“Just Asking” — Will President Obama “Leave” the Presidency in 2017?

It’s been awhile since I wrote about this, but World Net Daily’s Joseph Farah’s argument with RightWingWatch prompted me to revisit it, even though we’re still two years away from the Obamapocalypse.

First, there was on Thursday a column published by Joseph Farah, “Will Obama Leave Office in 2017?” It got 715 comments (so far). This was followed up on Friday by a published e-mail from a Frances Haase: “How Obama Could Stay in Office in 2017.” Just speculating about civil unrest and martial law and suspension of elections. It got one comment.

Then, in response later that day, Miranda Blue published on RightWingWatch: “Joseph Farah Is ‘Just Asking’: Will Obama Actually Leave Office in January 2017?” RWW noted this:

“[W]hy do we assume Obama will step aside willingly from the presidency following an election in 2016?” Farah asks in a column today. “I’m not saying he won’t. I’m just asking why.”

It’s a pathetic phrase that is often used by people who want to say something they know will be controversial and, for some reason or another (since Farah has said far more controversial things and been forthright about it), they don’t want it coming back on them, or they want an excuse to say, “Hey! I didn’t actually say that, I was just asking the question!”

Richard Hoagland does this a lot when claiming that every asteroid and comet is a space ship.

Despite RWW and WND going head-to-head for years, apparently it rubbed Joseph Farah the wrong way. He actually responded in a column on Sunday: “Who Would Oppose Obama 3rd Term?” Who indeed? He starts out his column as such:

In this space on Thursday, I raised a question that Americans had only been whispering about among trusted friends: Will Barack Obama leave office in 2017?”

People for the American Way’s “Right Wing Watch” didn’t like it.

I trust that means the group will use all of its influence and legal firepower to oppose any attempt by Obama to subvert the law – though there was no hint of that in its response.

Rush Limbaugh responded to the question Friday when a caller raised the possibility Obama might ignore the 22nd Amendment to the Constitution as he has ignored so many other laws since taking office.

[…] Limbaugh speculated that Obama might actually consider the possibility of a third term given the Democratic Party’s weak field of potential presidential candidates for 2016. He imagined Obama going on television and making a case to the American people that he is in the best position to stop a Republican from capturing the White House – “not after eight courageous years of transforming America!”

So, “Not only am I ‘just askin’,’ but so is Papa Rush!”

RightWingWatch responded today with a post by Peter Montgomery: “Birther Joseph Farah Wants PFAW Help To Block Third Obama Term. Let’s Make A Deal.” Here’s his proposal:

Farah was apparently bothered that Miranda’s RWW post did not include a pledge that People For the American Way would “use all of its influence and legal firepower” to stop Obama from chucking the Constitution in a White House power-grab. Of course we don’t take the possibility seriously, but since Farah seems to, let’s offer him a proposition: If President Obama refuses to allow a constitutional transfer of power to his successor, we will join you at the barricades. If the American republic miraculously survives, you will stop polluting the public discourse with toxic nonsense. Deal?

I think that’s fair.

Boycott Everyone!

This news made me smile because I knew that World Net Daily commenters were going to have a hissy fit: 379 different corporations that do business within America filed a friend-of-the-court brief with the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS) stating that the bans on marriage equality should be voided as unconstitutional. WND reported it in a 3-paragraph snippet from Huffington Post entitled, “379 Companies Urge Supremes to Support ‘Gay Marriage.'” I can guarantee you that the “Gay Marriage” in scary quotes was not in the original. Actually, they reworded the original title, which was “Here Are The 379 Companies Urging The Supreme Court To Support Same-Sex Marriage.”

Just for fun, let’s list them:

