Give 'em Hell, Harry!

Submitted without comment as no comments are necessary:

Published on November 11, 2016 to Senator Harry Reid's website: 

Washington, D.C. – Nevada Senator Harry Reid released the following statement about the election of Donald Trump as the 45th president of the United States:  

“I have personally been on the ballot in Nevada for 26 elections and I have never seen anything like the reaction to the election completed last Tuesday. The election of Donald Trump has emboldened the forces of hate and bigotry in America. 

“White nationalists, Vladimir Putin and ISIS are celebrating Donald Trump’s victory, while innocent, law-abiding Americans are wracked with fear – especially African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Muslim Americans, LGBT Americans and Asian Americans. Watching white nationalists celebrate while innocent Americans cry tears of fear does not feel like America. 

“I have heard more stories in the past 48 hours of Americans living in fear of their own government and their fellow Americans than I can remember hearing in five decades in politics. Hispanic Americans who fear their families will be torn apart, African Americans being heckled on the street, Muslim Americans afraid to wear a headscarf, gay and lesbian couples having slurs hurled at them and feeling afraid to walk down the street holding hands. American children waking up in the middle of the night crying, terrified that Trump will take their parents away. Young girls unable to understand why a man who brags about sexually assaulting women has been elected president. 

“I have a large family. I have one daughter and twelve granddaughters. The texts, emails and phone calls I have received from them have been filled with fear – fear for themselves, fear for their Hispanic and African American friends, for their Muslim and Jewish friends, for their LBGT friends, for their Asian friends. I’ve felt their tears and I’ve felt their fear. 

“We as a nation must find a way to move forward without consigning those who Trump has threatened to the shadows. Their fear is entirely rational, because Donald Trump has talked openly about doing terrible things to them. Every news piece that breathlessly obsesses over inauguration preparations compounds their fear by normalizing a man who has threatened to tear families apart, who has bragged about sexually assaulting women and who has directed crowds of thousands to intimidate reporters and assault African Americans. Their fear is legitimate and we must refuse to let it fall through the cracks between the fluff pieces. 

“If this is going to be a time of healing, we must first put the responsibility for healing where it belongs: at the feet of Donald Trump, a sexual predator who lost the popular vote and fueled his campaign with bigotry and hate. Winning the electoral college does not absolve Trump of the grave sins he committed against millions of Americans. Donald Trump may not possess the capacity to assuage those fears, but he owes it to this nation to try. 

“If Trump wants to roll back the tide of hate he unleashed, he has a tremendous amount of work to do and he must begin immediately.”

Kellyanne Conway via a CNN article written by Eric Bradner:

"I find Harry Reid's public comments and insults about Donald Trump and other Republicans to be beyond the pale. They're incredibly disappointing. Talk about not wanting my children to listen to somebody," Conway, Trump's campaign manager, said on "Fox News Sunday." 

Then, she added: "He should be very careful about characterizing somebody in a legal sense. He thinks -- he thinks he's just being some kind of political pundit there, but I would say be very careful about the way you characterize it." 

Conway's reference to "a legal sense" led host Chris Wallace to follow up, pressing Conway on whether she was suggesting Trump might sue Reid.

From Senator Reid's website:

Washington, D.C. –  Adam Jentleson, Deputy Chief of Staff for Senator Harry Reid, released the following statement after Kellyanne Conway, senior adviser to President-elect Donald Trump, threatened legal action in response to Senator Reid’s comments on Trump’s election: 

 “It only took five days for President-elect Trump to try to silence his critics with the threat of legal action. This should shock and concern all Americans. 

“Trump has always used threats and intimidation to silence his critics. Now he wants to silence a discussion of the acts of hate and threats of violence being committed in his name across the country. Silencing this discussion normalizes hate and intimidates the victims. 

“The facts are stark and shocking. Since Trump was elected, acts of hate against Muslims, Jews, women and people of color have spiked dramatically. The KKK is planning a parade to celebrate Trump’s victory because the KKK sees Trump as their champion. Today, a headline in one newspaper reads, ‘Popular neo-Nazi site urges readers to troll liberals into suicide,’ while another reads, ‘Post-election spate of hate crimes worse than 9-11.’ 

“But instead of rising to the responsibility of his office, Trump is hiding behind his Twitter account and sending his staff on TV to threaten his critics. 

“If this is going to be a time of healing, Trump must take action immediately to stop the acts of hate and threats of violence that are being committed in his name across the country. Trump owes the nation leadership, not petty attempts to silence his critics.”

Submitted Without Comment

I think this can go without comment. How embarrassing and yet revealing.

Credits go to Right Wing Watch.


Liam '15

The Correct Answer is No

Ben Carson on Meet the Press August 2, 2015 fails to answer a softball of a question: 

Simple question, does the Bible hold authority over the Constitution? Simple answer: no. According to U.S. Const. art. VI, cl. 2.: 

"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."

Want further proof. Good. U.S. Const. amend. I. states:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

Fundamental civics fail. Perhaps the Republican Primary could function like a season of Top Chef. There's enough of these asshats. Anyway, if it were a competition, please pack your knives...sashay away or whatever trite reality catchphrase floats your boat. Just leave.



Liam '15

Stop Voting for Dumb Fucks

This is a call for people to stop electing Government Officials who say stupid shit.  Case in point, Alabama's Chief Justice Roy Moore:


The flurry of stupidity is breath taking, but I will do my best.

"There is no word marriage in the Constitution" 

Well except for Article IV Section 1... whoops. "Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof."

I mean, sure, it does not directly say marriage, but it definitely means marriage. And this Article is definitely germane to the second question of Obergefell v. Hodges.

"The states can also resist... They can define what authority they have."

Nope.

Article VI says something different, "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."

"Blah blah blah... 10th amendment argument... blah blah blah"

Honey, we also have a 14th Amendment.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Equal protection, due process, life liberty and property, these are all afforded to every citizen of the United States, and no state can take those away without a damn good reason. It is not left up to the individual State to decide; it was federalized by the 14th Amendment.

If a law violates any of these principles, and then is ruled unconstitutional, it is no longer law.

