Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Barny Frank Scales Back Criticism of Hagel

Jim Burroway

January 7th, 2013

In remarks to the Boston Globe, retired Rep. Barny Frank (D-MA) has scaled back his criticism of former Sen. Chuck Hagel’s (R-NE) pending nomination as Defense Secretary. But before getting to his latest comments, I think it’s important to review his previous statements in order to provide full context. On December 19, after Hagel’s anti-gay comments from 1998 came to light but before he issued his apology, Frank ignored those earlier anti-gay statements and instead focused on charges that Hagel was either an anti-Semite or, at best, not a friend to Israel. Frank opinion then was:

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), who is Jewish, said he did not object to what has become one big point of contention about Hagel: an allusion to the “Jewish lobby,” in reference to advocates for Israel in Congress and elsewhere.

“I don’t think there’s anything wrong with having Portuguese lobbies, Jewish lobbies, Greek lobbies,” Frank said. “I think he’d be very good. … You need someone intelligent to help cut that budget.”

After Hagel apologized, Frank changed his mind on New Year’s Eve:

Then-Senator Hagel’s aggressively bigoted opposition to President Clinton’s naming the first openly gay Ambassador in U.S. history was not, as Sen. Hagel now claims, an aberration,” Frank said. “He voted consistently against fairness for LGBT people and there does not seem to be any evidence prior to his effort to become Secretary of Defense of any apology or retraction of his attack on James Hormel.”

Frank added, “And to those of us who admire and respect Mr. Hormel, Sen. Hagel’s description of him as aggressive can only mean that the Senator strongly objected to Hormel’s reasoned, civil advocacy for LGBT people. I cannot think of any other minority group in the U.S. today where such a negative statement and action made in 1998 would not be an obstacle to a major Presidential appointment.”

Today, Frank began walking that back:

“I was hoping the president wouldn’t nominate him,” Frank told the Globe today.

“As much as I regret what Hagel said, and resent what he said, the question now is going to be Afghanistan and scaling back the military,” Frank said. “In terms of the policy stuff, if he would be rejected [by the Senate], it would be a setback for those things.”

…”With the attack coming out of the right, I hope he gets confirmed,” Frank said today.

I don’t think Frank is being inconsistent. He’s framing his support for Hagel based on the larger question of what a Defense Secretary will be called upon to do in the coming months. But when it comes to LGBT policy, it’s worth noting that all policy originates in the White House, and the buck will always stop there. And this particular president — who dismantled DADT, who is acting on the conviction that DOMA is unconstitutional, who has come out in support for marriage equality — has earned a measure of latitude that no other president has come close to deserving in all of American history, at least insofar as LGBT policies are concerned. I will have more thoughts on this topic later.

Update: I want to add that this in no way means that I find Hagel’s apology acceptable as a final word. It opens a door, but that doorway is yet to be walked through.



Timothy Kincaid
January 7th, 2013 | LINK

“With the attack coming out of the right, I hope he gets confirmed,”

Yes, that sounds like Barney Frank.

Rob in San Diego
January 7th, 2013 | LINK

Hey Barney guess what, there is no such thing as Portuguese lobbyists or Greek lobbyists, however there is a very large and very loud jewish lobby. No other country besides israel send their lobbyists to America to get them to veto any resolution regarding israel in the U.N. Oh and how about this one, for a country that is so against the spread of nuclear weapons and technology, we actually GAVE them nuclear weapons and technology. That’s right folks, we GAVE them nuclear weapons.

Look, no one on the right and most people on the left actually care about his comments regarding that gay ambassador, because you know the irony of it is that we’d be putting him in a position where he has to get a long with gays, and I’m not talking about gay ambassadors, but gay soldiers, it’s kinda the “well take that you homophobe, now shut up and do you job.”

Is israel worried that he won’t sell them more weapons of mass destruction? Are they worried that we won’t have their back when they continue to screw up the Middle East? Are they worried that the Palestinians might actually get a country of their own right next to them?

It’s all about israel, because in today’s time you can’t say shit about israel without being labeled a hitler, an anti-semite, or some other hatter. But you know what you can do, you can talk all the shit you want of Russia, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, North Korea, hell, you can talk shit about England and NO ONE CARES! But don’t say a single word about israel or how it treats the Palestinians.

January 7th, 2013 | LINK

I don’t understand the update. Could you please clarify? It’s the first sentence that I don’t understand. I understand and agree with the second sentence.

Jim Burroway
January 7th, 2013 | LINK

The typos undoubtedly added to your confusion. What I meant to say is that I don’t find Hagel’s apology satisfying by itself. He needs to say more.

January 7th, 2013 | LINK

After initial hesitation, Hormel accepted Hagels apology. Doesn’t that mean the doorway has been walked through?

Jim Burroway
January 7th, 2013 | LINK

I think Hagel is the one who needs to do the walking. Obviously I totally screwed up this metaphor.

January 7th, 2013 | LINK

I think what Jim means is “show me what he does.” I also think the apology was lame and opportunistic, but if confirmed, Hagel’s going to be in a position in which he cannot act on whatever prejudices he might still harbor — he’ll be under a microscope.

I do think it’s the neocon/Israel lobby that’s going to be the problem.

January 7th, 2013 | LINK

Thanks Jim. I concur.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.