• A.L. Nella & Company, LLP, CPAs
• A.T. Kearney
• Aardema Whitelaw, PLLC
• Acacia Home LLC
• Accenture
• Aetna Inc.
• Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.
• AJ Leo Electric and Solar
• Akamai Technologies, Inc.
• Alaska Airlines
• Alcoa Inc.
• Amazon Services Inc.
• Amazon.com, Inc.
• American Airlines Group Inc.
• American Apparel
• American Express Company
• American International Group, Inc.
• Aparicio-Mercado Law, L.C.
• Apple Inc.
• AppNexus Inc.
• Aramark
• Arbor Brewing Company, LLC
• Arnold & Porter LLP
• Aspen Skiing Company
• Assemble Sound LLC
• AT&T Inc.
• Atlas Cut Stone
• Atticus Circle
• The Austin Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
• Avanade Inc.
• Bain & Company, Inc.
• Bakehouse Art Complex
• Baker & McKenzie LLP
• Bank of America
• The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation
• Barclays
• Barnes & Noble, Inc.
• bebe stores, inc.
• Becton, Dickinson and Company
• Belcampo Inc.
• Ben & Jerry’s
• Big Duck Studio, Inc.
• Bigelow Villa LLC
• Billy’s Farm
• BlackRock, Inc.
• Bloomberg L.P.
• Blue Apron, Inc.
• Blue Heron Ventures
• Blue Moon Hotel / Winter Haven Hotel
• Blume, Faulkner & Skeen, PLLC
• Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
• Boston Community Capital, Inc.
• Boston Consulting Group
• The Boston Foundation
• Boston Medical Center Corporation
• Boston Scientific Corporation
• Brady Mills LLC
• BrandQuery LLC
• Bristol-Myers Squibb Company
• Broadcom Corporation
• Brocade
• Cablevision Systems Corporation
• Capital One Financial Corporation
• Captain Wendell’s Marine Services LLC
• Cardinal Health, Inc.
• Care Resource
• CBS Corporation
• CEB
• Central Physical Therapy and Fitness, PSC
• CGI
• Charlotte Business Guild
• The Chubb Corporation
• CIGNA Corporation
• Cisco Systems, Inc.
• Citigroup Inc.
• City Catering Company
• City Lites Neon, Inc.
• The City of Ann Arbor, Michigan
• Civitas Public Affairs Group
• Clean Yield Asset Management
• CloudFlare, Inc.
• CMIT Solutions of Seattle Downtown
• The Coca-Cola Company
• Cohen & Associates
• Colgate-Palmolive Company
• Columbia FunMap, Inc.
• Comcast Corporation
• The Computer Butler
• ConAgra Foods, Inc.
• The Corcoran Group
• Corner Brewery, LLC
• Corning Incorporated
• Cox Enterprises, Inc.
• Crazy Misfits Pet Services
• Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC
• Cummins Inc.
• Cupcake Royale
• CVS Health Corporation
• Dallas Voice
• Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc.
• Danaher Corporation
• David J. Jarrett, P.C.
• David Kosar Insurance Agency
• David Mack Henderson Income Tax Preparation
• DCI Group AZ, L.L.C.
• Deloitte LLP
• Delta Air Lines, Inc.
• Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation
• The Desert Business Association
• Deutsche Bank AG
• Diageo North America, Inc.
• DIRECTV
• DocuSign
• Domini Social Investments LLC
• The Dow Chemical Company
• Dreamcatcher Arts and Publishing Ltd.
• Dropbox, Inc.
• DuPont
• eBay Inc.
• Edelman
• Eldercare Consulting
• Electronic Arts Inc.
• EnduringHydro, LLC
• Ernst & Young LLP
• The Estée Lauder Companies Inc.
• Event Rents
• Everything Real Estate LLC
• Express Movers Inc.
• Facebook, Inc.
• Farella Braun + Martel, LLP
• Fastsigns
• Fenwick & West LLP
• First Data Corporation
• 1st Security Bank
• 1stdibs.Com, Inc.
• FIT Technologies
• Flanery CPA
• Full Court Press Communications
• G.A.W., Inc.
• The Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce Nevada
• General Electric Company
• General Mills, Inc.
• Gensler
• Gilt Groupe Holdings, Inc.
• GlaxoSmithKline LLC
• Gleason & Associates Claims Services
• Go Factory, Inc.
• Goethel Engelhardt, PLLC
• The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
• Google Inc.
• Goulston & Storrs, P.C.
• Great Officiants LLC
• The Greater Connecticut Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
• Greater San Diego Business Association
• Greater Seattle Business Association
• Greensulate
• Grossman Marketing Group
• Group Health Cooperative
• Groupon
• Growing Hope
• Harrell Remodeling
• The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc.
• Healthline
• Hewlett-Packard Company
• Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.
• Holdredge Wines
• Homeward Pet Adoption Center
• Horizon Air Industries, Inc.
• House Packard LLC
• HSBC
• Ikard Wynne LLP
• The Independence Business Alliance
• The Inland Northwest Business Alliance
• Insala, Ltd
• Inspirato, LLC
• Integrated Archive Systems, Inc.
• Integrity Law Group
• Intel Corporation
• Intuit Inc.
• INUS Group, LLC
• Jackson Hole Group LLC
• Jagod Designs
• Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
• Jenn T. Grace International LLC
• Jennifer Brown Consulting
• JetBlue Airways Corporation
• The Jim Henson Company
• Johnson & Johnson
• Johnston, Kinney and Zulaica LLP
• Jonathan L. Bowman, Attorney at Law, PS
• JPMorgan Chase & Co.
• Julian Chang Consulting, Inc.
• kapchur.us photography
• The Kathy A. Janssen Foundation
• Kazan, McClain, Satterley, & Greenwood, PLC
• Keir Jones Agency – State Farm
• Keker & Van Nest LLP
• KEO Marketing Inc.
• Kimberly-Clark Corp.