If the 10th Amendment superseded the 14th Amendment, then the 14th Amendment would be pointless.

"The Bowers Court says..."

Bowers is no longer precedent. It was over turned on June 26, 2003, with Lawrence v. Texas. It was kind of a big deal. I'm not sure, but  it might have been covered by the newspapers in Alabama.

Why not quote Dred Scott while you're at it?


*****


I'm fucking bored by this. I could go on but too bored. Ennui could be deadly.

How the fuck did this idiot ever get elected the first time around. For fuck sakes I learned this shit in 8th grade. Roy Moore knows less about the law than an 8th Grader. It's fucking embarrassing.

There are a lot of reasons I'm glad I'm not from Alabama and some how Roy Moore nears the top of that list.


Liam '15

Not Even Wrong

On Friday morning instead of work (shh), I read this article that was linked to SCOTUSblog:

Correcting Six Mistakes from the Same-Sex Marriage Oral Arguments Last Week by  James Phillips at the Witherspoon Institute.

I thought it was going to be interesting and soon discovered that it was in fact interesting, but for the wrong reasons.

To get the discussion going in the right direction I want to lay out some terms. Before I dissect this article, I want to quote Black's Law Dictionary on marriage: "The essentials of a valid marriage are (1) parties legally capable of contracting marriage, (2) mutual consent or agreement, and (3) an actual contracting in the form prescribed by law."


Section 1. "Error Number One: Massachusetts Marriage Rates Have Stayed the Same"

Alright, let's do this. Whatcha got:

"During the questioning of Michigan’s attorney, John Bursch, Justice Sotomayor commented that 'In Massachusetts, we’ve got data that it’s—the rates have remained constant since they changed their laws...' Justice Sotomayor is only correct if Massachusetts includes same-sex marriages in that number."

Sorry that's not an error. What she said was factual.

"The marriage scholars were also able to obtain data on opposite-sex marriage rates from three other states that have legalized same-sex marriage, and they likewise have seen declines: Vermont (-5.1 percent), Connecticut (-7.3 percent), and Iowa (-9.2 percent)."

Over the same period of time based on CDC figures the average change in marriage rate for states that did not allow same-sex marriage is -13.07 percent. Even assuming all of these numbers are correct, the declining marriage rate is still slower in the pro-gay states. Has same-sex marriage led to the appreciation of marriage among heterosexuals? No, there is no mechanism for this to occur. If you want to understand long term marriage trends look to anthropology and economics for the answer.

Call me old fashioned, but I believe that at least your first point should be valid, particularly when you are calling people out for being "wrong."


Section 2. "Error Number Two: Because Some Men Leave Their Wives and Children, Marriage Does Not Help Keep Fathers Around"

True, Justice Sotomayor makes a logical fallacy; however a logical fallacy does not make an assertion incorrect. For example the non-sequitur statement "if there are 2 apples and 2 oranges, and ass-fucking is fun, then there are 4 pieces of fruit" does not discount the truth of 2+2=4.

My point being prove the correlation or shut the fuck up.It doesn't matter that Justice Sotomayor made a logical fallacy, since the base statement wasn't proven to begin with.

Further, this section is pointless as it has little bearing on anything. It would possibly have meaning if the first section were correct, because if same-sex marriage caused a decrease in straight marriage, and marriage "keeps fathers around"... I would dig up some facts to find out the truth of the assertion made by Michigan, but it is absolutely pointless. So, I'm moving on.


Section 3."Error Number Three: The Purpose of States’ Recognizing and Regulating Marriage is to Bestow Dignity on Couples"

I actually agree with this entire section:

"Justice Kennedy expressed surprise when Mr. Bursch argued that the states are not in the marriage business to bestow dignity. Justice Kennedy responded: 'I don’t understand this is not dignity bestowing. I thought that was the whole purpose of marriage. It bestows dignity on both man and woman in a traditional marriage. It’s dignity bestowing, and these parties say they want to have that—that same ennoblement. Or am I missing your point?'Yes, Justice Kennedy was missing the point. He was confusing the reason that a couple may desire to be married with the reason that a state would want to recognize and regulate marriage. Those are distinct.

The funny thing is that this bit undercuts pretty much every argument against same-sex marriage.If marriage doesn't bestow dignity, then it's a bundle of rights and obligations.

And what constitutional basis would the government have to deny a class of people rights and obligations?

See where I'm going with this. Good. If marriage bestows dignity the government cannot take it away, and if it is an institution that bestows rights and obligations the government cannot take it away.


Section 4."Error Number Four: The Only Harm to Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Is Making Marriage More Adult-Centered"

Another laughable section. Even the title is funny as no one argued this.

The rest of the section is conservative butthurt over changing social mores. To paraphrase Heraclitus, go suck a dick change is the only constant.

Get fucking over it.

Also, way to be total fucking dick bags towards adoption.

And thirdly, no-fault divorce is a problem? Nice can o' worms ya got there.

PS. This is section is largely opinion... not really a subject to error.


Section 5. "Error Number Five: There Is a Parallel between Brown/Loving and Lawrence/Obergefell"

Yes, yes there is a definite parallel between civil rights cases.

"At the time of Loving, state prohibitions on inter-racial marriages had been in existence in only some of the states, and then at most for about 300 years if we go back to colonial times in Virginia and Maryland. But man-woman marriage has been the law in every state since the birth of the nation—and in every Western nation for millennia."

Umm... so gays have it had it historically worse and this proves that it's not discrimination? I'm not following your point. Not really even a point I guess. Further more the parallel was established and the article only affirms it.


Section 6. "Error Number Six: Age Restrictions on Marriage Are Equivalent to the Definitional Element of One Man and One Woman"

This is another dumb one to argue. Age restrictions are constitutional; by disassociating age restriction from the definition you're only hurting your position. But that's just the title.

Let's look further:

"Several of the justices questioned whether there was a difference between recognizing exceptions to age restrictions and recognizing same-sex marriages.In short: yes, there is. Not all exceptions are equal. Age has never been a part of the definition of marriage."

Umm... consent isn't apart of the definition of marriage... funny. It's like a someone said something contradictory earlier... like in the actual definition of marriage...

