongues on the left and a genuine hero to thousands of us.

I'm sorry you think he's wrong about something. But you know what? I am absolutely sick to DEATH of people so politically immature they have absolutely no perspective about this kind of thing.

So allow me to join the other voices on this thread who think you're an idiot.

Let's cut off the nose to punish the face.

Good idea.

News for you, Congressmen don't get punished for whatever bill they may or may not support. Only Bushco can get away with 'punishing' people. This particular issue with DMCA is a legal one, not a political issue.

-- is strictly top-drawer. He will be re-elected by a considerable margin.

Barney Frank is an asset to the Democratic Party. He is one of the most formidable, ass-kicking congressmen we have. Most Repukes are scared of him, and he has represented his district in Mass. very well.

So are you from Mass? Do you know he voted against the IWR? Do you know his record except for one pet issue?

So what if you disagree with one of his votes? He's been with us more than agin' us.

Until I saw it was in GD and being treated seriously.

Damn, now that is a joke! Single-issue voters aren't worth the trouble it takes to get them.

Are we going to defeat every Dem in the Senate?

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:HR02281:@@@X

thought that far ahead? didn't think so.

this country got bigger problems than someone messing with your ability to get free music and software. and barney frank is on the right side of those issues.