• Kimpton Hotel & Restaurant Group, LLC
• Kollmar Sheet Metal Works, Inc.
• Kotzan Chiropractic
• KPMG LLP
• Lambda Business Association
• Laparoscopic Institute for Gynecologic Oncology
• Larson Marketing & Communications LLC
• Laughton Properties
• Law Offices of Joel L. Sogol
• Law Office of Lisa E. Schuchman
• Law Office of Lorie L. Burch, PC
• Law Offices of Robin L. Bodiford, P.A.
• The Law Office of Susan K. Fuller, PLLC
• Levi Strauss & Co.
• Liberty Burger
• Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP
• Life & Love Celebrations
• Link in the Chain Foundation, Inc.
• Littler Mendelson, P.C.
• LNT, Inc.
• The Long Beach Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
• Lori Karbal et al
• Loring, Wolcott & Coolidge Trust, LLC
• The Los Angeles Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
• Main Street Hair Shoppe Ltd.
• Marriott International, Inc.
• Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.
• Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company
• McGraw Hill Financial, Inc.
• McKesson Corporation
• McKinsey & Company, Inc.
• Merca Property Management
• The Miami-Dade Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
• Microsoft Corporation
• The Mid-America Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
• Miller & Olson, LLP
• Miller Shelton Group, LLC
• MillerCoors LLC
• Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
• Mona Smith PLLC
• Moody’s Corporation
• Morgan Miller Plumbing
• Morgan Stanley
• MWW Public Relations
• NAMI Dallas, Inc.
• The Nashville LGBT Chamber of Commerce
• The National Gay & Lesbian Chamber of Commerce
• Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company
• Neumann Capital Management, LLC
• The New England Patriots
• New Leaf Columbus
• New York Life Insurance Company
• Nifty Hoops, LLC
• NIKE, Inc.
• Nixon Peabody LLP
• North Texas GLBT Chamber of Commerce
• Northrop Grumman Corporation
• OBOX Solutions
• Office Depot, Inc.
• The Ogilvy Group, Inc.
• Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.
• ONE Community Media, LLC
• 1 Source Consulting Solutions
• Oracle America, Inc.
• Orbitz Worldwide, Inc.
• Out & Equal Workplace Advocates
• Outerwall Inc.
• Pakmode Publications, LLC
• d/b/a Pakmode Media + Marketing
• Pandora Media, Inc.
• PATH
• Peabody & Arnold LLP
• Pepper Hamilton LLP
• PepsiCo
• Pfizer Inc.
• Pixelligent Technologies LLC
• Plexus Education Foundation
• Plexus LGBT and Allied Chamber of Commerce
• Portland Area Business Association
• PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
• PrideFest
• The PrintingWorks
• Pro-Tec Data, Inc.
• Procter & Gamble
• ProTrials Research, Inc.
• Prudential Financial, Inc.
• Puma Spring Vineyards
• Qualcomm Incorporated
• Quorum
• RAFI Architecture and Design
• Rainbow Chamber of Commerce Silicon Valley
• Ralph’s Regal Weddings
• Ray Holley Communications
• RBC Capital Markets, LLC
• Replacements, Ltd.
• Restaurant Management Concepts
• Reverberate! Marketing Communications, Inc.
• Rising Tide Brewing Company
• RJR Photography
• Robert H Stutz Jr CPA
• Rockwell Automation, Inc.
• Rotella & Hernandez, LLC
• The Sacramento Rainbow Chamber of Commerce
• Sadek Bonahoom PLC
• The San Francisco Chamber of Commerce
• The San Francisco Giants
• The Seattle Lesbian, LLC
• Seattle Metropolitan Chamber of Commerce
• Sempra Energy
• Seyfarth Shaw LLP
• Shingles Roofing LLC
• Sidetrack, Inc.
• Simon, Schindler & Sandberg LLP
• Skellenger Bender, P.S.
• Skyworks Solutions, Inc.
• Sleeves Up Productions, LLC
• Sōw
• Spectra Law PS
• Spry Vision, Inc.
• St. Jude Medical, Inc.
• Staples, Inc.
• Starbucks Corporation
• Starrtek LLC
• State Street Corporation
• Steven Graves Insurance Agency
• Stonewall Behavioral Health
• Stonewall Columbus
• Stuffed Cakes, LLC
• Sun Life Financial (U.S.) Services Company, Inc.
• SunDaily
• Support.com, Inc.
• Sweet Dixie Kitchen
• Symantec Corporation
• Taber Food Services, Inc.
• dba Hobee’s California Restaurants
• The Tampa Bay Rays
• Target Corporation
• TD Bank, N.A.
• TD Securities (USA) LLC
• Tech Data Corporation
• TestTracks
• Thinking Cap Communications & Design
• Third Point LLC
• Thomson Reuters
• Tiwary Entertainment Group LLC
• TNT Promotions, LLC
• TOCA Events, LLC
• TravelOut, Inc.
• Tutta Bella Neapolitan Pizzeria
• Twitter, Inc.
• 206 Inc.
• UBS AG
• The Ultimate Software Group, Inc.
• United Air Lines, Inc.
• United Therapeutics Corporation
• Uptown Physicians Group
• VCB Consulting & Accounting Services
• Verizon Communications Inc.
• Viacom Inc.
• Visa Inc.
• VitaPerk
• VMware, Inc.
• W. M. Martin Advertising
• W.W. Grainger, Inc.
• W/S Development Associates LLC
• Walsh Wellness Center
• The Walt Disney Company
• Wasserman Media Group
• Wells Fargo & Company
• Whey Natural! USA LLC
• Wisconsin LGBT Chamber of Commerce
• Witeck Communications, Inc.
• The Workplace Equality Index
• Wyndham Worldwide Corporation
• Xerox Corporation
• Xfund
• YES DESIGN GROUP
• Ypsilanti Downtown Development Authority
• Zausmer, Kaufman, August & Caldwell, P.C.
• Zingerman’s Community of Businesses
• ZoomSystems
• Zynga Inc.