The main reason age is a restriction to marriage is because of consent. The concept of consent makes the restriction rational.

****

To sum up the article, ignore every economic reason for a falling rate of marriage to pin it on Griswald, Loving, Roe California adopting No-Fault Divorce, queers getting hitched. It also unquestioningly assumes that a declining marriage rate is bad. It ignores human history and the constant flux of morality.In short the article is sloppy, ignorant, and fails to make a coherent point.


Ok I'm bored now.

Check out the other article linked to SCOTUSblog, which is Lisa Keen's article on Obergefell v. Hodges.


Laim '15

Green Shirt

This last week, Mary Cheney posted on her Facebook page:

"Why is it socially acceptable — as a form of entertainment — for men to put on dresses, make-up and high heels and act out every offensive stereotype of women (bitchy, catty, dumb, slutty, etc.) — but it is not socially acceptable — as a form of entertainment — for a white person to put on blackface and act out offensive stereotypes of African Americans?" she asked. "Shouldn't both be OK or neither?"

Advocating blackface?! Yeah that was cheap of me, but zero shits are given on my end.

Earlier this week I was thinking of responding, but why speak as an advocate when you can post a response from a member of the community:

I cannot resist posting the top comment, which was posted by Betty Bowers:

Sorry, once again I couldn't resist.

I'm planning to post later on advocacy, because there are too many issue that I want to write about that cannot fit here. But if I can't find the words I won't.


Liam '15

Alabama Song

Update I

***According to his Twitter Feed, Judge Steven Reed of Montgomery County will issue marriage licenses unless a stay is put into place. Super cool!***

Update II

*** Judge Callie V. Granade (awesome judge name) has issued a 14 day stay that also clarifies the original order. Particularly this section:  

3.Granting a Stay Will Irreparably Harm the Plaintiffs and Other Same-Sex Couples

As indicated above and in its order granting the injunction, the court has already found that same-sex couples face harm by not having their marriages recognized and not being allowed to marry. The harms entailed in having their constitutional rights violated are irreparable and far outweigh any potential harm to the Attorney General and the State of Alabama. As long as a stay is in place, same-sex couples and their families remain in a state of limbo with respect to adoption, child care and custody, medical decisions, employment and health benefits, future tax implications, inheritance and many other rights associated with marriage. The court concludes that these circumstance constitute irreparable harm.

Ausgezeichnet!***

On Friday Judge Callie V. Granade (greatest judge's name since Learned Hand) from the Federal Southern District of Alabama ruled that the State's Marriage Amendment and Statutes are unconstitutional under federal law. As of this moment no stay has been issued.

However because some people just want to be sued,  Alabama Probate Judges Association (which is a non-binding, but contains Probate Judges) had to weigh in. According to this report by Crystal Carr from ABC 33 in Birmingham, the dumb fucks Probate Judges have decided not to issue marriage licences:

"Judge Granade's ruling in this case only applies to the parties in the case and has no effect on anybody that is not a named party. The probate judges were not parties in this matter," Al Agricola, attorney for the Alabama Probate Judges Association, explained. "The legal effect of this decision is to allow one person in one same-sex marriage that was performed in another state to adopt their partner's child. There is nothing in the judge's order that requires probate judges in Alabama to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples." 

Hmm... I did not know that in the South the word "Attorney" is defined as "one who is dumber than a sun-baked jar of mayonnaise," but much is explained.

Ok let me 'splain this to you... Attorney General was named on behalf of State... you know that thing you belong to... the nice judge lady say laws stopping certain couples from marring are no longer there... if you don't marry people when they ask, you get sued.

Ughh. Is there a fucking See 'n Say that can explain this to the fucking knuckle dragging mouth breathers? The judge says "unconstitutional."

Ok,you do not need to be named for the decision have an effect on you! So yes, the Judge didn't order you to do anything; however it would behoove you to follow the law!!!!!!! 

Don't believe me; here is the Conclusion from Searcy v. Strange, No.14-0208-CG-N (S.D.Ala. Jan. 23, 2015):

For the reasons stated above, Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment (Doc.21), is GRANTED and Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Docs. 47), is DENIED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that ALA. CONST. ART. I, § 36.03 (2006) and ALA. CODE 1975 § 30-1-19 are unconstitutional because they violate they [sic.] Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the defendant is enjoined from enforcing those laws. 

DONE and ORDERED this 23rd day of January, 2015.

In summary, the Plaintiff won. The following section of the Alabama Constitution is no longer governing:

(a) This amendment shall be known and may be cited as the Sanctity of Marriage Amendment.
(b) Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting this unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.
(c) Marriage is a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman, which, when the legal capacity and consent of both parties is present, establishes their relationship as husband and wife, and which is recognized by the state as a civil contract.
(d) No marriage license shall be issued in the State of Alabama to parties of the same sex.
(e) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any marriage of parties of the same sex that occurred or was alleged to have occurred as a result of the law of any jurisdiction regardless of whether a marriage license was issued.
(f) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any common law marriage of parties of the same sex.
(g) A union replicating marriage of or between persons of the same sex in the State of Alabama or in any other jurisdiction shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state as a marriage or other union replicating marriage. 

The following statute is no longer governing:

(a) This section shall be known and may be cited as the "Alabama Marriage Protection Act."
(b) Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting the unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.
(c) Marriage is a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman, which, when the legal capacity and consent of both parties is present, establishes their relationship as husband and wife, and which is recognized by the state as a civil contract.
(d) No marriage license shall be issued in the State of Alabama to parties of the same sex.
(e) The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any marriage of parties of the same sex that occurred or was alleged to have occurred as a result of the law of any jurisdiction regardless of whether a marriage license was issued.

According to Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b), failure to issue marriage licenses can allow aggrieved parties to intervene as plaintiffs in pending actions, allow certification of plaintiff and defendant classes, allow issuance of successive preliminary injunctions, and which will allow successful plaintiffs to recover costs and attorney’s fees.

Done. So here is a little Brecht:




Liam '15

Sunday Morning Slander

Warning the following is so stupid you may void your bowels: Enjoy.

This weekend was Twin Cities Pride. Of course since it's pride weekend that means the stupid is out in full force. And this is really fucking stupid.

Thanks to the intrepid reporting of Andy Birkey (who was a part of the Rachel Maddow lawsuit that I analyzed forever ago) at the Twin Cities Daily Planet, we are granted insight into the inter machinations of a local evangelical organization called Trinity Works:

The group says it has about 300 outreach workers scheduled for Pride, and those workers will be based at First Baptist Church on Hennepin Avenue along the Pride parade route.

Its leader Steven Uggen told a group gathered in April at The Well, A Living Church in Robbinsdale, that people will be cured of “HIV or AIDS” at the Pride festivities. Uggen says that by healing those with HIV, it will prove to the LGBT community that they should find Jesus and leave “the lifestyle.”

Please go read the full article.

How to go about this:

A.)     There are reportedly 300 people not only dumb enough to buy this Aids-Denialist bullshit, but they are also willing to participate.

B.)     There are reportedly 300 people who think they can channel God to heal people.

C.)     This organization thinks that the Gayz haz the Aidz.  HIV is a virus you fucking dumb pieces of shit. What the fuck is wrong with you. Do you think that MILLIONS of South Africans chose a sinful life style. You fucking fucks.

D.)     If anyone stops taking their antiretroviral cocktail due to these bottom feeders... ughh so fucking pissed. Mother.. son of... 

There is a phase, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity," but these assholes are really pushing it.

Liam '14

Hat Tip to Joe.My.God 

Yeah, These are Still Things...

First on the list of This Shit's Still Happening

Did you think that measles were eliminated from the United States in 2000? Yeah, so did I. During my lunch break on Friday, I was greatly dismayed when I read a Washington Post article on the subject.

Lenny Bernstein in an article for the Washington Post summarizes the current measles outbreak:

The ongoing measles outbreak in the United States has reached a record for any year since the disease was  eliminated in this country 14 years ago, with 288 cases of the potentially deadly infection reported in 18 states, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said Thursday.

The largest measles clusters are in Ohio (138 confirmed cases), California (60) and New York (26), according to the CDC. Almost all — 97 percent — have been brought into the country by travelers, mainly Americans, who contracted the infection abroad. About half of those were people who picked it up in the Philippines, where a large measles outbreak has affected more than 32,000 people, causing 41 deaths,  since January alone, said Anne Schuchat, director of the CDC’s National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases.

Read the rest.

As I said before, measles had been eliminated from this country 14 years ago. So what gives:

In the United States, the number of people who choose not to be immunized for religious, philosophical or personal reasons has begun to become a public health problem, Schuchat said. Others are unaware of, or unable to get, vaccinations before they arrive in the United States. A small number of adults can lose their immunity over time and may need to be re-vaccinated.(Ibid.)

Blöd, blöd, blöd... Vaccinate your fucking kids. There is absolutely no reason that the measles epidemic should continue in the United States. I understand that a large number of those infected are from Amish Communities, and expecting a group that eschews technology to adopt a technology would be frivolous.But there are people in the US who do participate in the modern society who don't vaccinate. And it is completely unfounded. According to this Macalester College article, the MMR vaccine is safe and effective:

The net medical effects of the MMR vaccine cannot be understated.  "The health and resource benefits due to vaccination against measles during the first 20 years of vaccine licensure," according to a 1985 study in Pediatrics, "have been enormous.  In this period [in the United States] it is estimated that vaccination against measles has prevented 52 million cases, 5,200 deaths, and 17,400 cases of mental retardation, achieving a net savings of $5.1 billion."

And oh yes, if you are actively campaign against vaccines, you can go fuck yourself. Your bullshit is injuring people if not killing them, and it needs to stop.

Creationists on the School Board

Did you find the culture wedge issues of the Bush Era exhausting? Yeah, so did  I. Oh Johnny Walker, there is not enough of you to make this tolerable (he's also the reason why I am writing this so late in the week.)

It wouldn't be America without an idiot running for School Board, thinking that they will change the curriculum to get rid of those icky things like the Theory of Evolution, Reproductive Education, and Keynesian Economics (Mercantilism forever baby.)  According to an article by Sherese Gore in the News and Advance, this time it's in Amherst County, Virginia, which boarders Lynchburg:

Two candidates seeking appointment to the Amherst County School Board are laying out an early agenda for their time on the board, including a candidate who said he is concerned with the inclusion of evolution and human-caused global warming in the schools’ science textbooks.

Oo goodie. And how, pray-tell, did this Candidate come to his agenda? 

Olivares [...] is a graduate of the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

His interest in serving on the school board was sparked while serving as a substitute teacher with Amherst County Public Schools. During that time, Olivares said he became concerned with science textbooks that state that global warming is caused by human activity and those that teach Darwinian evolution. As part of the school board, he said would like to review the division’s textbooks.

When I was a substitute teacher I used my time wisely to look up gay porn on my iPhone... just kidding, I didn't have an iPhone back then.

Ok, let's give him the benefit of the doubt. Why doesn't he believe in Global Warming:

“As far as the current global warming, my physicist contacts tell me that there has been no global warming in the past 15 years despite Mr. Gore’s film,” he said, referencing the 2006 documentary “An Inconvenient Truth,” which was written by Al Gore.

Fantastic! Unsourced contacts, academia what out, we have a new scholar rising.  And now how are you totally not going to undercut your previous statement with something completely asinine:

In regards to humanity’s involvement with climate change: “As a physicist, I know better than that,” Olivares said. “I know the cause. It’s that big shiny thing that we see up there every day if the clouds are not covering it.”

Oh for fuck sake, which is it: is global warming real but cyclical, or is it a hoax? Hint, it can't be both, and it ends with neither. (Note: there are natural occurrence which are contributing to global warming; however releasing the amount of carbon dioxide at the current rate is having an adverse affect on our environment.)

I am also wondering if his physicist "contacts" aren't just a bunch of sock puppets he created that he talks to.