It’s a lot. And the story has garnered 255 comments. The top-rated comments are all about how they now have a list of 379 companies they will be boycotting, such as “Just Me” who wrote quite literally that: “I have a list of 379 companies I will be boycotting.” Others are perhaps more peripheral, just generally ranting about The Gays getting married.

But what’s funny about this is that you cannot possibly live in modern society and boycott all these companies.

Do you own a computer? Well, you cannot run Windows or Mac operating systems or even Chrome. I guess you’re stuck with Linux or Unix. And that’s ignoring the hardware. Obviously Apple is still out, but so is Intel (which makes most CPUs) and Hewlett-Packard. (Make sure your printer isn’t an HP!) Social networking is also out, for both Facebook and Twitter are on the list.

What about a smart phone? If it’s an iPhone, throw it away, you’re stuck with something like Samsung, but make sure it doesn’t have an Intel CPU.

Does your job use any sort of computer security? Chances are it’s Cicsco-based, so you have to stop working because Cisco is on the list. They also make much of the equipment that runs the internet.

Television? The biggest television providers are on the list, including Comcast and Direct TV.

What about air travel? Delta, United, American, Alaska Air, JetBlue … they’re on the list.

What about a credit card? Visa and American Express are both on the list, so you’re stuck with MasterCard, Discover, or some less recognized company, but be careful about the bank it’s through because Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley are both on the list, as is even the Deutsche Bank.

If you’ve managed to convince yourself you can still use a computer and the internet, well, you won’t be able to use the largest internet stores: Amazon and eBay are both on the list.

Office supplies needed? Well, Office Depot, Staples, and Target are on the list.

You may even be forced to throw out some of your clothes, for companies like American Apparel and Levi are on the list.

So, that’s what you’re faced with if you want to be a bigot today and boycott all the companies that support allowing gays to be married. And I just barely touched the list, but I tried to think of things that most people do. In general, though, you’re screwed.

Again, I Agree with World Net Daily Commenters

I’m in a good mood because 57 abstracts were submitted by the deadline yesterday to a conference I’m convening in May. So let’s do a quickie for a WND post that comes via the AP: “Man Burned by Fajitas While Praying Can’t Sue Eatery.”

Here are the gigantic two paragraphs that WND posted:

(Associated Press) A New Jersey appellate court says a man cannot seek damages for burns he suffered while bowing his head in prayer over a sizzling steak fajita skillet at a restaurant.

The ruling made public Wednesday upheld a lower court ruling that dismissed his lawsuit. The man claimed a waitress didn’t warn him the dish was hot, but the lower court found the food posed an “open and obvious” danger.

Yeah … so, 10% of me thought that maybe the knee-jerk WND commenter reaction would be complaining that some sort of Christian privilege was being trampled on, in some way. 90% of me thought that even WND commenters would think that the attempted lawsuit was ridiculous. Which they did.

At the moment, there are 15 comments. Top-rated is by “bob” who wrote: “He must be one dumb gringo. Every time I have ever ordered Fajitas they come out on a hot sizzling iron frying pan and I don’t need to be told not to stick my face in it.”

Or there’s third-place, “knowitall27” who wrote: “It is dishonest loons like this that ruin it for everyone else.”

But there’s also “Soundbyte,” who I’m hoping wrote this with sarcasm: “I am getting very tired of the anti Christian foods being served in restaurants. When will it stop………………when will it stop.”

The Hillary Clinton E-Mail Scandal

I’m an equal-opportunity pointer-outer-of-stupid-stuff here at WND Watch. And Cheryl Chumley is making a lot of posts … her “About” paragraph says she is a full-time reporter for WND, but I’m guessing she was hired very recently because until this week, I have never seen her posts, and I’m too tired to go back and search. (Okay, fine: She had a few WND posts starting in July 2014, but only around a dozen. Suddenly on March 2, she’s writing around 9 per day.)

Anyway, back to the story: It has emerged over the last few days that when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, she used a private e-mail address. WND has reported this as: “Hillary-Gate? Email Server Traced to Clinton Home.” (FYI, I’m really sick of people attaching “Gate” to every scandal or pseudo-scandal.)

The news is really that basic headline. The problem is two-fold: (1) The law (Federal Records Act) requires that official e-mails of government workers take place from government accounts such that they are subject to open-records requests (in other words, what Hillary did was probably illegal, in my very un-legal opinion); and (2) security reasons, for government servers tend to be more hardened against hacking attempts as well as being better backed up.

Because of that first reason, I remember early in President Obama’s presidency, headlines were made about him being the first “Email President” because both George W. Bush and Bill Clinton eschewed e-mail because of those open-records laws. Obama was at a point where he was unwilling to give it up.

There is a lot to still be said for this developing story, and I don’t know how it will turn out. Did Mrs. Clinton violate the law? I don’t know, but it would seem like it. Is this a massive scandal? I don’t think so, but “scandals” tend to be scaled by one’s own personal politics.