Backing up, I couldn't help but notice that he doesn't care to much for that there "Darwinian Evolution" thing in them learny books.  I for one am glad someone finally is taking a stand against Darwinian Evolution. Why should American Children be learning an outdated theory from 1859, which does not include genetics, DNA sequencing, and in utero epigenetics? Oh wait, I'm guessing he actually means Modern Evolutionary Theory:

Olivares said he also is concerned with Darwinian evolution “being taught as fact and settled science which it is not.” Single-celled organisms have not changed significantly through the millions of years “that they say evolution has taken place,” he said.

Err.. for one thing, no scientific theory is ever settled. Claiming complete knowledge is antithetical to science. And secondly, single celled organisms have varied greatly you dunderhead. I am just going to spitball it here, because I am not too concerned about this statement being overly accurate, but according to Wikipedia:

Following present classification, there are a little less than 9,300 known species of prokaryotes, which includes bacteria and archaea;^[147] but attempts to estimate the true number of bacterial diversity have ranged from 10⁷ to 10⁹ total species – and even these diverse estimates may be off by many orders of magnitude.^[148][149]

That's just diversity among Prokaryotes, which is minuscule when compared to the complexity and diversity of Eukaryotes.

While the article no where suggests that the Candidate's motives are driven by religious fervor, I will treat it as if it does. As I have written before, Creationism is an Insult to any god that would exist. If there is a god, that god apparently created the universe in a natural method, that includes evolution. To deny rational thought and the scientific method in favor of ancient mythology is insulting to this would be creator god.

Around Half of Americans Don't Understand Gayness

Did you think that most Americans finally understood what it means to be gay? Yeah, so did I.

This Gallup poll is slightly depressing.

Credits belong to Gallup. So go read the article and inform yourself.... I'll wait for you.... Done reading now? Good.

In concordance with this poll done by the Pew Research Center last year:

Credits belong to Pew. 

So these two polls show that around 37% of the public believes that gayness is a learned behavior that can be changed. My attraction to men is fixed. No one can change that about me. And thank fuck nobody has. I am proud to be gay. I am proud of my yellow eyes. I am proud of my brown hair. I am proud of the things I did not choose about myself, as I am sure a straight man with blue eyes and blond hair is proud of himself. 

It makes me sick to think of the millions of people wishing they could change, expecting that they can change, and completely incapable of changing.

And to anyone who thinks it is a choice to be gay, I know it's trite, but so you think you are choosing to be straight? You choose to think the waitress is attractive or the woman who sits next to you on the bus?

But what's really troubling to me is that some 37% of gay children will be raised in a household that believes they can change. Perhaps worse is the number of straight children who will be raised "straight" and that any sign of effeminacy must be beaten out corrected.  

Liam ‘14

Heterophobia Gaysplained

All Michael Sam and No Play Makes Liam a Dull Boy. Blah blah blah, Michael Sam, blah blah blah. Blah blah, blah blah blah blah, blah blah vibrator blah. Blah blah blah blah blah blah Christianist douchebag, blah blah blah blah blah IB Times article written by Greg Price
on May 14 2014:

A Christian lobbyist has launched a boycott against the St. Louis Rams, openly gay defensive end Michael Sam, and credit card giant Visa.

In February, Jack Burkman, who head’s his Washington-based firm JM Burkman & Assoc., vowed to boycott any team or company that works with Sam and he has stayed true to his word. Burkman said the Rams and Sam are violating Christian beliefs, and that he's mobilized a grassroots campaign made up of a coalition of Christian leaders in 27 of the 50 U.S. states, according to The Independent.

“Visa and the Rams will learn that when you trample the Christian community and Christian values, there will be a terrible financial price to pay,” said Burkman.

“Openly gay football players send a terrible message to our youth about morality. Somebody needs to step up because the moral fiber of the nation is eroding.”

Please read the article if you aren't dying from ennui. 

Anyway...

First of all, wow, Jack Burkman has contacts in 27 of the 50 states... good for him... I hope his mom stops for ice cream after soccer practice...  78.5 percent of the nation is Christian. It is positively laughable that his coalition isn't in 48 of the 50. If all non-Christians lived in their own states, they would occupy 10 states. Even if that were the case, he should still be able to find contacts in the remaining 40.

Secondly, how and in what way is Michael Sam playing in the NFL trampling "the Christian community and Christian values." It's just so fucking stupid, res ipsa loquitur. Dear lord my head hurts simply trying to write this article. 

It is my experience that most of the gays that I know are looking forward to day when the act of existence is not viewed as a political statement. 

Blah Blah Blah

So I went to Photoshop and here's what Heterophobia would look like:

And how about this:

Or this:

Have you ever seen this?

What about from prominent gays:

Yeah, I haven't seen that either...

I realize that last one doesn't make a lick of sense, so I fixed it:

Wapow!

I was going to show actual photos that were the result of homophobia, but it was too much. So I posted a bunch of links that shows what homophobia actually looks like.

Warning: the following is far too graphic for this blog.

Mark Carson

Barie Shortell

Kerry Tyler Street (Actually Straight)

Dustin Martin

Ferrucio Silvestro

Wilfred de Bruijn

Sachsenhausen

And so many more, but I just can't go any further...


Liam '14

Sorry Pat. F & U Don't Solve the Puzzle.

As emperor of the gays, I want to congratulate game show host, Pat Sajak, for coming out as a heterosexual.Who would of guessed, he seemed so gay.

Klassy.

But no, I'll be serious for moment. Congratulations for being straight. Congratulations for feeling secure enough to come out. Congratulations for feeling so secure that you can tell your boss that you love a human being without the fear of being being terminated. Congratulations for feeling so secure that you can tell your family that you love a human being without the fear of being ostracized or financially or emotionally reprimanded. Congratulations that you feel so secure that you can tell your siblings that you love a human being without your siblings shielding their children from you, because they might emulate a "deviant lifestyle." Congratulations that you feel secure enough that you can tell your property manager that you live with the person that you love without the fear of being evicted.

Congratulations that your little stunt of trying to become the next right-wing martyr did not succeed, and you still have a job, a wife, a family, and a future.

May your second marriage continue going strong.

And perhaps now that you had the benefit of coming out without repercussions you could champion ENDA, so that no person should have to suffer consequences for saying the words "I love you."

But you won't.