Will this affect her possible White House run? I doubt it because the people who won’t vote for her because of this weren’t going to vote for her anyway, and those who would vote for her aren’t going to let this get in the way. For the most part.

But, if she actually did break the law here, I think she should be held accountable. That said, it remains to be seen whether the report is accurate and what the specifics were if it was accurate.

Another Update on The Gay in Alabama: State Supreme Court “Overrules” Federal District Court

Sigh. To me, this is neither a conservative, nor a liberal issue at this point. (Though maybe it is? State supremacy = conservative cause?) Here’s the latest from Alabama, just in Sunday night (so less than 12 hrs old): “Alabama Judges Ordered to Halt ‘Halt’ Weddings.” It’s by Cheryl Chumley, who I haven’t seen before on WND.

And let’s be very clear: It’s not the weddings at issue, it’s the issuance of marriage licenses.

Anyway, the decision was 7 to 1 with Roy Moore recusing himself (probably the only thing he’s done right in this, in my opinion). The dissenting judge effectively told his co-justicies: “WTF, are you high?” He actually that he didn’t think the case was properly filed, the court had any jurisdiction, and that public interest groups could sue in Alabama’s name, since it was outside groups and not the Governor, Legislature, nor Attorney General who sued.

The issue for me is that second one: Jurisdiction. Article 6, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution clearly says:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.

Most people I know interpret this to mean that federal laws and courts have supremacy over state. In other words, the Federal District Court Judge’s ruling has supremacy over a state Supreme Court.

This is besides the fact that I think this is a ruling meant to uphold a hugely discriminatory law. Or, as God put it today:

God Tweets on Alabama Supreme Court

World Net Daily Complains About Exact Thing It Supports

I was going through my RSS feed and found this gem by WND’s Joe Kovacs: “Inquisition: College Girl Gets 3rd Degree for Being Jew.”

The story is that, allegedly, “the student government at UCLA interrogated a young student about the fact she is Jewish, and nearly scrapped her acceptance to its group because of her religious heritage.”

In other words, they weren’t going to let a person do something because they weren’t the correct religion.

Except, that’s exactly what WND wants for every religion except Christianity, and perhaps Judaism. Muslim? Hindu? Wiccan? Atheist? WND writers would ardently advocate for you not to be able to hold any public office or, in some cases, even vote. This is in part rooted in – or at least “supported by” – a constant stream of articles that America is a “Christian Nation.”

Hypocrites much?

Surprising Stories that WND Hasn’t Talked About, Part 2: Alabama’s Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Applies to All Counties

I posted once and twice last week about the developments in Alabama. World Net Daily happily covered the drama and the Christian Soldiers (mainly Roy Moore) fighting against marriage equality and for judicial nullification (which is odd, considering that Roy Moore is a judge).

What happened on Thursday is that the plaintiffs in one of the counties where a probate judge was following Moore and not the federal ruling is that the US District Judge Callie Granade clarified her ruling and stated it applied to all probate judges. Most counties fell within a day or two, but there are still about a dozen holdouts praying that Moore is right.

What’s surprising to me is that there was nary a peep out of WND about that development. Nothing. After all their coverage in the week before it, there was not a single article nor news snippet about this for the past five days.

Judicial Recusal: If Ginsburg and Kagan Are Recused from Marriage Equality Case, Scalia and Thomas Need to, Too

Skeptics or logicians reading the title of this post may recognize an inherent logical fallacy, the tu quoque (literally, “you, too”). This is an informal fallacy which means that the logic is flawed, but that doesn’t mean the conclusion reached is flawed.

Many on the far right wing over the past several months have pointed to the fact that both Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Elena Kagan have presided over same-sex marriage ceremonies. Therefore, the thinking goes, they have pre-judged any same-sex marriage case that would go before the Supreme Court and therefore they should recuse themselves. I wrote about this once before back in 2013. Since I wrote about it before, I’ve generally ignored follow-up WND posts on it.

But, I decided to knock out an easy one today and let you know that it’s still A Thing over at WND, such as this latest story by Bob Unruh quoting the vehemently anti-gay Brian Brown of the National Organization for (straight-only, two-people-only, God-fearing-only) Marriage (NOM) (who also has a WND column): “Calls for Ginsburg to Drop Out of Marriage Case Escalate.”

The issue of judicial recusal is a tricky one. I don’t understand all of the details, but I do know that it is often very much up to the jurist to decide their own conflict of interest and make that determination themselves. I also know that it has long been held that a jurist’s makeup (such as gender, race, sexual orientation, political affiliation) is not grounds for recusal.

Public statements specific to the case? Perhaps. I’m not sure. In which case Ginsburg – who stated this week that people need to get over it, same-sex marriage is going to happen (that’s me paraphrasing) – might be considered as someone who should recuse herself.

That said, if she does, then Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia also must recuse themselves. Interesting that I don’t see WND or anyone else on the right pointing this out.

Why do I say this? Because of the tu quote or, “what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.” While Kagan and Ginsburg have both made their general personal position on marriage equality fairly clear, so have Scalia and Thomas. Thomas has been a bit more cagey in his remarks, but as a strict textualist and very much a person seeking to limit the federal government, his opinions have pretty much always sided with restricting individual rights when those are rights not explicitly enumerated in the Constitution. And, he’s seen as one of the most conservative members of the Court and voted against the majority opinion in the decision to strike down anti-sodomy laws. As for Scalia, he has been very outspoken against same-sex marriage and made his opinions on the issue very clear. He has been the primary dissenter in any legalization or striking down of anti-legalization of pro-homosexual issues, including the anti-sodomy laws and DOMA. In addition to that, both Scalia and Thomas frequently associate with vehemently anti-gay groups.

Do I actually think any of these four will recuse themselves? No. But if you call for one side to do so, you must call for the other. But, WND and its ilk want to stack the deck and know that the ruling this year is likely to be a 5/4 decision, but if both Kagan and Ginsburg recuse themselves, then the Court will uphold marriage equality bans.

Surprisingly, at the moment, the top-rated of the 147 comments on the 18-hrs-old WND story is by “BobSF_94117” and he points this out: “Scalia goes around the country offering his opinion on SSM and, far worse, his legal opinion of it.” You have to scroll through many, many other comments (when ranked form “Best” on down) to find one expressing similar ideas.

Todd Starnes’ Latest Outrage that World Net Daily Happily Parrots: May God Bless America!

I have a headache and the airplane I’m in as I’m writing this has hit some turbulence, so forgive me for a short post. There are three links for this one. First, there’s the WND post, which is “Student Reprimanded for Saying ‘God Bless America.'”

There actually is no story. Nada. No description in the RSS feed, no three-paragraph snippet. Just a link to “Read the full story” which takes you to Fox “news” and an article by Todd Starnes: “Student Reprimanded for Saying ‘God Bless America.'” The Fox story has nearly 10,000 comments when I loaded it in the airport.

“Similarly,” the WND story has 53 comments when I last loaded it. The top-rated comment is by “daleetaylor” who wrote: “I wonder if we realize how close we are to a national collapse. The leaders of this nation are doing whatever they want and they could care less what the American people want. That is the sad truth. They LIE, LIE, LIE and LIE about their lying. We as a nation must pray to the only true God and repent or we will perish. That is the truth. God forgive us.”

Without even reading the story or anything else, my knee-jerk reaction is pretty much what “kim” said in response: “The american people don’t want god in the classroom. They decided 230 years ago and reaffirm that every election since. Maybe you should move to a theocracy.” “kim” was attacked, as expected.

But, the whole reason that I found this story and even clicked on it was because Hemant posted about it on his The Friendly Atheist blog: “Todd Starnes Flips Out After Student Told Not to Say “God Bless America” During Morning Announcements.”

Here’s the real story:

1. Students at this school (Yulee High School in Florida) are allowed to read the morning announcements. Over the loudspeaker. To a captive audience. At that point, they legally become an agent of the school. More on that later.
2. Students were adding “God Bless America” to the end of the announcements.
3. Two students who are atheists, fearing reprisal, told their parents and the parents complained to the American Humanist Association’s Appignani Humanist Legal Center.
4. The legal center wrote a letter to the school explaining the problem.
5. The principal wrote back within hours saying that “the theistic assertion was not part of the scripted announcements but was added by a student without the school’s approval.” And, “The principal reassured the legal center, “It is our desire and intention to respect the belief and constitutional freedoms of all our students at Yulee High School.””

Enter Todd Starnes. Who “asked Jeremy Dys, an attorney with Liberty Institute to weigh in on this nonsense and he said the atheists don’t have a prayer:”

“Whether a student is being patriotic or engaging in religious speech, there is no law in this country forbidding a student from telling his or her classmates, ‘God bless America’ and it is illegal for a school to censor a student for doing so,” he said.

Dys also wonders why atheists are so hell-bent on trying to censor the patriotic speech of a red-blooded American high school student.

“Regardless of this attempt by secularists to white wash over this demonstration of patriotism by a teenager, America’s students do not give up their right to free speech and the expression of their religious beliefs when they go to school,” he said.

Here’s the issue: Students don’t give up their First Amendment rights to free speech when at school. They can tell fellow students anything they want about their religious beliefs or wear clothing that does – provided they do not create a hostile environment or interfere with learning – during school hours and on school property.

The issue goes to my first enumerated step in the story: They are giving this to a captive audience over the public address system as agents of the school. The school – and its agents – cannot advocate a religious belief. Therefore, the students saying “God Bless America” over the loudspeakers to a captive audience as part of the morning announcements is illegal.

Another part of the comments are people screaming about the “atheist students” and how they feared reprisal, and how they should have just come forward on their own. Um, this is high school. Do you really want to be even more of a pariah if, say, you’re the person already with few friends, and it’s the school’s prize quarterback who’s the one saying this in the announcements? Really?

And, I can personally relate: In my elementary school (grades 3-5), we were allowed, two at a time, for fifth graders, to go to the office in the morning and read the Pledge of Allegiance over the loudspeakers. Like good little minions, everyone in their homerooms would stand and recite it along with us.