Liam '14

As emporer I command you to kiss my ring

A Total Eclipse of the Brain

The next lunar eclipse for North American eyes will be on April 4, 2015.

The lunar eclipse that recently happened on April 14, 2014 had been predicted by scientists for, like, ever, and Wikipedia has a schedule of the next, what, millennial of lunar eclipses that are predicted to happen.

When I was younger I used to pay attention to astronomical events far more closely than what I do toady, mostly because I was a nerd who never got laid. I would spend summer nights out on a blanket looking at the stars and tracking the motion of the planets. I knew all the dates of predicted phenomena days in advance and would hope for good weather. Always in August I would go out and watch the Perseid Meteor Shower and drink Coca Cola all night long on a green blanket that smelled slightly funny, because we kept it in the basement and only ever took it out to lie in the grass.

So, I was kind of shocked when I turned on the TV the other day and saw people talking about the lunar eclipse, because I assumed only virgins and Neil deGrasse Tyson talked about astronomy.

Here’s what some idiot-asshole at World Net Daily had to write about it (I was going to be nice and properly cite the author, but there's no byline):

Barack Obama quite recently, expressing his frustration that Republican members of Congress won’t give him what he wants, threatened arbitrary executive action, promising that he has a “pen and phone.”

But there are “flashing red warning lights” in the heavens that should command peoples’ attention right now, because the one behind those warnings, God, had “more than a pen and a phone in his hand,” according to the author of “Blood Moons: Decoding the Imminent Heavenly Signs.”

Pastor Mark Biltz, whose book is creating a tidal wave of interest right now with the first of four lunar eclipses expected to become visible early Tuesday, was speaking to Breaking Israel News.

“I believe that the blood moons have great historic and prophetic significance just as they did following 1948 and 1967. In the book of Joel it mentions three times about the sun and the moon going dark and in context it also mentions Divine wrath against all countries that want to divide or part the land of Israel,” he said.

“I believe the moons are like flashing red warning lights at a heavenly intersection saying to Israel as well as the nations they will be crossing heavenly red lines and if they do, they will understand as Pharaoh did on Passover night 3,500 years ago that the Creator backs up what He says.

“Like Pharaoh the leaders and pundits of today will realize when it comes to crossing the red lines of the Creator of the universe he has more than a pen and a phone in his hand.” 

Oh god I need a shower...

Ugggh. The stupid will not come off. Damn you Dove with Cucumber Extract, why won't you wash away the stupid.

See, if you can predict an astronomical event in advance, then it cannot be a warning, because that would suggest determinism. Punishing people for a pre-determined outcome is not only baffling but would be utterly sadistic. Under this theology, humanity is literally built to spill. That's fucking sick.

Secondly, there are about two lunar eclipses each year. Only one is typically visible depending where in the world you are located. But still that is a lot of eclipses. Which means there are either a lot of warnings or else it's a lot of bullshit.

Guess where my money's at.

Here's what lunar eclipses actually tell us instead of this crazy Jesus hates President Obama bullshit.

If you hold up a coin that is one inch in diameter (about the size of a quarter) it needs to be 108 inches away from your eye to exactly block out the sun. Don't try this as it will be super painful, or worse you might go blind trying it (well actually I don't give a fuck about your well being; I'm just avoiding any liability). Instead do this with the moon. It turns out that the moon and the sun are often the same size (have the same angular size, obviously.) That's why solar eclipses can be spectacular.

Due to this phenomenon, you can measure the distance of the Earth to the Moon and the diameter of the Moon during a lunar eclipse. Without doing any measuring, we know that the distance from the Earth to the Moon is 108 times the Moon's diameter.

To find the diameter of the Moon all you need is a handy-dandy stop watch. On April 4, 2015, camp out on the beach, and after your boyfriend gets done blowing you, measure the time it takes the Moon to enter the Earth's shadow. Then measure the time it takes for the Moon to emerge from the Earth's shadow.

The entrance time is 2.5 times shorter than the total time of the eclipse; therefore the diameter of the Moon is 2.5 times smaller than the Earth.

AB = CE; therefore DB = 108*DE

Aristarchus of Samos who died around 230 BCE knew the diameter of the Earth and calculate the size and distance of the Moon using this method.

It is pathetic for me to type this, but it's 2014: Lunar eclipses are not divine signs to warn a sinful people. Grow the fuck up.


UPDATE:


I decided to make a scale model of the Lunar Eclipse:

Obviously Click to Embiggen  

Here is a cropped version:

Liam '14

The So-Called Vampire Agenda

It is my firmly held belief that many Conservative-Christian have confused gays for vampires. I have come to this conclusion based on the following arguments made by actual people.

1. Gays are Turned Gay

  

On the December 12, 2012 episode of the show The 700 Club, Pat Robertson received a letter asking for his advice... why? Who the fuck knows why anyone would ask him about anything, but it happened.

Anyway, the question reads:

Growing up, I had a best friend. We parted ways after high school. Ten years later, we got back in touch. I am really glad to see her because I've always thought of her as my sister. But recently, I invited her to meet my children. She said yes – and asked if she could bring her 'partner.' I said, 'Okay.' I know that my friend's family has shunned her because of her lifestyle, and I don't want to be like that. I want to show love – but I don't want her to think I am okay with her ways. And I don't feel comfortable having her around my children. Should I keep this friendship?

Robertson answers:

You keep love, you loved her, you were close and your influence may have something significant to her, the idea is you don’t gain anything by shunning, but at the same you don’t want your children to grow up as lesbians…

Yep, more pedophilia recruitment bullshit. Instead of biting and infecting to recruit new members, we drive Subarus, drink white wines, and shop at Bed Bath & Beyond. Anyone who witnesses this behavior becomes gayified. 

Well if you can't get them to join, you can always get them with your Aids Ring, eh? 

Asshole.

To use the parlance created by the vampire mythos, nobody has sired me. And I have sired no gaylings. I have no attraction to straight men. In fact, straight guys kind of disgust me actually.