I was fairly atheistic from a young age. I would say the pledge (I stopped in high school, for which I got bullied even by friends for not saying it when everyone else would during assemblies), but I would remain silent during the “under God” part. I was going to skip over it when I read it to the school. But even I, who already at that age didn’t have too many friends to lose anyway, chickened out and just read it as I was “supposed to.” Though because I didn’t chicken out until literally the word before it, I tripped up anyway and instead of a proud statement of church-state separation, I just was laughed at because I stumbled over several words in front of the entire school. The girl who did it with me (since it was boy-girl pairs) just shook her head, and the secretaries administrative staff looked at me with pity.

Sometimes school sucks. Trying to make a political, religious, or a-religious statement – even if you’re in the right – can make you a social pariah right at that age where you’re trying to figure out who you are, what your values are, and just fit in.

Recap of First Day of Marriage Equality in Alabama: Legal Maneuvering while Loving Couples Left Waiting

As I said in my post two days ago, Monday would be interesting in Alabama with all the legal stuff (and, I would argue, illegal stuff) going on. I think the headlines are what really tell much of the story.

From World Net Daily, we have these, all written by Anti-Homo-in-Chief Bob Unruh (all comment counts are preliminary since these are less than 24 hours old):

• “Alabama Begins Marrying ‘Gay’ Couples*” –Bob Unruh (February 09, 2015), 595 comments
• “Judge Roy Moore Defies Feds: ‘Law Is Very Clear'” –Bob Unruh (February 09, 2015), 888 comments
• “Federal Judge Refuses Sanctions in ‘Gay Marriage’ Case” –Bob Unruh (February 09, 2015), 35 comments

*This story has gone through at least four different headlines. The first was, “Drastic Measure Taken on ‘Gay’ Marriage.” The second, I didn’t copy down. The third was “Supremes Won’t Stop ‘Gay’ Marriage,” and the last one I saw was “Alabama Begins Marrying ‘Gay’ Couples.”

And, I have lots of headlines from other news outlets, including many from blogger Joe Jervis at “Joe.My.God” or “JMG” for short. These are in temporal order, starting late Sunday night, and by reading the headlines, you’ll be able to tell a lot of what happened.

• “BREAKING: Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore Orders Officials Not To Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “Ala Chief Justice Tells Judges: Refuse Gay Marriage Licenses” –Kim Chandler via ABC News / AP
• “Alabama Judge Defies Gay Marriage Law” –Alan Blinder via New York Times
• “Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore Orders Probate Judges Not to Issue Same-Sex Marriage Licenses” –Hemant Mehta via The Friendly Atheist
• “Alabama’s Chief Justice Refuses to Allow Same-Sex Marriages” –Neal Broverman via Advocate
• “Is Roy Moore protesting too much?” –Kyle Whittier via AL.com
• “Supreme Court Refuses to Halt Same-Sex Marriage in Alabama” –Reuters via The Raw Story
• “Alabama AG Luther Strange Has the Sadz” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “Same-Sex Couples Wed in Alabama Despite Efforts to Block Them” –Eliott C. McLaughlin via CNN
• “Read the Supreme Court’s Order Allowing Same Sex Marriages in Alabama” –Mark Berman via Washington Post
• “Alabama Chief Justice Orders State Judges to Defy Federal Court Judge. State Judges Defy Alabama Chief Justice” –Dale Carpenter via Washington Post
• “ALABAMA: Majority Of 67 Counties Are Issuing Same-Sex Marriage Licenses” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “Same-Sex Marriages Proceed in Parts of Alabama, Amid Judicial Chaos” –Alan Blinder and Richard Pérez-Peña via The New York Times
• “Why Roy Moore’s Gay Marriage Gambit Isn’t Just Alabama Being Alabama” –Phillip Bump via Washington Post
• “Alabama’s ‘Ten Commandments Judge’ Defies the Feds Over Gay Marriage” –Josh Sanburn via Time
• “ALABAMA: Governor Refuses To Take Any Action Against Probate Judges” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “Justice Roy Moore Has The Sadz” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “ALABAMA: Plaintiffs File Federal Contempt Motion Against Mobile County Judge” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “Alabama Was a Final Holdout on Desegregation and Interracial Marriage. It Could Happen Again on Gay Marriage” –Aaron Blake via Washington Post
• “A National Right to Same-Sex Marriage Is a Done Deal” –Orin Kerr via Washington Post
• “Alabama’s Chief Justice Is Trying to Stave Off Gay Marriage. Welcome to the Last Stand” –Hunter Schwarz via Washington Post
• “The ‘Ten Commandments Judge’ Has Lost — Same-Sex Couples Are Getting Married in Alabama” –Reuters via The Raw Story
• “ALABAMA: Number Of Counties Refusing Same-Sex Licenses Grows Dramatically” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “Roy Moore: I’m No George Wallace” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “ALABAMA: Federal Judge Denies Contempt Order Against Mobile County Judge” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “Roy Moore Will Stop Alabama from Turning into Sodom and Gomorrah” –Brian Tashman via Right Wing Watch
• “WATCH: Alabama Officials Continue Attempts to Stop Marriage” –Matt Baume via Advocate
• “Alabama, Where Same-Sex Marriage Remains Deeply Unpopular” –Nate Cohn via New York Times
• “ALABAMA: Plaintiffs Sue Everybody” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “REPORT: Roy Moore to File Charges Against Judges Who Issue Licenses” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “ALABAMA: Three Counties Relent” –Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “Alabama Gov. Won’t Defy Gay Marriage: ‘I’m Trying To Move This State Forward'” –Kim Chandler and Jay Reeves via Talking Points Memo
• “ALABAMA: Where Things Stand Today” –a Joe Jervis via Joe My God
• “Alabama’s Roy Moore: I blocked gay marriages because father-daughter weddings were next” –David Edwards via The Raw Story
• “Alabama Gay Marriage Advocates Renew Legal Push for Licenses” –Richard Pérez-Peña and Richard Fausset via New York Times
• “Alabama activists seek court leverage amid standoff over same-sex marriage” –Sandhya Somashekhar via Washington Post
• “For Alabama Chief Justice, Soldiering in Name of God Is Nothing New” –Richard Fausset via New York Times
• “Supreme Court Undercuts Alabama Chief Justice’s Argument to Delay Same-Sex Marriages” –Erik Ekholm via New York Times
• “Clarence Thomas faults Supreme Court for refusing to block gay marriage in Alabama” –Robert Barnes via Washington Post

That is a lot of news coverage. To try to summarize for y’all who don’t want to even skim that list, there was a basic sequence of events:

1. Judge Roy Moore on Sunday night sent a letter to all probate court judges telling them NOT to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. He stated in the letter that the Governor could take action against them if they did, though the Governor’s office said they had no idea what Moore was talking about. Because, you know, The Bible. And Icky Stuff.
   

   “The U.S. district courts have no power or authority to redefine marriage. Once you start redefining marriage, that’s the ultimate power. Would it overturn the laws of incest? Bigamy? Polygamy? How far do they go? A lot of states in this union have caved to such unlawful authority, and this is not one This is Alabama. We don’t give up the recognition that law has bounds. I disagree with standing in the schoolhouse door to prevent blacks from getting equal education. We’re talking about a constitutional amendment to preserve the recognition that marriage is one man and one woman, as it has been for centuries.” – Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore, speaking this afternoon to NBC News.

2. This created a patchwork of counties in Alabama that were offering licenses to everyone (few), offering licenses only to opposite-sex couples (more), or none at all (most).
   

   Alabama Counties Status of Marriage Licenses, February 10, 2015

3. The Governor came out and said that he wasn’t going to do anything against probate judges who followed Moore’s directive or who followed the Federal court’s directive. But he did NOT want to be compared to Gov. George Wallace who, half a century ago, stood in the way of National Guard troops after the Federal courts ruled against desegregation. (This comparison was being made a lot yesterday.)
   

   Gov. Robert Bentley, a Republican and a Southern Baptist, said he believes strongly that marriage is between one man and one woman, but that the issue should be “worked out through the proper legal channels” and not through defiance of the law. The governor noted that Alabama is about to be in the spotlight again with the 50th anniversary of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was passed after civil rights marchers were attacked and beaten in Selma, Alabama — events chronicled in the Oscar-nominated movie “Selma.” “I don’t want Alabama to be seen as it was 50 years ago when a federal law was defied. I’m not going to do that,” Bentley said in an exclusive interview with The Associated Press.

4. Some judges refusing to comply with the the Federal order were mocked.
   
   

   Alabama Probate Judge Refusing to Follow the US Constitution

5. Others were sued, but the Federal judge did nothing:
   

   Probate Judge Don Davis is not a party in this case and the Order of January 23, 2015, did not directly order Davis to do anything. Judge Davis’s obligation to follow the Constitution does not arise from this court’s Order. The Clarification Order noted that actions against Judge Davis or others who fail to follow the Constitution could be initiated by persons who are harmed by their failure to follow the law. However, no such action is before the Court at this time.

6. So, the actual plaintiffs are now suing.

That’s kinda where we are today, or as of noon today. I could talk about a lot of issues here. Including Judge Moore making many of his arguments on Facebook, and then deleting them, like the one below.

One of Roy Moore’s Rants on Facebook that Were Deleted

Or that this is a huge case of judicial activism, which I thought conservatives were against. Or questions about authority, and whether Moore actually has any authority over probate judges. Or the apt or inapt comparisons to George Wallace. Or that in the refusal of the Supreme Court of the United States to grant a stay of the Federal judge’s order could be interpreted (by Justice Thomas’ own remarks) as the tacit admission that that is how the Supreme Court will rule later this year.

Instead, I think I’ll just point out the real effect here: In all this posturing, to try to uphold their religion (and let’s be honest: There is no reason to be against this other than religion, and it’s what’s been the focus of all Moore’s (and others’) arguments), they are hurting real people. People who love each other and just want the recognition of the state that opposite-sex couples have always enjoyed. This isn’t just some vague issue. It’s a real one with real victims.