Secondly, notice how the Asker never states that she has a daughter; she says she has "children." If they're boy children, wouldn't they become the manliest, straight-men ever butched up, simply by hanging out with Auntie U-Haul?  You know wearing flannel, playing sports, eating pussy. It seems like Pat kind of assumed on this one. And come on Pat, you know what they say about what happens when you assume.

2. Gays are Demonically Possessed

On the May 18, 2012 David Pakman Show, Gordon Klingenshit Klingenschmitt had a few pearls of wisdom he wanted to share with the world:

Anyone who’s studied biology and Punnett squares and Mendelian genetics obviously has to agree with me that homosexuality cannot be genetic, because if, say, a blond haired man and a blonde haired woman have children there's a pretty good chance that their kid might have blonde hair… and let’s say that a homosexual man mates with another homosexual man, there’s a one hundred percent chance they won’t have children. So they have to recruit the children of heterosexuals, and that’s what this whole marketing scheme for the pro-homosexual movement is all about.

Yes, and anyone who has studied 8th grade biology knows that hair color is vastly more complicated than a simple 4 squared Punnett diagram. Also I may or may not have siblings, who may or may not pass a lot of shared genes to their children, who I am a responsible uncle for possibly. Those possible nieces and/or nephews would contain enough genetic similarities as to any possible children that I would produce.  (By Klingenschmitt's logic things like Tay-Sachs and Sickle Cell Anemia shouldn't exist either. Is he saying that those are demonic too...) Also there is this study from William R. Rice, Urban Friberg, and Sergey Gavrilets published in 2012 in the University of Chicago's Quarterly Review of Biology entitled "Homosexuality as a Consequence of Epigenetically Canalized Sexual Development" So if the research is correct, then yes in part gayness is not wholly genetic, but there are epigentic factors that are naturally deterministic. Moving on.

Pakman then asked Klingenschmitt about gay animals, also known as gaynimals and how they aren't exposed to marketing, because, well, they're animals:

It is entirely possible — we know from the Bible, for example, when Jesus cast the devil out of Legion, he went into a herd of pigs. So, it is possible for demons or the devil to inhabit or invade animals just the same way they invade humans, and that causes the sin of lust.

Legion wasn't one being; it wasn't the Devil; it comes from Latin meaning I am hundreds... When asked to clarify his point, Klingenschmitt stated:

Marketing is related to the demonic, because the devil wants to recruit people into sin.

So being gay means, demonic possession. I think this may have been the plot to season one of Buffy the Vampire Slayer; in which case I am so definitely Spike.

3. To Cure the Gays Simply Pray Away the Gay

I am not even going to waste my time by offering up any quotes as evidence that I am not trying to build a strawman for this one. 

Yep, so go on and hold up your crosses and your bibles at Gay Pride Parades. That will definitely protect you from the gay just like it does against vampires.

Garlic and holy-water too. And my reflexion can't be capture by a mirror or a camera. That's why my blogger photo is a drawing.

4. Gays are not Natural

Sweet so I guess that makes me supernatural. Fuck Yeah! I am going to go fight crime with the power of teh gayz. Ooo ooo.. I could be the Crimson Cock. Fighting crime with my rod of justice.

Oh, wait... Unfortunately it's still a criminal statute in Virginia. It is laid out in Va. Code Ann. § 18.2-361:

Crimes against nature; penalty.

A. If any person carnally knows in any manner any brute animal, or carnally knows any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth, or voluntarily submits to such carnal knowledge, he or she shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony, except as provided in subsection B.

Dear Legislative body of Virginia, fix your laws, you jackasses. Ken "the Cooch" Cuccinelli lost the gubernatorial race over his defense of this statute (the statute was struck down in Lawrence v. Texas. The Cooch claimed the statute was need to prosecute rapists... in which case he should have lobbied the Legislature when he was serving Vice Lieutenant Governor for a new and more legal version of the statute. But no, he instead was a complete fuck-head. So guess what, it's been more than a decade since the Court struck down the statute, and it is still in the Code and nothing has been done, when it easily, easily could pass the legislative process... for fuck sake what is wrong with these stupid bastards. Fix your goddamn laws you goddamn idiots. That's your fucking job, you fucking incompetent asses.)   Anyway, I've digressed enough.

I am unnatural, an aberration who casts no shadow. I mean that's the only explanation, because there's no such thing as gaynimals (well except those some 4,000 documented species.) I couldn't possible exist without magic or Satan or whatever you call it.

Secondly, before any asshole mumbles, "just because animals do it doesn't make it right. Some animals practice cannibalism blah blah blah," I just want to point out I am not saying that gay sex is moral. I am answering the claim "Gays are unnatural." The question of morality is a different subject that relies on notions such as consent, damages, harm, etc. After hours of reading articles on gaynimals, I have not come across an author making the claim that because it is natural it is moral. 

As a postlogue, I would just like to point out that the arguments present by the Christianists were relatively low-hanging fruit. A simple google search will show that they are not nearly alone in their views of gay people. They seem pretty prevalent to me.

This is every gay person I know in a nutshell

Count Orlok in a speedo... why not?

Liam '14

Douchebag of the Day

Today the douche-o-meter goes bust on John Sununu.

Recently Mr. Sununu said:

I'm a giant weiner. Wah wah wah. The president's black and that makes me want to support Hitler. White Power. I John Sununu am definately saying this. Wah.

Sorry I was going to copy and paste the actual quote, but hey I'm drunk and pissed at his actual bullshit comments. It's funny how a communist born in the People's Republic of Cuba can lecture a red blooded American on what it means to be a "real" American. Fuck off! But seriously John Sununu was born in Havana, Cuba, I'm guessing only a crib away from Castro. Why does John Sununu hate America so much that he was born in the terrorist state of Cuba? Because he hates America.

But any way John Sununu definately knows how to be a real American. Listen to his sage like advice:

I'm a giant weiner. Wah wah wah. The president's black and that makes me want to support Hitler. White Power. I John Sununu am definately saying this.Wah.

 Shit. I'm sorry, I did it again. Ok Sununununu nunu nu said:

"I wish this president would learn how to be an American" 

Are you going to teach him how to be a real 'm'rican, eh comrade?

Anyone living in the United States is a real American. They cannot be taught how to be an American. A racist douchebag like John Sununu is just as American as is the president, as is the homelessman begging on the street, as is the banker, as are my grandparents who got off the boat from Latveria or anyone else living in the US. New York, Illinois, California, and Hawaii are just as much a part of America as is Wisconsin, Oklahoma, or Mississippi. So stop it with this shit. We have a vast range of ideas; many horrible, a few great, and we try to wrestle them out through debate and the political process. We get nowhere by trying to disqualify competing ideas by labeling them as anti-American.

Liam '12

Freedom Just For Me

Sherlock Holmes and the Case of the Rachel Maddow

For months I have been following the Court Room Epic known as Dean v. Maddow  (Dean v. NBC Universal would be its hypothetical case name), where Axel Rose (not really) gains 50 pounds and goes on homophobic tirades and then sues Rachel Maddow for quoting him. I have read all the available documents from the original Complaint issued by Bradlee Dean, to the Special Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to DC Anti-SLAPP Act, and now the Certification for Recusal or Disqualification of Judge.

I read the other day that the Judge in the case had docketed a judgment in favor of NBC Universal, awarding them attorneys fees. Subsequently the Plaintiffs are now quixotically pursuing a recusal. So in their honor I have gone through the main documents in the case to explain and critic them.  Hopefully the case will make a little bit more sense now.


The Complaint:

Don't Put in a Dollar Amount.

In many jurisdiction putting in an actual dollar amount in a complaint is unprofessional. Secondly 50 Million Dollars is ridiculous and makes you seem without creditability. If you are suing for 50 Million dollars, that is saying, Maddow ruined your reputation to the point where you expected to earn 1 Million dollars per year for the next 50 years. Dean is not Axel Rose so... yeah...

Side Bar Time

If you are suing someone for defamation, you should be mindful of the elements of a Tort. DBCD.  If you are claiming damages to your reputation and business, then making headlines (especially if it's the La Crosse Tribune):

DUNKERTON, Iowa — Administrators, teachers and students did not get what they expected Thursday during an extended school program.

Everyone anticipated the message from Junkyard Prophet, a traveling band based in Minnesota, to be about bullying and making good choices. Instead, junior and senior high students at Dunkerton High School and faculty members said they were assaulted by the group's extreme opinions on homosexuality and images of aborted fetuses.

"They told my daughter, the girls, that they were going to have mud on their wedding dresses if they weren't virgins," said Jennifer Littlefield, a parent upset with the band's performance..

... Littlefield also did not appreciate what she described as gay bashing.

"They told these kids that anyone who was gay was going to die at the age of 42," she said. "It just blows me away that no one stopped this."

Don't be in the news showing that the Maddow segment didn't affect your career. If you are still getting hired to preform at high schools, it is counter to your argument that you're damaged goods. Worse, if you are the one destroying your own reputation that undercuts the claim that Maddow is the causation. Worst, by saying sufficiently similar things to the alleged defamation, it shows the defamatory statements to be true, which is a defense against defamation.

Reduce the Pages

There are approximately 6 unnecessary pages out of 10. This is a court proceeding not the Newsroom at Fox. Slamming Maddow for being a gay leftist secular atheist will only anger the court because it has nothing to do with the case or the law.

State a Claim

Really why are you suing. If you can't state it in clear, concise words, then perhaps you shouldn't be suing.  Not everything requires a lawsuit.

Proof Read

Yes, hire a high school student if you need to. I'm dyslexic, and I would never, never submit anything without having 2 to 3 pair of eyes reading it, well except this blog because I'm lazy and cheap. Sentences like this should be edited "He is on information and belief a gay activist."  Once again I write a blog, I submit articles that I have proofread. They have spelling errors. If I were before a court I would pay someone to read it over. And get a style guide to learn how to comma properly. I suggest Eats, Shoots & Leaves.


The Special Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to DC Anti-SLAPP Act:

 Like her or hate her, Maddow has great lawyers. Really this motion is pure poetry. Well articulated, coherent and well reasoned. It is never abusive, but release on the law to make legal arguments.It is 51 pages, but if you ever get a chance to read the ant-slapp do it.  This is how a legal document should read.


The Recusal:


Good Faith vs. Bad Faith.

Because you are a Christian does not mean that you always have good faith. For example, if you move to dismiss your own action to bring the case to Federal Court to avoid Anti-SLAPP laws that is known as forum shopping. Forum Shopping is the antithesis of Good Faith. This motion clearly admits Forum Shopping, so it is doubly embarrassing.

While on the subject of good faith, NBC Universal could easily have filed a Motion for a change of venue. By getting a different venue Larry Klayman couldn't represent Dean, and let's face it DC is awkward in this case as Dean is primarily from Minnesota, Maddow Broadcasts from New York, and  NBC Universal is also out of New York.

It takes an Idiot...

When you are trying to get relief from judgment on the basis that the judge was prejudice it would behoove a litigant to do anything but call the judge a "woman scorned." It makes you seem like a jackass. Really why would you write that, all it can do is show that you were being unreasonable. Seriously, fuck, that's stupid.

!ekorts regna na dah tsuj I !ti nmaD

Ok. I'm better. When you are trying to claim prejudice, you yourself do not want to seem in the least bit prejudice. This is kindergarten shit.

It's a (Gay) Trap!

This is not Fox News. The Gay conspiracy doesn't exist. So stop it. It only hurts your argument as you seem unreasonable.


In the end it's real simple, the judge was in her right to order Attorneys' Fees. If you bring a suit forward only to drop it right before commencement you are wasting people's time and money.  What the Judge ordered was fair and reasonable. She could have gone a mile further and order deeper sanctions for wasting not only the defendants' money and time, but also the courts. She may also have been able to sanction Klayman (DC Bar Rule 3.2). This complaint is obviously frivolous because the plaintiff could barely state a claim. Dropping the case seconds before trial to pursue the same lousy case in a different court is a waste of time and money. Money the defendants should not pay.

All in all I am a little comfuzeded by this whole case.  I thought both Klayman and Dean were small government conservatives. So why do they need the Government to solve their problems? And why are they now seeking help from the largest, most gay loving intrusive level of government?